Overview
Practice Areas
Andrew S. Kent focuses his practice on surety and fidelity claims, providing legal advice with respect to surety-related regulatory and transactional matters, commercial litigation, and public contract bid disputes.
For more than 25 years, he has regularly authored and assisted on articles related to the topics of fidelity and surety law and is a presenter and speaker at conferences in those fields.
Andrew earned his J.D. from Rutgers Law School in Newark and his B.A. from Rutgers University, where he was in the General Honors Program and a member of Phi Beta Kappa. He served as a law clerk to the Honorable Leo Yanoff in the Law Division of the Superior Court, State of New Jersey. Andrew also worked for nearly two years as a surety claims specialist at a Pennsylvania-based insurance company.
Involvement
- American Bar Association, Tort Trial & Insurance Practice Section – Fidelity & Surety Law Committee
Education
- Rutgers Law School (J.D., 1992)
- Rutgers University (B.A., 1988)
Admissions
- New Jersey
- New York
- U.S. District Court, District of New Jersey
- U.S. District Court, Eastern District of New York
- U.S. District Court, Northern District of New York
- U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York
- U.S. District Court, Western District of New York
- U.S. Court of Appeals, Second Circuit
- U.S. Court of Appeals, Third Circuit
- U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
- U.S. Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit
Overview
Andrew has acted as counsel in numerous cases resulting in reported and unreported decisions, including:
- Jack Daniels Motors, Inc. v. Universal Underwriters Insurance Company, 446 Fed.Appx. 504 (3rd Cir. 2011) (Held: Insured’s loss was not of “money” or “securities” as defined under the policy; New Jersey’s “reasonable expectations” doctrine cannot be invoked to alter unambiguous policy definitions.)
- Precision Development of Chappaqua, Inc. v. Hartford Fire Ins. Co., 10 Misc.3d 1055(A), 809 N.Y.S.2d 483 (Table), 2005 WL 3274977 (N.Y.Sup.). (Held: Second-tier claimant not entitled to rely on common law presumption of receipt for notice of surety bond claim sent by regular mail, where payment bond statute requires service by registered mail or personal delivery, with exception only for notice actually received by other means).
- Sentinel Trust Company v. Universal Bonding Insurance Company, 316 F.3d 213 (3rd Cir. 2003) (held that former indenture trustee lacked standing to sue under surety bond issued to obligee in its capacity as trustee; obligee collaterally estopped by state court findings of negligence against it from suing surety for negligence, despite vacature of state court judgment)
- Conestoga Title Ins. Co. v. Premier Title Agency, Inc., 328 N.J. Super. 460 (App. Div. 2000), aff’d, 166 N.J. 2 (2000) (held that owner/director of the insured company was not an “employee” of the insured for purposes of a fidelity bond covering thefts by employees)
- United States ex rel PCC Construction v. Star Insurance Company, 90 F. Supp.2d 512 (D.N.J. 2000) (held that state court judgment against principal does not preclude Miller Act surety from defending against subsequent payment bond claim brought in federal court; evidence sufficient to require a trial as to whether claimant was a subcontractor entitled to claim under the payment bond, or an undisclosed joint venturer with the principal and not a beneficiary of the bond)
*Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.