Holly Harvey

Special Counsel | Miami, United States
Get in touch

Profile

Education

  • University of Miami School of Law, JD (cum laude), 1992
  • Barry University, BPS, 1989

Holly Harvey is special counsel in the Miami office. She advises clients on a wide range of insurance-related matters, focusing on coverage and bad faith. For over 25 years, she has acted as coverage counsel in hundreds of high-risk claims, including construction defect cases, catastrophic losses and mass disasters on land, air, and sea, environmental claims, and class actions.

With her extensive knowledge and experience, Holly has been called upon to serve as a witness on multiple occasions. Additionally, her clients— along with industry leaders—frequently ask her to speak and write on coverage and defect issues.

Prior to joining Kennedys, Holly handled virtually all manner of insurance coverage and bad faith cases at an international law firm.

Memberships

  • American Bar Association
    • Section of Litigation
    • Tort Trial & Insurance Practice Section (TIPS)
    • Corporate Counsel Committee
  • Claims & Litigation Management Alliance
  • Federation of Defense and Corporate Counsel
  • Florida Association for Women Lawyers
  • Florida Bar
    • Appellate Practice Section
    • Appellate Rules Liaison Committee
    • Publications Committee

Qualifications and admissions

  • Florida
  • US District Court for the Middle, Northern and Southern Districts of Florida
  • US Court of Appeals for the First and Eleventh Circuits
  • US Supreme Court

Market recognition

  • Recognized in Best Lawyers in America: Insurance Law (2023–2024)
  • Recognized by Chambers USA: America's Leading Lawyers for Business for Insurance: Dispute Resolution – Florida, (Band 4) 2022, (Band 3) 2023
  • Received the AV® Peer Review Rating from Martindale-Hubbell for Ethics and Legal Ability

Presentations and publications

  • "Ethical Issues in the Defense of Construction Defect Claims," presented at the 6th Annual Insurance in the Construction Industry Conference (August 2022)
  • "FMIC AI Seminar," (September 2020)
  • "Navigating Insurance in Construction Claims - Latest Laws and Trends," presented at the Florida Bar, 14th Annual Construction Law Institute, Florida (2020)

Report decisions

  • Mama Jo’s, Inc. v. Sparta Ins. Co., 832 F. App’x 868 (11th Cir. 2020): Holding dust and debris that entered premises from adjacent road construction did not constitute “direct physical loss or damage to property” that would be covered under a commercial property insurance policy.
  • Altman Contractors, Inc. v. Crum & Forster Specialty Ins. Co., 232 So. 3d 273 (Fla. 2017), answering certified question from the Eleventh Circuit. Holding that the statutory pre-suit process under Florida Statutes, Chapter 558 constitutes an alternative dispute resolution proceeding that may give rise to a duty to defend under a standard CGL policy, if the insurer consents to the insured's participation in the chapter 558 process.
  • Core Constr. Servs. Se., Inc. v. Crum & Forster Specialty Ins. Co., 658 F. App'x 534 (11th Cir. 2016). Affirming summary judgment determining that CGL carrier had no duty to defend USD 2.5 million claim against general contractor asserting that project owner had to replace hurricane-damaged roofs on condominium buildings as a result of roofing subcontractor's faulty work because the claim was not one for damages because of "property damage."
  • Summit Contractors, Inc. v. Crum & Forster Specialty Ins. Co., 633 Fed. App'x 785 (11th Cir. 2016), aff'g, 76 F. Supp.3d 1381 (M.D. Fla. 2015). Holding that third-party indemnity payments could not be applied to satisfy insured's self-insured retention under CGL policy.
  • Spaulding Decon, LLC v. Crum & Forster Specialty Insurance Company, 158 F. Supp. 3d 1293 (S.D. Fla. 2016). Holding CGL carrier had no duty under policy's personal and advertising injury coverage to defend insured against a claim for breach of the confidentiality provision in a settlement agreement.
  • Amerisure Mut. Ins. Co. v. Crum & Forster Specialty Ins. Co., No. 2:12-CV-443-FTM-29CM, 2014 WL 3809113 (M.D. Fla. Aug 1, 2014). Holding that under Florida law, one co-insurer could not state a claim against another co-insurer for equitable contribution for the cost of defending their mutual insured, and that complaint presented no case or controversy.
  • Shelley's Septic Tank, Inc. v. U.S. Fire Ins. Co., No. 6:10-CV-932-ORL- 28, 2011 WL 5358624 (M.D. Fla. Nov 7, 2011). Holding that insurer's agreement to defend the insured against an amended complaint alleging a potentially covered claim was not a "confession of judgment" entitling insured to recover statutory attorney's fees against insurer on a claim regarding the original complaint; upholding application of employee exclusion as to original complaint.
  • Rolyn Cos., Inc. v. R&J Sales of Texas, Inc., 412 Fed. App'x 252 (11th Cir. 2011). Affirming summary judgment for insurer based upon insured's breach of voluntary payment clause.
  • Mastec, Inc. v. U.S. Fire Ins. Co., 361 Fed. App'x 37 (11th Cir. 2010). Affirming summary judgment for insurer based upon pollution exclusion.
  • Aronowitz v. Health-Chem Corp., 513 F.3d 1229 (11th Cir. 2008). Affirming judgment as a matter of law against inventor on breach of contract claim, and reversing USD 2.6 million award to inventor on trademark infringement claim as legally unsupported by the evidence.
  • S. Fire Ins. Co. v. Milood Ben Ali, 198 F. Supp.2d 1313 (S.D. Fla. 2002). Holding truck used by subcontractor was not a "hired auto" and that subcontractor was not an omnibus insured under prime contractor's commercial umbrella policy. Aff'd, 61 Fed. App'x 669 (11th Cir. 2003).
  • Royal Ins. Co. v. Latin America Aviation Servs., Inc., 210 F.3d 1348 (11th Cir. 2000). Holding that cargo legal liability exclusion in aircraft liability insurance policy excluded coverage for theft of cargo during course of carriage.
  • McAleer v. Smith, 57 F.3d 109 (1st Cir. 1995). Affirming summary judgment in favor of ship captain's estate in capsize case where captain was not owner pro hac vice or partner in vessel or employer of plaintiff's decedents, and decedents had no common law or DOHSA claim against captain.
  • Anthony v. G.M.D. Airline Servs., Inc., 17 F.3d 490 (1st Cir. 1994). Reversing jury award in favor of airline pilot against airline in personal injury claim as against the manifest weight of the evidence.
  • General Star Indem. Co. v. Boran Craig Barber Engel Constr. Co., Inc., 895 So. 2d 1136 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005). Holding Florida's nonjoinder statute prevented general contractor from pursuing direct action against subcontractor's insurer.
  • Great American Ins. Cos. v. Souza, 855 So. 2d 187 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2003). Holding auto exclusion in airport liability policy precluded coverage for wrongful death claim involving a passenger on a shuttle.
  • Aerolineas Argentinas, S.A. v. Gimenez, 807 So. 2d 111 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002). Reversing trial court and ordering dismissal of 52 wrongful death claims to Argentina under doctrine of forum non conveniens.
  • Underwriters of Lloyd's of London v. CZX Prods., Inc., 686 So. 2d 706 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App 1996). Reversing summary judgment for aircraft owner against insurers under all risks hull policy based upon fact issues involving London insurance market and agency of broker.

Services

Sectors