Nicholas C. Cramb

Insurance and Reinsurance

• Represents a primary and excess insurer in the Purdue Pharma bankruptcy, which concerns the company’s liability for thousands of governmental enforcement actions and private lawsuits filed in state and federal courts alleging that Purdue Pharma's’ manufacture, promotion, and sale of OxyContin contributed to the opioid epidemic. 
• Represents a liability insurer in consolidated asbestos cases, which concern the trigger of coverage for certain asbestos disease.   
• Represented a UK based reinsurer in a $30 million reinsurance arbitration dispute involving rescission of a workers’ compensation program.
• Successfully represented certain London Market Company Reinsurers in a lengthy litigation proceeding in federal court arising out of a cedent’s $120 million settlement with its insured resolving environmental contamination exposure. The matter involved complex issues of allocation, enforcement of coverage periods, and application of choice of law.
• Defended an insurer through summary judgment and on appeal against breach of contract and bad faith claims by immediately deposing the insured and proving no damages, while preventing any depositions of the insurer.
• Defended an insurer against claims that it converted subrogation claims, obtaining summary judgment from the US District Court for the District of Oregon.

Real Estate Litigation

• Defended the developer of a mixed use project, which included over 60 residential units, in an appeal brought by a competing shopping center.
• Obtained summary judgment on behalf of developer in an action challenging of municipality’s inclusionary zoning determination.
• Regularly represents an finance agency in litigation involving affordable housing in order to protect affordability of units.  
• Argued an appeal of a Comprehensive Permit before the Supreme Judicial Court, which affirmed our client’s Comprehensive Permit for a residential development of approximately 150 units.
• Obtained dismissal of lawsuit brought by a municipality challenging a funding agency’s determination of eligibility for a Comprehensive Permit.