OVERVIEW
Gabriel Darwick is a commercial litigator whose practice focuses on insurance coverage, reinsurance, and general commercial disputes.
In his insurance coverage practice, Gabe works with clients on claims arising under various policies, including commercial general liability, cyber, errors and omissions, lawyers professional liability, directors and officers, and product recall policies. Known for his result-oriented approach, Gabe develops efficient and creative solutions in an increasingly challenging legal landscape. When litigation ensues, Gabe has substantial experience litigating in state and federal courts, has tried multiple cases to verdict, and has prevailed on appeals in some of the toughest jurisdictions.
Gabe routinely advises clients on risks implicating Coverage A and Coverage B of CGL policies. In recent years, he has represented insurers in claims arising from hazards such as tainted baby foods, hair straighteners, benzene, mercury, legionella, asbestos, social media music infringement, and false arrest and malicious prosecution.
In the realm of cyber insurance, Gabe has helped clients navigate coverage issues arising from security breach liability, media incidents, business email compromises, funds transfer fraud, business interruption, and cryptojacking. Gabe has successfully litigated several of these cutting-edge cyber issues in courts across the country.
Gabe also maintains a diverse commercial practice. Gabe represents individuals and small and mid-size businesses in business litigation, including employment, professional liability, corporate governance, real estate, tax, and contract disputes. His recent matters include securing voluntary dismissal of a corporate officer in a contentious dispute over the ownership and operation of a well-known art gallery, a favorable settlement for a technology company in the pursuit of breach of contract claims against a large health provider, a voluntary dismissal of a family business in a real estate litigation over unpaid broker commissions and corporate waste, and reaching a mid-trial nuisance value settlement in a cooperative dispute over a private nuisance.
Recognition and Involvement
Recognition & Involvement
New York Metro Super Lawyers Rising Stars (2013 - 2020)
Super Lawyers (2021-2023)
Credentials
Bar and Court Admissions
New Jersey
New York
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York
U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey
Education
Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, J.D., 2009
University of Maryland, College Park, BA, 2005
News & Insights
Memberships
Member, Defense Research Institute (DRI)
Member, Claims and Litigation Management Alliance (CLM)
REPRESENTATIVE MATTERS
- Member of team that secured summary judgment for excess insurers in coverage dispute arising from nine figure settlement of false arrest claims.
- Secured a finding of no coverage after bench trial concerning the applicability of a Fungi or Bacteria Exclusion to a multi-million-dollar consent judgment arising from exposure to toxins.
- Secured a defense verdict for an insurer in a multi-week jury trial arising from environmental contamination claims.
- Secured a finding of no coverage after a two-week bench trial concerning the applicability of the retroactive date in an underground storage tank policy to a petroleum discharge.
- Obtained affirmance before the Second Circuit Court of Appeals of district court determination applying the anti-subrogation rule to prohibit an excess insurer from passing through eight figure settlement to employer’s liability insurer.
- Represented excess insurer in long-tail claim alleging exposure to carbon black in West Virginia, resulting in favorable settlement.
-
Represented excess insurer in long-tail claim alleging exposure to benzene, resulting in favorable settlement.
-
Member of team that obtained summary judgment for an insurer in the NFL concussion litigation finding at least one “occurrence” per claimant.