Lee S. Siegel

MEMBER

860-869-0375

Mr. Siegel is a Connecticut-based attorney in Hurwitz Fine P.C.’s Insurance Coverage Group, where he represents insurers in complex coverage and bad faith disputes. With more than 30 years of experience in insurance coverage, bad faith, class action, and defense litigation, he brings both deep litigation knowledge and a unique insight into insurance company operations.

Admitted in Connecticut and New York, Mr. Siegel regularly advises and defends insurers in high-stakes coverage and bad faith litigation across the country. He is widely recognized for his thought leadership, having published numerous articles on insurance coverage issues, been quoted in leading industry journals, and spoken at national conferences and webinars. He is often retained as a consulting and testifying expert.

Before joining Hurwitz Fine, Mr. Siegel served in a senior role in the Law Department of one of the nation’s largest insurers, where he supervised all coverage and bad faith litigation involving management liability policies, including D&O, E&O, EPLI, Fidelity, Surety, and Cyber. In earlier roles, he provided real-time coverage advice, bad faith avoidance strategies, and litigation management across all major property and casualty lines throughout the United States.

Mr. Siegel began his career at a leading Manhattan medical malpractice defense firm, where he represented doctors and hospitals, as well as manufacturers and providers in medical products liability litigation. Today, he concentrates his practice in New York and Connecticut, providing insurers with strategic guidance in resolving complex claims and litigation.

He earned his B.A. in History and Political Science from Indiana University and his J.D. from Hofstra University School of Law, where he served as Research Editor of the Law Review. Mr. Siegel lives on the Connecticut shoreline with his wife, their four children, and their loyal dog, Mocha. You can often catch him on the beach with a claim file in hand or a good spy novel.

Court Admissions

Courts of the State of Connecticut

Courts of the State of New York

United States District Court
- Southern District of New York
- Eastern District of New York
- Western District of New York
- Northern District of New York
- District of Connecticut

United States 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals

Admitted to Practice

New York

Connecticut

Education

Hofstra University School of Law (J.D., 1992)

Indiana University (B.A., 1989)

Professional Associations

Professional Liability Underwriting Society

Defense Research Institute

New York State Bar Association

Community Associations

Farmington Valley Jewish Congregation, Board of Directors

Recent News

04/21/25: Business Insider: High Court RICO Ruling Could Drive New Suits, Coverage Disputes

10/01/24: Business Insider: CISOs face D&O cover risks as hacks spread

08/16/24: Business Insurance: Outcome of a Ninth Circuit Decision in a Directors and Officers Insurance Coverage Dispute

04/11/24: Law360: Chubb-Archdiocese Suit Raises Coverage Burden Issue

03/06/24: Business Insurance: Appeals Court Considers if Renewal Omission is Misrepresentation 

11/22/23: Law360: W. Va. Continuous Trigger Ruling Will Spur Allocation Fights

05/05/22: Law360: NYC Hotel Wants 2nd Circ. To Revive Virus Coverage Suit

05/04/22: Legal Alert: Actual Notice of Non-Renewal Not Required, Says Connecticut Court

03/30/22: Legal Alert: Litigation Privilege Bars Bad Faith Claims Where Carrier Accused of Making Misrepresentations and Withholding Evidence: Says Connecticut Supreme Court

11/08/21: Law360: Lee Siegel Quoted in Law360 Article on COVID Coverage in High Courts

09/13/21: Blog: Lee Siegel Featured in Law260 Article on the Demand for Insurance Attorneys

05/13/21: Law360: NY Bad Faith Bill Would Tip The Scales Against Insurers

12/23/20: Legal Alert: First Connecticut Court to Rule Finds COVID-19 Business Income Claim Not Covered

11/01/20: DRI In-House Defense Quarterly: A One-Two Punch: Michigan State Court Renders First Substantive COVID-19 Decision and It's Big News for Carriers

09/17/20: Legal Alert: In a Case of First Impression, the Connecticut Supreme Court Held that an Insurer Must Afford a Defense Where Coverage is “Uncertain”

08/12/20: Legal Alert: JPML Rejects COVID-19 Business Interruption Consolidation

08/09/20: Legal Alert: COVID-19 Business Interruption Complaint Survey

08/06/20: Legal Alert: Breaking News: Superior Court of D.C. Sides With Insurance Carrier, Finds No COVID-19 Business Interruption Coverage

07/07/20: Legal Alert: Hurwitz & Fine Insurance Coverage Group Quoted in Multiple Industry Publications for Analysis of First COVID-19 Decision Nationwide

07/06/20: Best's Insurance News & Analysis: "Judge Siding With Insurer in COVID-19 BI Case Is a ‘Big Win,’ Attorneys Say"

07/03/20: Legal Alert: Michigan State Court Renders First Substantive COVID-19 Decision Nationwide And It’s A Big Win For Carriers

06/05/20: Buffalo Business First: Interruption insurance debate may lead to consolidated litigation

05/14/20: Law360: Expert Analysis: Major Trends In COVID-19 Business Interruption Lawsuits

05/14/20: WSHU Public Radio: How Coronavirus Relief May Lead To Tort Reform

05/07/20: Blog: Public Fear: The Newest COVID-19 Coverage?

05/05/20: Legal Alert: Hurwitz & Fine Resources on COVID-19 Business Interruption: Lawsuits and Legislative Summaries

04/21/20: Legal Alert: Hurwitz & Fine Resources on COVID-19 Business Interruption Lawsuits and Legislative Summaries

04/18/20: Buffalo Business First: "Fine print on policies has businesses, insurers and legislators in a quarrel."

3/29/20: Blog: Critique of Assembly Bill A.10226 – The COVID-19 “Business Interruption Bill” – The Cure is Worse than the Solution

11/13/19: Blog: Connecticut Supreme Court Requires Imminent Danger of Collapse for Crumbling Concrete Coverage

11/13/19: Blog: U.S. Supreme Court Will Not Rule on Sandy Hook Preemption, Permits Gun Suit to Proceed

3/21/19: Blog: Connecticut Supreme Court Finds Unfair Trade Practices Act Not Preempted by Federal Law, Reinstates Sandy Hook Plaintiffs’ Suit Against Manufacturer