Charles E. "Chuck" Spevacek

Chuck has over 30 years of experience litigating complex commercial cases, with particular emphasis on the trial and appeal of insurance coverage disputes, including breach of contract, declaratory judgment and bad faith actions. Chuck was named in 2025, 2021, and 2016 by The Best Lawyers in America as its Minneapolis Mass Tort Litigation/Class Action – Defendants “Lawyer of the Year.” He was also named as its 2019 and 2014 Minneapolis Insurance Law “Lawyer of the Year.” He has twice been recognized by Minnesota Lawyer as an “Attorney of the Year,” in 2013 and in 2006. He was chosen as one of Minnesota’s 10 best appellate lawyers and has been recognized since 1994 on the Minnesota Super Lawyers list, earning Top 100 distinction in fifteen of those years. Since 2013, he has been identified by Chambers USA as one of America’s Leading Litigation Lawyers for Business.

Chuck is one of 788 insurance lawyers and seventy Barristers from forty-four countries recognized in Lexology Index: Insurance. Additionally, Chuck has been included in its Thought Leaders: USA report for his expertise in advising on significant matters in insurance and reinsurance. Nominees are selected based on comprehensive, independent survey work with both general counsel and private practitioners worldwide.

Chuck has served as a national coordinating coverage counsel for several of his clients, including on matters involving environmental losses, cyber-liability, TPCA claims and, most recently, COVID-19 claims. He has shared his expertise on insurance issues in testimony before the Minnesota Legislature. Chuck has served on the Board of Directors of The Purdue Alumni Association, Center of the American Experiment, and the Ridgeview Hospital Foundation.

Representative clients include American Financial Group, AIG, Argo Group US, Benchmark Insurance Company, Bituminous Insurance Company, BNSF Railway Company, Brown & Brown, Inc., Certain Underwriters at Lloyds of London, Chubb Limited, CNA Insurance Companies, Curi Insurance, Everest Global Services, Inc., Federated Mutual Group, The Guilford Specialty Group, Hartford Casualty Insurance Company, Hudson Insurance Company, Intact Insurance Specialist Solutions, James River Group, Liberty Mutual Insurance Companies, Nationwide Insurance Group, Obsidian Specialty Company, Riverstone Claims Management Services, Inc., RLI Insurance Company, Swiss Re Reinsurance Company, The Travelers Companies, Inc., and Westfield Insurance Companies.

Major cases include Home Depot, Inc. v. Steadfast Ins. Co., et. al., 125 F.4th 769 (6th Cir. 2025) (rejecting the claim for "silent cyber" coverage under a CGL insurance contract); Prisk v. Travelers Indemnity Co. of Am., 81 F.4th 782 (8th Cir. 2023); Great American Alliance Ins. Co. v. Windermere Baptist Conf. Center, Inc., 931 F.3d 771 (8th Cir. 2019); Rarick v. Federated Serv. Ins. Co., 852 F.3d 223 (3d Cir. 2017) (in a case of first impression in the Third Circuit, adopted the "independent claim test" for determining whether the federal courts have discretion to exercise jurisdiction over actions in diversity seeking both legal and declaratory relief)' Land O' Lakes v. Employers Ins. Co. of Wausau, 2013 WL 4559813 (8th Cir., Aug. 29, 2013) (no coverage for cleanup of contaminated refinery); Engineering & Construction Innovations, Inc. v. L. H. Bolduc Co., Inc., 825 N.W.2d 695 (Minn. 2013) (additional insured coverage applies only to vicarious liability); Cynosure, Inc. v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co., 645 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2011) (no coverage for TCPA claims under MA law); Cargill, Inc. v. ACE American Ins. Co., 784 N.W.2d 341 (Minn. 2010) (recognizing an equitable right to contribution for defense costs paid by a defending insurer against a non-defending insurer); West Bend Mut. Ins. Co. v. Federated Mut. Ins. Co., 598 F.3d 918 (7th Cir. 2010) (holding insurer's absolute pollution exclusion valid under Indiana law); Anderson v. Minnesota Insurance Guaranty Association et. al., 534 N.W.2d 706 (Minn. 1995), reh’g denied (Sept. 20, 1995) (rejecting “regulatory estoppel” as a means of invalidating the “sudden and accidental” pollution exclusion); Northern States Power Co. v. Fidelity and Casualty Co., 523 N.W.2d 657 (Minn. 1994) (announcing a pro-rata by time on the risk rule for allocation of indemnity amongst consecutively triggered insurance policies); and Federated Mutual Insurance Company v. Concrete Units Inc., 363 N.W.2d 751 (Minn. 1985) reh’g denied (March 29, 1985) (establishing that the term “property damage” as defined in the standard general liability policy did not include “diminution in value”). These decisions have been cited as significant precedent in over 300 published opinions and scholarly papers.