Attorney Profile
David E. Williamson
Areas of Practice
Contact Info
Overview
Dave is an experienced civil litigator and trial lawyer, handling a wide range of claims over the course of his career. His practice includes defending insurance company clients in disputes with insureds, other insurers, and claimants. Those cases involve questions about whether coverage is available for a claim, the value of the claim, the priority of multiple coverages, and whether the insurer acted in bad faith in its handling of the claim.
Dave also defends clients in general liability cases, in which a party claims to have suffered bodily injury, property damage, etc., as a result of the negligent acts or omissions of another – including complex bodily injury cases. He has also handled cases in federal court defending a variety of claims asserted against cities, counties, and municipalities. Other areas of his practice include transportation law, workplace injury claims, property disputes, grade crossing accident cases, interactions with local municipalities, medical malpractice cases - defending doctors and other health care providers, as well as a variety of commercial litigation involving disputes between businesses.
As managing attorney of the Cincinnati office, Dave oversees the day-to-day operations for the entire office, ensuring that client matters are handled promptly, professionally and effectively.
Dave received his juris doctor from Salmon P. Chase College of Law in 1999, after completing his undergraduate work at Hanover College in 1995. He is admitted in both state and federal courts in the state of Ohio and Commonwealth of Kentucky.
Dave is married with two sons. He is active in his community, and currently serves on the Executive Board of Oak Hills Youth Athletics.
Results
Obtained summary judgment for a local city against a plaintiff’s claim for violation of civil rights. The plaintiff claimed the City of Fairfield and its police department violated his civil rights by improperly evicting him, forcing him to abandon the home where he had been living, and his personal property that he was forced to leave behind. He also claimed they threatened him with arrest and physical harm. We first obtained a dismissal of the police department on grounds that it was not the proper party. We then moved for summary judgment as to the claims against the city based on the evidence—the body cam footage from the responding officers—and political subdivision immunity. The court granted our motion for summary judgment based upon immunity from performing a police function and the plaintiff's failure to prove the city had adopted any custom or practice that violated his civil rights.
Obtained summary judgment on behalf of an insurance company client in a bad-faith case pending in Jefferson Circuit Court in Louisville, Kentucky.