Bowitch & Coffey, LLC was established in June 2012 and brings almost 50 years of legal experience to its clients. Bowitch & Coffey provides legal advice and litigation services to a variety of businesses, insurance companies, municipalities and non-profit organizations.Read More
Our attorneys are admitted in all courts in New York State, all federal district and appellate courts within New York State, and the U.S. Supreme Court. We have represented a variety of businesses and individuals in a variety of civil litigation matters, ranging from small claims courts to New York’s Court of Appeals.Read More
Bowitch & Coffey provides counsel to municipalities on compliance with General Municipal Law, Public Officers Law and other laws. The firm advises municipalities on contaminated tax-delinquent properties; has represented municipalities in defense of third party claims; and has prosecuted subrogation claims for municipal clients.Read More
Dan Coffey Sworn in as President of the Albany County Bar Association
Dan Coffey was honored to be sworn in by Judge Karen Peters January 12th as the 108th President of the Albany County Bar Association. Dan will serve a one-year term. He has previously served on the Board and as an Officer of the Association, which consists of over 1,100 attorney who practice in or live in Albany County. The mission of the county bar association is to promote collegiality among the bench and bar, facilitate public service and access to justice to all and to offer programs, benefits and services to enhance the skills of its members.
Appellate Court Affirms B&C’s Summary Judgment Obtained for Broker
In House of the Good Shepard v. Lehr Agency et al., Bowitch & Coffey successfully defended insurance agencies from allegations they improperly recommended a self-insured worker’s compensation trust (“GSIT”) to a non-profit organization. The Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department, agreed with the trial judge that the broker had no duty, under a breach of implied contract theory, to obtain and review tax returns of the GSIT prior to presenting it to the not-profit for consideration. Bowitch & Coffey successfully obtained summary judgment from the trial judge and the appellate division has affirmed.
Judge Allows Evidence of “Similar Incidents” in Products Trial Against General Motors
If there’s a fire involving a product that failed, chances are that same product has failed and cause damage elsewhere. The courts have struggled at times with the issue of how much evidence regarding “similar failures” should be admissible and used against the product manufacturer/seller. The subrogation attorney will want similar incidents involving failure of the product to be shown to the jury to support plaintiff’s contention that the product is inherently defective and also to show that the defendant had notice of the problem and failed to either fix or recall the product to prevent harm to others. The defendant manufacturer/seller usually fights very hard to keep such “similar” evidence from being disclosed to the jury, arguing that evidence of other product failure has no bearing on whether and how the specific product failed and is very prejudicial to the defendant.