Cynthia M. Clark, ex rel., et al. v. Peter G. Angelos, et al
Case Background
Plaintiffs Cynthia M. Clark, as successor personal representative of the Estates of Walter F. Kacala and Helen M. Kacala; Norman J. Loverde, as successor personal representative of the Estates of Stephen J. Loverde Sr. and Mary Anna Loverde; and Maria M. McCarthy and William J. McCarthy Jr., as personal representatives of the Estate of Anne Major and successor personal representatives of the Estate of Bernard L. Major, filed a class action legal malpractice lawsuit for failure to adequately pursue their asbestos claims. The Defendants included Peter G. Angelos, Esq.; Gary J. Ignatowski, Esq.; Armand J. Volta, Jr., Esq.; and The Law Offices of Peter G. Angelos, P.C.
The case was tried in the Maryland Circuit Court in Baltimore City, with Judge John S. Nugent presiding. The case number was 24-C-21-000847.
Cause
In 1994, thousands of asbestos Plaintiffs, represented by the Law Offices of Peter G. Angelos, reached a settlement with MCIC Inc. (formerly McCormick Asbestos Co.). The settlement included payments ranging from $1,000 for nonmalignant conditions to $9,500 for mesothelioma. MCIC and its insurers indicated that their policies had aggregate limits. Because MCIC’s insurance contracts had not been preserved, the settlement covered all known and any future insurance proceeds, with pro rata distributions for these funds.
In 1997, a Maryland appellate court ruled that companies like MCIC could be liable for injuries caused during their work. This meant MCIC’s insurance policies, which had aggregate limits, applied only to completed projects. As a result, MCIC and its insurers could be liable for asbestos exposure during ongoing work. The Angelos firm then sought millions of additional dollars from MCIC.
When MCIC refused, the Angelos firm sued to enforce the settlement, but the appellate court ruled the suit untimely in 2006. In 2005, the firm also filed a tort action, claiming MCIC misrepresented the available insurance during settlement talks. Maryland courts dismissed the claim, stating that documents from 1993 already explained the policy’s aggregate limits. The Maryland Supreme Court declined to review the case.
In 2018, the Angelos firm informed clients about the unfavorable decision and suggested they hire separate counsel.
In 2021, Plaintiffs involved in the settlement filed a legal malpractice class action against the Angelos firm, alleging failure to adequately pursue their claims.
Damages
Key Arguments and Proceedings
Legal Representation
- Plaintiff(s): Cynthia M. Clark, Norman J. Loverde, Maria M. McCarthy, and William J. McCarthy Jr., representing estates of individuals impacted by asbestos exposure.
- Counsel for Plaintiff(s): Paul S. Caiola | Brian T. Tucker | Joe Dugan | Sarah R. Simmons | Tory S. Trocchia
- Defendant(s): Law Offices of Peter G. Angelos PC | MCIC Inc., formerly McCormick Asbestos Co.
- Counsel for Defendant(s): Jeff Schwaber
Claims
The Plaintiffs’ Third Amended Class Action Complaint included three legal malpractice claims against the Defendants.
In Count I, the Plaintiffs alleged that the Defendants failed to timely enforce the rights of the Plaintiffs and other similarly situated Angelos clients under the 1994 MCIC Settlement Agreement.
Under Count II, the Plaintiffs claimed that the Defendants did not pursue timely fraudulent and negligent misrepresentation claims against MCIC and its insurers on behalf of the Plaintiffs and other affected Angelos clients.
In Count III, the Plaintiffs argued that the Defendants failed to challenge a buyback by Reliance Insurance Co. of CGL coverage it had provided to MCIC before the 1994 settlement, which reduced the coverage pool available for the settling claimants.
The parties later reached a settlement. On November 12, 2024, the Plaintiffs moved for final approval of the settlement.
Settlement
Judge Nugent approved a 33% attorney fee from the settlement’s total amount. The Angelos firm agreed to pay $57 million to the class. This amount also covered litigation expenses of $330,012.50. Each of the named Plaintiffs received $2,000 as part of the settlement.
Court Documents:
Available for purchase upon request
Leave A Comment