Breach of contract, D&O insurance; bench verdict $442K. Los Angeles County.
Summary
Argument over D&O insurance coverage turns into law suit by board member against company.
The Case
- Case Name: Tucker Taylor v. Llewellyn Werner
- Court and Case Number: Los Angeles Superior Court / SC 121 454
- Date of Verdict or Judgment: Thursday, October 27, 2016
- Date Action was Filed: Friday, October 04, 2013
- Type of Case: Breach of Contract
- Judge or Arbitrator(s): Hon. Nancy L. Newman
-
Plaintiffs: Tucker Taylor
-
Defendants: Llewellyn Werner
- Type of Result: Bench Verdict
The Result
- Gross Verdict or Award: $442,794.70
- Net Verdict or Award: $442,794.70
-
Award as to each Defendant:
Llewellyn Werner - $442,794.70
- Contributory/Comparative Negligence: None.
-
Economic Damages:
$442,794.70
- Trial or Arbitration Time: Less than 8 hours over 2 court days.
- Post Trial Motions & Post-Verdict Settlements: Defendant's request for statement of decision -denied.
The Attorneys
-
Attorney for the Plaintiff:
Ogden & Motley by Dale E. Motley, Los Angeles.
-
Attorney for the Defendant:
Llewellyn Werner, in Pro Per.
The Experts
-
Plaintiff’s Medical Expert(s):
None.
-
Defendant's Medical Expert(s):
None.
-
Plaintiff's Technical Expert(s):
None.
-
Defendant's Technical Expert(s):
None.
Facts and Background
-
Facts and Background:
Defendant requested plaintiff to serve on the board of directors of a company with which the defendant was involved. Plaintiff agreed on the condition that he have no financial exposure and that the company would have adequate D&O insurance. Defendant agreed to those conditions. Plaintiff then served on the board.
Plaintiff was then sued based on his position as a member of the board. The entity that sued him was an LLC owned by the former CEO of the company who allegedly owned more than a 10% interest in the company. When plaintiff tendered the claim for defense, he learned that the D&O policy contained an exclusion for claims brought by 10% shareholders. Although the insurer defended under a reservation of rights, plaintiff was forced to incur attorney's fees to defend himself. Although plaintiff ultimately prevailed in the litigation, the case went to the court of appeal before plaintiff could stop paying attorney fees.
-
Plaintiff's Contentions:
That defendant made an oral agreement providing that if plaintiff would serve on the board, then plaintiff would not have any financial exposure and that the company would have adequate D&O insurance.
-
Defendant's Contentions:
Defendant denied that he ever made any such agreement with plaintiff.
Injuries and Other Damages
-
Physical Injuries claimed by Plaintiff:
N/A
-
Attorney's fees incurred in defending against the lawsuit brought by the former CEO of the company.
Additional Notes
Defendant was represented by an attorney, Marshall Mintz, until that attorney withdrew in July of 2015.