TL;DR — The Core Truth Behind Every Insurance Dispute
- For more than 30 years, I have fought insurance companies that refuse to pay fair and appropriate compensation.
- The type of case may change—auto accident, personal injury, uninsured motorist, workers’ compensation, or homeowners insurance.
- The fight never does.
- It is always the injured or insured person versus an insurance company denying responsibility or value.
- I handle that fight for Baltimore residents, in Baltimore.
The Unifying Reality Behind “Different” Insurance Cases
Insurance companies want cases placed into silos:
car accident, personal injury, workers’ compensation, homeowners claim.
From the insurer’s perspective, those labels are convenient.
From the injured person’s perspective, they are meaningless.
For more than three decades, my work has involved the same fundamental conflict:
An insurance company that refuses to pay fair and appropriate compensation when it is owed.
The mechanism may differ.
The defense language may change.
The impact on my clients does not.
Different Case Types. The Exact Same Fight.
Whether the case involves:
- a Baltimore automobile accident
- an uninsured or underinsured motorist claim
- a workplace injury
- a homeowners dispute with one’s own insurance carrier
the dispute follows the same pattern.
The insurance company questions responsibility.
The insurance company minimizes harm.
The insurance company delays, denies, or undervalues the claim.
The injured or insured person is forced to fight back.
That fight is what I handle.
How Insurance Companies Defend Every Claim
Across all insurance disputes, carriers can rely on a seemingly endless stream of variations of the same strategies:
- Fault shifting (including contributory negligence in Maryland)
- Causation challenges (arguing injuries or damage came from something else)
- Documentation attacks (timing, gaps, or alleged inconsistencies)
- Value suppression (downplaying severity, permanence, or impact)
- Delay as leverage (waiting for pressure, fatigue, or financial stress)
These strategies appear whether the claim arises from a crash on a Baltimore roadway, a job-related injury, or a denied homeowners claim.
The context changes.
The resistance does not. My fight does not.
Why Maryland Law Makes the Fight Harder
Maryland’s legal landscape gives insurance companies powerful tools—especially doctrines like contributory negligence, which bar recovery entirely if the injured person is found even minimally at fault.
That reality makes insurer decision-making more aggressive, not less.
Understanding how carriers use Maryland law is not optional.
It is central to every negligence case I handle.
Litigation Is Not a Threat. It Is the Process.
Insurance companies do not pay fair compensation because it is requested.
They pay when exposure is real.
For decades, my work has involved:
- challenging denials,
- forcing accountability,
- and litigating when necessary to compel fair outcomes.
Sometimes cases resolve early.
Sometimes they do not.
The willingness to litigate—and the experience to do it effectively—is what equalizes the imbalance between an individual and an insurance company.
A Central Feature of My Maryland Personal Injury Practice: The Reduced Fee Program
In Maryland personal injury cases, I offer clients a reduced fee program designed to align the attorney’s interests with the client’s recovery. The premise is simple: a recovery is won when compensation is ultimately recovered from an insurance company that initially refused to pay fair and appropriate value.
In the Baltimore legal community, a typical contingency fee agreement often provides for an attorney to retain approximately 33⅓% of a case resolved before a lawsuit is filed, and 40% if the case proceeds into litigation. Under my reduced fee program, those percentages are lower. When a case resolves before suit, the fee is 30%. If a lawsuit must be filed, the fee is 35%. The difference remains with the client.
The reduced fee program applies to Maryland personal injury cases that are not referred to me by another attorney. The program does not apply to insurance dispute litigation.
Baltimore Clients. Baltimore Cases. Baltimore Courts.
My practice is rooted in Baltimore.
The roads.
The neighborhoods. The homes. The homeowners.
The courts.
The insurers who routinely defend cases here.
That local knowledge matters—not as a slogan, but as an operational advantage in investigation, evaluation, and litigation.
The Bottom Line
Different cases.
Different insurance policies.
Different fact patterns.
The exact same fight.
For more than 30 years, my work has focused on one objective:
Holding insurance companies accountable when they deny fair and appropriate compensation to my clients who deserve it.
- Baltimore Personal Injury Trial Lawyer Eric T. Kirk
- Legal Analysis & Case Studies
- Baltimore Insurance Claims Denial Lawyer
For over three decades, I have battled against the nation’s largest insurance companies, always endeavoring to ensure my clients receive the compensation they deserve. As lead counsel in thousands of cases across Maryland, New York, and Florida, I have recovered millions for clients whose claims were wrongfully denied and delayed. Whether denying fair compensation for a personal injury victim or denying benefits to a homeowner, Insurance companies employ policy exclusions, technicalities, and lowball offers to deny and defeat claims. They also hire very good lawyers to fight you in court. So should you. When an insurance company unfairly rejects a claim, I stop them.
Client Review
"Eric Kirk was a great attorney to me. He settled my personal injury case in about 5 short months, and handled my complicated situation with professionalism and a great attitude. Eric handled everything with the insurance companies, and I didn’t have to lift a finger. I am so grateful for the work Eric put in, and it won us my case! I would recommend Eric’s firm to anyone in need of an awesome attorney. Thank you Eric!"
C. Delaney
