Kurt M. Mullen

Partner | Litigation

About

Kurt Mullen is a commercial litigator with over 20 years of experience litigating insurance-coverage and other complex disputes.

  • He regularly counsels and represents insurers and insurance guaranty associations regarding all aspects of coverage under first-party and third-party policies across a variety of product lines, including cyber, general liability, property, and surplus lines. Insurance industry clients often turn to Kurt for strategic and litigation advice regarding issues of first impression, as well as to represent them in coverage, extra-contractual and bad faith litigation.

    Kurt also has an active complex commercial practice representing medium- and large-sized businesses across industries in a variety of trial and alternative dispute resolution proceedings.

    In addition to an active trial court practice, Kurt has extensive appellate experience. He has argued in the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, the Connecticut Supreme Court, and before all levels of the Massachusetts appellate courts concerning insurance and statutory issues of first impression.

    Before Pierson Ferdinand, Kurt was a partner at an AmLaw 100 law firm. Prior to entering private practice, he clerked for the Honorable William J. Lavery, Chief Judge of the Connecticut Appellate Court.


Practices

  • Appellate

  • Arbitration and Mediation

  • Commercial Litigation

  • Cyber-Risk, Privacy, and Data Security

  • Insurance

  • Litigation and Risk Management

Admissions

  • Connecticut

  • Massachusetts

  • New Jersey

  • New York

  • U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut

  • U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts

  • U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey

  • U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York

  • U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York

  • U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit

  • U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit


Education

  • J.D., Boston College Law School

  • B.S., Northeastern University, summa cum laude


Professional Activities

Kurt is an elected Town Meeting Member in Needham, Massachusetts. He also represents Needham on the Regional Transportation Advisory Council, which provides public input on transportation planning issues to the Metropolitan Planning Organization for the Boston Region. Kurt also is on the Board of Directors of Needham Bikes, Inc., a nonprofit community organization that promotes bicycle use for transportation and recreation.


Recognition

  • Selected, through a peer-review survey, for inclusion in The Best Lawyers in America® 2024 in the field of Insurance Law; listed in Best Lawyers since 2023


Memberships

  • International Association of Defense Counsel

Experience

  • Nixon Peabody LLP

  • Robertson, Freilich, Bruno & Cohen, LLC


Representative Experience

Appellate Cases

  • Massachusetts Insurers Insolvency Fund v. Berkshire Bank, 475 Mass. 839 (2016) (reversing trial court’s summary judgment ruling and holding that the Massachusetts guaranty fund is entitled to recover workers’ compensation benefits paid to claimant on behalf of high net worth insured).

  • Connecticut Insurance Guaranty Association v. Drown, 314 Conn. 161 (2014) (holding an insurer’s breach of its duty to defend a medical malpractice suit before becoming insolvent does not bar the Connecticut guaranty association from contesting its obligation to pay a claim made under the insolvent insurer’s policy and that the underlying claim was barred by the policy’s vicarious liability exclusion).

  • Suffolk Construction Co., Inc. v. Illinois Union Ins. Co., 80 Mass. App. Ct (2011) (Reversing trial court’s summary judgment ruling and holding that additional insured endorsement to sub-subcontractor’s commercial general liability insurance policy, providing coverage for additional parties “as required by contract, provided the contract is executed prior to loss,” required that the contracting parties have a signed, written contract in order for contractor and subcontractor to be covered as additional insureds under policy).

Other Cases

  • Insituform Technologies, Inc. v. American Home Assurance Co., 566 F.3d 274 (2009) (Reversing district court’s judgment ruling excess insurer liable for cost of repairing and replacing insured’s work and holding that “following form” endorsement did not create new liability for excess insurer inconsistent with other basic provisions in the excess policy, including the “your product” and “your work” exclusions, which still operated to bar coverage for construction defect claim).

Presentations

  • Kurt regularly presents at the Legal Seminar for the National Conference of Insurance Guaranty Funds

  • “Veteran Litigators: A How-To,” NCIGF Legal Seminar, Denver, CO, June 27, 2019


Publications

  • “Determining the Insurer’s Response” (with Gregory P. Deschenes), 1 New Appleman Insurance Law Practice Guide 11-1 (Mathew Bender & Co., Inc. 2007)

  • “The Differences and Similarities in Dealing with Primary vs. Excess Carriers” (with Gregory P. Deschenes), presented at the Mealey’s All Sums: Reallocation & Settlement Credits Conference (November 2006)

  • “Ethical Obligations and Out-of-State Arbitration,” ABA Commercial and Business Litigation Journal, (2004)


In the News

  • “Cooper Levenson, client ditch NJ racketeering claims” Law360, November 28, 2016

  • “Mass. justices reverse bank's win against insurance fund” Law360, November 2, 2016

  • “Loss Accrued V. Occurred In Mass. Fire Insurance Policies” Law360, November 2, 2015

  • “Conn. High Court Says Insurer's Breach Doesn't Nix Suit” Law360, October 21, 2014