Menu
  • John C. Pitblado
  • 860.392.5024
  • Share Share this page
John C. Pitblado

John C. Pitblado

Shareholder

Overview

John Pitblado has extensive experience as a litigator and trial lawyer in complex insurance coverage, indemnity, and risk-transfer matters, with an emphasis on premises liability defense and indemnity issues for the sports and entertainment and educational institution industries. John has handled numerous high-profile, high-value matters for insurers, concert and sports venues, prep schools, colleges, and universities.

John regularly handles cases before Connecticut's state and federal trial and appellate courts, including Connecticut's complex litigation docket, and bankruptcy court. In addition, he has handled numerous cases in other state and federal trial and appellate courts as pro hac vice counsel, in pretrial proceedings, at trial, and on appeal.

John is a member of the firm’s Insurance Industry Group, Property Casualty, Real Property Litigation, and Privacy and Cybersecurity practices. He counsels clients, speaks, and writes on a range of insurance, indemnity, and premises liability issues, and is an editor of the firm’s property-casualty and reinsurance blogs.

John has been recognized for his pro bono work, including civil rights matters, educational outreach in underserved communities, and representation of minor children subject to neglect and abuse petitions brought by the Connecticut Department of Children and Families (DCF) in Connecticut’s juvenile courts. Since 2013, John has served on the board of directors of Lawyers for Children America Inc., a nonprofit organization providing legal representation to children subject to DCF proceedings.

Featured Insights

Experience

  • Bracho v. Kent School, No. 3:18-cv-00021, 2022 WL 198679 (D. Conn. Jan. 22, 2022) (defense verdict after two-week jury trial in favor of defendant boarding school client, in case brought by international student who sustained catastrophic injuries during school cycling activity, including claims of traumatic brain injury and more than $1.2 million in medical care).
  • Pineda v. Rumsey Hall School, No. UWYCV156037123S (Conn. Super. Ct. June 21, 2019) (summary judgment in favor of insured school on catastrophic injury claims arising from construction accident).
  • Sterling Trail, LLC v. Weston I, LLC, No. FST-CV12-6015105-S (Conn. Super. Ct. June 26, 2017) (judgment in client’s favor after bench trial in real property litigation matter).
  • Daconto v. Howard, 68 Conn. L. Rptr. 3, 2018 WL 7821676 (Conn. Super. Ct. Sept. 19, 2018) (granting summary judgment to insured client on premises liability claim arising from soccer-related traumatic brain injury claim).
  • Mason v. Liberty Mutual Ins. Co., 64 Conn. L. Rptr. 809, 2017 WL 3481533 (Conn. Super. Ct. July 12, 2017) (granting motion to strike all counts against insurer staff counsel law firm on bad faith/subrogation/assignment of legal malpractice claim).
  • Snyder v. ACORD Corp., No. 1:14-cv-01736, 2016 WL 192270 (D. Colo. Jan. 15, 2016), aff’d, 684 F. App'x 710 (10th Cir. 2017), cert. denied, 138 S. Ct. 392 (Oct. 30, 2017).
  • McCaffree Fin. Corp. v. Principal Life Ins. Co., 811 F.3d 998 (8th Cir. 2016) (drafted brief on behalf of amicus ACLI in support of prevailing party in excessive fee 401(k) dispute between plan sponsor and insurer).
  • Bozelko v. Webster Bank, N.A., 123 A.3d 1250 (Conn. App. Ct. 2015), cert. denied, 128 A.3d 954 (Conn. 2015).
  • Rochow v. Life Ins. Co. of N. Am., 780 F.3d 364 (6th Cir. 2015) (drafted brief on behalf of amicus ACLI in support of prevailing party in participant denial of benefits disability claim).
  • Chen v. Hopkins Sch., Inc., 86 A.3d 482 (Conn. App. Ct. 2014).
  • Merrimon v. Unum Life Ins. Co. of Amer., 758 F.3d 46 (1st Cir. 2014) (amicus counsel in support of appellant/cross-appellee/prevailing party insurer in retained asset account class action against service provider/insurer).
  • Leimkuehler v. Am. United Life Ins. Co., 713 F.3d 905 (7th Cir. 2013) (amicus counsel in support of appellee/prevailing party plan service provider in 401(k) fee dispute).
  • Nationwide Life Ins. Co. v. Haddock, 460 F. App'x 26 (2d Cir. 2012) (amicus counsel in support of appellant/prevailing party plan service provider in 401(k) fee dispute).
  • Nw. Mut . Life Ins. Co. v. Gil, No. 3:07-cv-00303, 2009 WL 276086 (D. Conn. Feb. 5, 2009), aff'd, 351 F. App'x 515 (2d Cir. 2009).
  • Phones Plus, Inc. v. Hartford Fin. Servs. Grp., Inc., No. 3:06-cv-01835, 2008 WL 11376616 (D. Conn. Sept. 30, 2008) (denying plaintiff’s motion to dismiss counterclaims in 401(k) fee dispute between plan sponsor and service provider).
  • Royal Indem. Co. v. King, 512 F. Supp. 2d 117 (D. Conn. 2007).
  • Nichols v. Salem Subway Rest., 912 A.2d 1037 (Conn. App. Ct. 2006).
  • Waldman v. Jayaraj, 874 A.2d 860 (Conn. App. Ct. 2005), cert. denied, 882 A.2d 680 (Conn. 2005).

