Ryan M. Uhrig

OVERVIEW

Ryan Uhrig is an Associate in Galloway’s Tampa, Florida office. He focuses his practice on first-party property insurance litigation, construction defect, and premises liability. Ryan’s clients value his responsiveness. He is quick to advise clients of potential risks and issue-spot potential problems in litigation before they are leveraged against the client.

Ryan’s clients rely on his deft attention to detail, responsiveness, pragmatism, and creativity. Not all cases are the same. Clients appreciate being provided with a prompt initial description of the case, potential issues that may arise, possible exposure, and early recommendation on how to proceed. It is often advantageous to postpone incurring significant fees and costs if a case – even a questionable one – can be resolved early for a reasonable amount. Ryan keeps his eye on what is truly important to his clients – efficiency, value, and what makes sense for their business.

Ryan grew up in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, and has made the Tampa Bay area his home. After obtaining his undergraduate degree, he worked for the City of Pittsburgh’s Department of City Planning. Working under the City’s Americans with Disabilities Act Coordinator, Ryan learned valuable skills relating to standing up for and protecting the rights of others. In his free time, Ryan enjoys spending time with his wife Sarah and daughter Rose.

Representative Matters

• Obtained summary judgment in a coverage action for an insurance company in a heavily litigated case involving a murder at a condominium association. After appeal, prepared an answer brief which resulted in the case resolving well below potential exposure.
• Obtained a judgment for fees for a contractor in a construction defect matter based on the plaintiff raising baseless counts in their initial pleading. The case was ultimately dismissed against the contractor with no payment being made to the plaintiff.
• Obtained summary judgment in a hotly contested “assignment of benefits” case involving a roofing contractor. The plaintiff agreed to pay the carrier incurred fees based on previously served PFS and 57.105 letter to avoid final judgment being entered.
• Obtained a settlement agreement in a subrogation case that the plaintiff would pay our client’s insurer incurred fees to avoid trial based on previously served PFS and 57.105 letter.
• Achieved several voluntary dismissals in cases with little facts supporting the plaintiff’s case by way of 57.105 letters detailing our position and the applicable law.
• Obtained favorable settlements in various cases where demands began in an unreasonable range.

PRACTICES

EDUCATION & ADMISSIONS

PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS

• The Florida Bar Association