Andrew May

Email: 
amay@ngelaw.com
V Card: 
Download VCF File
Telephone: 
(312) 827-1473
Fax: 
(312) 980-0803

Andrew G. May is an associate in Neal Gerber Eisenberg’s Litigation Practice Group and its Insurance Policyholder Practice Group. Andrew takes a results-oriented approach to clients’ needs and delivers dynamic and efficient solutions to complex legal problems. Andrew’s practice encompasses a wide array of litigation matters, including breach of contract disputes, defamation, common law and consumer fraud claims, insurance coverage, products liability defense and class actions.

Andrew sits on the Board of Directors for the Evening Associates of the Art Institute of Chicago. The Evening Associates are a group of young professionals dedicated to cultivating appreciation for art and the resources of the Art Institute through fundraising and membership development initiatives.

While in law school, Andrew clerked for the Honorable David G. Sills of the California Court of Appeals.

Education

  • Northwestern University School of Law (J.D., 2009), magna cum laude
  • Colgate University (B.A., 2005), magna cum laude

Bar Admissions

  • Illinois, 2009

Court Admissions

  • U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, 2010

Insurer’s Silence Does Not Evidence Consent For Purposes of Voluntary Payments Condition

by Andrew May on February 18, 2013

In West Bend Mutual Insurance Co. v. Arbor Homes LLC, No. 12-2274 (7th Cir. Jan 8, 2013), the Seventh Circuit reaffirmed the critical importance of obtaining an insurer’s consent before settling a case.

continue reading...
Topics: 
Duty to Indemnify
Tags: 
Voluntary Payments, Notice; Consent, Conditions

Prevailing Plaintiff’s Attorneys’ Fees in Civil Rights Action are “Damages” Under Follow Form Insurance Policy

by Andrew May on October 3, 2012

In Fox v. Will County, 1:04-cv-07309, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 115255 (N.D. Ill Aug. 15, 2012), the court held that an excess insurance policy, which excluded “costs” from its definition of “Ultimate Net Loss,” provided coverage for $1.77 million in attorneys’ fees awarded to a prevailing plaintiff in a civil rights action because the excess policy provided follow form coverage and the primary policy specifically defined attorneys’ fees as “damages.”

continue reading...
Topics: 
Duty to Defend
Tags: 
attorney fees, Section 1983, civil rights

Illinois Appellate Court Holds That Section Headings in an Insurance Policy Do Not Modify or Restrict Coverage

by Andrew May on May 28, 2012

In Pekin Ins. Co. v. Tovar Snow Professionals, Inc., 2012 IL App (1st) 111136 (1st Dist. 2012), the Illinois Appellate Court held that the words used in the section heading of an insurance policy could not be construed to modify or restrict the policy’s coverage.

continue reading...
Topics: 
Policy Interpretation
Tags: 
insurance policy interpretation

Illinois Court Holds That Bankruptcy Trustee Is Not An “Insured” For Purposes of “Insured Versus Insured” Exclusion

by Andrew May on April 15, 2012

In Yessenow v. Executive Risk Indemnity, Inc., 2011 IL App 102920, 953 N.E.2d. 433 (1st Dist. 2011), the Illinois Appellate Court held that a bankruptcy trustee asserting claims on behalf of a bankrupt entity is not an “insured” for purposes of the “insured versus insured” exclusion.  In the underlying case, the bankruptcy trustee of an insolvent health care company filed an adversary complaint against the company’s former officers and directors asserting claims for self-dealing and mismanagement. 

continue reading...
Topics: 
Directors and Officers
Tags: 
bankruptcy; bankruptcy trustee; insured v insured

Ninth Circuit Strikes Down California Law Allowing Insurance Claims by Armenian Genocide Victims

by Andrew May on March 4, 2012

Last month, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, in a unanimous opinion, struck down a California law, which extended the statute of limitations for insurance claims by the heirs of Armenian Genocide victims.  The court held that the California law was constitutionally preempted under the “foreign affairs doctrine” because it interfered with the federal government’s exclusive domain over foreign affairs.

continue reading...
Topics: 
Property Losses & Business Interruption
Tags: 
statute of limitations; constitutionality of insurance regulation

No Harm, No Foul: Supreme Court of Nevada Holds that Insurer Must Show Untimely Notice of Claim Caused Prejudice to Insurer Before Denying Coverage

by Andrew May on January 29, 2012

In Las Vegas Metro. Police Dep’t. v. Coregis Ins. Co., 256 P.3d 958, 959-65 (Nev. 2011), the Supreme Court of Nevada joined the majority of jurisdictions in holding that an insurer may not deny insurance coverage on the basis that the insured did not provide timely notice of a claim, unless the insurer is able to prove that it suffered prejudice as a result of the untimely notice.

continue reading...
Topics: 
Excess Insurers, Policy Interpretation
Tags: 
notice of claims

Neal Gerber Eisenberg’s Insurance Policyholder Practice Group pairs its extensive knowledge of insurance law with exceptional litigation capabilities to maximize insurance recovery for corporate and individual policyholders and claimants.

RSS