All Insights



























































Recognition

  • Connecticut Super Lawyers, Super Lawyers Magazine (2019–2021)
  • New England Rising StarsSuper Lawyers Magazine  (2009–2013)
  • Pro Bono Honor Roll, Connecticut Lawyer (2010)

Professional & Community Involvement

  • American Bar Association
    • Co-Editor, Class Action and Derivative Suits Quarterly Newsletter
  • Connecticut Bar Association
    • Insurance Law Committee (2010–present)
    • Insurance Law Executive Committee, Secretary (2019–present)
    • Co-Chair, Appellate Committee, Young Lawyers Section (2007–2009)
  • Lawyers for Children America Inc.
    • Board of Directors (2013–present)
    • Interim Treasurer (2020–present)

Speaking Engagements

  • "Negligent Security Litigation – Preparing for the Unexpected," 2021 National Sports Safety and Security Conference & Exhibition, Phoenix, AZ (November 9, 2021)
  • "ERISA, Anti-Subrogation, and Collateral Sources," Connecticut Bar Association Insurance Law Section (January 12, 2021)
  • "A Practical Look at Directors and Officers Insurance," Connecticut Legal Conference, Hartford, CT (June 11, 2018)
  • "Have You Been Robbed? Fidelity and Crime Insurance in a Nutshell," Connecticut Bar Insurance Association, Hartford, CT (May 8, 2017)
  • "Cyber Security, Wire Transfers, and Insurance," Regulatory Fundamentals Group (February 28, 2017)
  • "Cybersecurity Issues for the Contract Examiner and Market Conduct Examiner," Career Development Seminar and Regulatory Skills Workshop, Insurance Regulatory Examiners Society, Scottsdale, AZ (August 8, 2016)
  • "Latest Developments in Cyber Risk," IRI Cybersecurity Forum 2016, Washington, D.C. (July 19, 2016)
  • "Fifty Shades of Indemnity," Connecticut Valley RIMS Chapter Meeting, Hartford CT (October 14, 2015)
  • "What Insurance Lawyers Need to Know About Claims Handling Software," ExecSense Webinars (July 7, 2011)
  • "What Insurance Lawyers Need to Know About the New Generation of Pollution Legal Liability and Related Environmental Insurance Policies and the Potential for Litigation Over Duty to Defend Under These Policies," ExecSense (December 3, 2010)
  •  "The Instant Impact on Insurance Lawyers of Baker v. National Interstate Insurance Co. on Products and Completed Hazards Exclusions and Negligent Service Claims," ExecSense (February 5, 2010)

Credentials

Education
  • University of Connecticut School of Law (J.D., 2003)
    • Associate Editor, Connecticut Law Review
  • University of Vermont (B.A., 1999)
Bar Admissions
  • Connecticut
Court Admissions
  • U.S. Supreme Court
  • U.S. Court of Appeals, First Circuit
  • U.S. Court of Appeals, Second Circuit
  • U.S. Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit
  • U.S. District Court, District of Connecticut

Disclaimer

The information on this website is presented as a service for our clients and Internet users and is not intended to be legal advice, nor should you consider it as such. Although we welcome your inquiries, please keep in mind that merely contacting us will not establish an attorney-client relationship between us. Consequently, you should not convey any confidential information to us until a formal attorney-client relationship has been established. Please remember that electronic correspondence on the internet is not secure and that you should not include sensitive or confidential information in messages. With that in mind, we look forward to hearing from you.