For over 20 years, I have worked closely with Ty Sagalow. I consider him to be a good friend and colleague. At National Union, we worked together on many new creative deals as well as new products together and now at Ironshore I am pleased to be able to draw on his expertise in product development.
Ty is one of the most creative and smart dealmakers in the industry. He has the rare ability to listen to his clients needs, understand the views of the other stakeholders, and arrive at a resolution that supports his client’s profitability and long term goals. I am privileged to be able to work with him and call him my friend.
I wanted to let you know I retained Ty Sagalow to act as an expert on the broker malpractice case I am handling. He did a first class report and identified an issue that I had not thought of before. His opinion on that issue could be a game changer in favor of the Firm client. Thank you for recommending him.
Partner,
Boston, MA
For almost 25 years, I have worked closely with Ty. First as a colleague at AIG and Zurich, and currently as a client of Innovation Insurance Group. Put simply, Ty is the best product development expert in the commercial insurance industry.
In addition to being a fine lawyer, he is also, in my opinion, one of the foremost experts in D&O insurance as well as network security insurance, which he largely invented as a product.
At AIG, Ty and I worked together on many high profile D&O deals. When I was President of AIG Small Business, I hired Ty and his team to develop our new products. When I moved to Zurich, I recommended Ty for the new company position of Chief Innovation Officer and today, as President of Navigators Management Company, we have hired Innovation Insurance Group to help with our new product needs in the management and professional liability space. Ty is one of a kind.
Ty
Just to let you know that last week, for the first time since the inception of this litigation, opposing counsel asked that I submit a demand for settlement…its timing immediately following your deposition is not lost on me!
Thanks!!!
Named Partner
Mississippi Mid-sized Law Firm
Ty, I am pleased to inform you that we completely won our arbitration with XXXX. As you can see, the Arbitrator 100% adopted our arguments. XXX and I want to thank you for your invaluable assistance on this case. If you are ever in Los Angeles, please call me so we can have a celebratory drink or dinner together.
Thanks Again,
NAMED PARTNER
REGIONAL LAW FIRM, LOS ANGLES
The Federal District Court was asked to rule on reasonableness of the Mr. Sagalow’s fees. In a decision taking into consideration 5 factors (the witness’s area of expertise, education and training, prevailing rates for other comparable experts, nature and complexity of the responses, fees traditional charged by the expert on related matters and cost of living in particular geographic area), the Court held in favor of Mr. Sagalow’s fees ($700/hr), reasoning as follows:
[In this case, counsel representing the party seeking Mr. Sagalow’s expert deposition has argued] that Sagalow’s fees are “unreasonable” and that “Sagalow’s unreasonable fee schedule should be reduced to an amount consistent with the hourly rates charged by other expert witnesses designated in this case… and that his preparation time be limited to ½ of his deposition time”. For a fee to be reasonable, ‘there must be some reasonable relationship between the services rendered and the remuneration to which the expert is entitled.” (Decision at pages 1,2)
Applying the [5] factors in this case, the court notes that Mr. Sagalow is a graduate of Georgetown University and subsequently received an L.L.M from New York University School of Law. He also practices law and held numerous positions in the insurance industry, such as chief underwriter for two large insurance companies, as well as serving as general counsel for AIG Insurance and National Union Insurance Company.’ (Decision at page 3)
Having applied the factors to this matter, the court holds that Sagalow’s hourly rate is not unreasonable and [opposing party] shall compensate Sagalow at this rate, $700/hr, for the time he actually spends attending the deposition. Furthermore, the courts holds that [opposing party] shall also be liable for Sagalow’s preparation time, if any, provided that such time is reasonable.” (Decision at page 4)
Though Sagalow’s hourly rate was found reasonable under the factors discussed, the court would point out that this is not a case where one party’s expert was billing the opposing part at an inflated rate. Rather [the party retaining Sagalow] has been paying Sagalow $700.00 hourly rate since he was first retained as an expert. Therefore, fairness dictates that [opposing party] should not be allowed to benefit from [retaining party’s] discovery at a discounted price.” (Decision at pages 4-5)
Note: Travel time was not an issue in this case.
For a copy of the full decision, click here.
David a. Sanders
United States District Court
Northern District of Mississippi
September 5, 2015
