Eve- Lynn Gisonni, Esq.
Eve-Lynn Gisonni has spent the greater part of her career championing the rights of individuals under insurance contracts. She has made inroads in the fields of long term disability insurance law and life insurance law through her characteristic application of cutting-edge arguments to novel issues of insurance contract interpretation. Eve-Lynn is seasoned in all aspects of federal and state practice, including disability and life insurance matters governed by ERISA.
Court decisions in Eve-Lynn’s cases continue to be relied on as disability and life insurance precedent. She is a prolific writer and trial attorney who continually seeks creative ways to advocate her clients’ positions.
Eve-Lynn’s fighting spirit is epitomized in the landmark case, Benesowitz v. MetLife, where she dealt a blow to group disability carriers in New York by successfully arguing the proper interpretation of New York’s pre-existing condition clause before the New York Court of Appeals. As a result of that case, the N.Y. Superintendent of Insurance ordered all group disability carriers to change the way they do business, reopen claims and pay insureds suffering from pre-existing conditions.
Clients describe Eve-Lynn as “compassionate,” “driven” and “confident.” Colleagues and adversaries admire her professionalism, approachability and unwavering commitment to finding solutions in the face of challenging circumstances.
Eve-Lynn has expanded her practice’s reach to accommodate her clients with offices now in Manhattan, Syosset and Huntington, New York. She litigates in New York State and is qualified and eligible to practice in all federal forums, as well as all state courts. She is admitted to practice in the state courts of New York, the United States Supreme Court, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals and the Eastern and Southern District Courts of New York.
- New York, 1997
- United States District Court, Eastern District of New York
- United States District Court, Southern District of New York
- Second Circuit Court of Appeals
- United States Supreme Court
- New York State Bar Association
- Litigation Counsel of America
- Nassau County Bar Association
- Touro College – Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center, Juris Doctorate – Cum Laude, 1996
- New York Law Journal: How Paying Life Insurance Premiums Can Thwart Rescission of a Life Insurance Contract, 2011
- New York Law Journal: U.S. Supreme Court Rejects Treating Physician Rule Under ERISA, 2003
Q: What motivates you to stand up for the underdog against insurance giants with limitless resources to fight your clients?
A: My motivation is borne from my desire to even the playing field.
The typical person dealing with an insurance company incorrectly assumes that the first line insurance representative is there to protect his or her interests. Even some of the most sophisticated consumers making a claim operate under the wrong belief that they will be taken care of. Time and time again, I have seen that approach work to the benefit of the insurance company.
Insurance companies spend great time, money and effort training their employees in the claim process to ensure an optimum outcome for the insurance company. Having the assistance of an expert representing the insured’s interests eliminates the confusion and inevitable misunderstandings that arise when an expert insurer is dealing with an insured in need of help.
Q: Don’t the insurance companies have endless funds to fight?
A: People lose sight of the fact that insurance companies are businesses, plain and simple. It does not make sense for an insurance company to pull out all the stops and spend limitless resources to fight every case or claim. Generally, the insurance company makes a business decision whether a settlement or compromise resolution makes more business sense than perpetuating a costly litigation that they could lose.
Q: What about the armies of lawyers they can afford to fight an insured’s claim?
A: I practice law under the basic precept that each side’s case is only as good as their best argument. There is no correlation between the number of lawyers participating in a case on the insurance company’s side and the merits of their case.
For a crisp example, see Our Successes – Benesowitz v. MetLife – where in one case I was successful against three different law firms, insurance lobbyists and Skadden Arps because my client had the winning argument.