Nancy J.W. Brown

Partner, Los Angeles Office

PROFESSIONAL SUMMARY

Nancy J.W. Brown is a partner in the Firm’s Los Angeles office. She represents insurers carriers in coverage disputes and insurance related litigation in Federal and State court, with particular expertise in the areas of excess and reinsurance. She handled a series of matters that evolved into a line published case law and other significant authorities that address excess policies and reinsurance contracts issued to employers who self-insure for workers compensation.  Ms. Brown also has substantial insurance coverage and litigation experience involving many types of primary and excess insurance policies, including general liability, professional liability, and directors and officer’s liability policies.  Her work involves both direct representation of carriers and oversight of insurance litigation throughout the country.  She also has performed regulatory work on behalf of insurers and their managing general agents.

Ms. Brown has bench, jury trial, and appellate experience representing insurance carriers as well as other businesses and professionals.  She has represented insurance brokers, attorneys, accountants, real estate brokers, building contractors, and various retail and wholesale businesses in matters involving professional liability, breach of contract, licensing, intellectual property, antitrust, unfair competition, and other commercial disputes.

She previously owned a specialty practice representing fine artists, musicians, production and management companies, independent record labels, theatre companies, and non-profit arts and music foundations. She has served on boards of several non-profit music and theatre foundations.

After law school, Ms. Brown clerked for Justice Robert Rose of the Supreme Court of Nevada.

PUBLISHED DECISIONS AND OTHER REPRESENTATIVE CASES

  • City of Vista v. General Reinsurance Corporation, 295 F.Supp.3d 1119 (2018)
    Defeated motion to remand by establishing complete diversity, including that insurer was not a citizen of all states, that amount in controversy in equitable claim exceeded jurisdictional minimum, and that the court may maintain jurisdiction over an action for declaratory relief.
  • San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District v. General Reinsurance Corporation 726 Fed.Appx. 562 (9th Cir. 2018)
    As a matter of first impression, established that an insurer is not bound by a California Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board determination when the insurer did not have notice and an opportunity to protect its interests.
  • Roman Catholic Diocese of Rockville Ctr. v. General Reinsurance Corp. 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 133724 *; 2016 WL 579399
    Successfully moved to dismiss Plaintiff's prayer for punitive damages.
  • Drummond Co. v. General Reinsurance Corp 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 127118 *; 2016 WL 4993276
    Defeated motion to remand by establishing that the action does not arise under Alabama's workers' compensation law, and therefore does not fall within 28 U.S.C. § 1445(c), which lists claims that are nonremovable to federal court.
  • San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District v. General Reinsurance Corp. 111 F.Supp.3d 1055 (2015)
    Prevailed in bench trial, and established that a dispute over an excess insurance policy is not within the jurisdiction of the California Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board, and also that an excess insurer is not bound by a prior determination, when its interests are not aligned with those of the self-insured entity.
  • Contra Costa County, v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board, General Reinsurance Corp., Jeffrey Millman, 79 Cal. Comp. Cases 439; 2014 Cal. Wrk. Comp. LEXIS 32
    Established at trial that the WCAB does not have jurisdiction to determine a contract dispute between defendant and its excess insurance carrier
  • Genesis Ins. Co. v. BRE Properties, 916 F.Supp.2d 1058 (2013)
    Prevailed on summary judgment, and established that insurer had no duty to defend when extrinsic facts eliminated the potential for coverage, despite complaint allegations that suggested potential liability.
  • Endurance Am. Specialty Ins. Co. v. WFP Secs. Corp., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 164037
    On behalf of investment advisors, successfully moved to dismiss interpleader action in which insurer improperly sought to interplead policy proceeds rather than defend pending arbitrations.

COMMUNITY

Ms. Brown has contributed her time on a pro bono basis to these non-profit organizations: Ami Aloni Music Foundation, Westchester Parents Nursery School, California Lawyers for the Arts, 18th Street Art Center, Festival Theatre USA, Inc.

ADMISSIONS & PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS

  • State Bar of California 
  • State Bar of Nevada 
  • U.S. District Courts, Central, Southern, Eastern, and Northern Districts of California
  • United States Court of Appeals