Brad J. Moore
Know thy self, know thy enemy. A thousand battles, a thousand victories. Sun Tzu
As a partner in the Seattle offices of Stritmatter Kessler, Brad’s practice focuses on nursing home liability, products liability, aviation injuries, class actions and insurance litigation. His insurance work involves pursuing Coverage, Bad Faith, and Consumer Protection Act claims on behalf of policyholders and insureds
Brad has tried to verdict or judgment over 75 cases and settled hundreds more. As reported in Washington Law and Politics, Brad’s peers have voted him a “Super Lawyer” each of the past 14 years. He has presented at over 30 legal seminars and written numerous articles and papers on law-related issues over the years. He has twice chaired the Washington State Trial Lawyer Associations Insurance Law section.
Outside the office, Brad currently serves on the Board of Directors for the Public Justice Foundation, the nation’s preeminent public interest law firm, and also acts as Public Justice’s President and state coordinator. He has also presided over more than 30 arbitrations in King, Pierce, Snohomish and Thurston counties.
- Seattle University, J.D., cum laude, 1992
- University of Washington, B.A., Philosophy, 1988
Outside the Office
Brad enjoys spending time with his wife, Suwalee, and their daughters, Arita and Aleeya. He is an avid golfer. The lifelong Seattle resident often travels overseas, and calls Thailand his favorite destination.
Awards & Achievements
- Chapter Author: Washington Civil Procedure Deskbook, Washington State Bar Association, 1992, 1997 update
- Super Lawyer, Washington Law & Politics Magazine
- Best Oralist in the Fred Tausend Moot Court Competition Member of both the National Moot Court Team and the National Mock Trial Team Warren Peterson Advocacy Award,1992
- President, Public Justice Foundation
- Board of Directors and Washington State Coordinator, Public Justice Foundation
- Washington State Association for Justice (Chair, Insurance Law Section, 1997-1998, 2003-2004)
- American Association for Justice
- Washington State Bar Association
- American Board of Trial Advocates
- United States Supreme Court
- U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
- U.S. District Court, Western District of Washington
- U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Washington
- All Washington State Superior Courts
- Washington State Bar
- The Luvera Seminar, Washington State Trial Lawyers Association (“WSTLA”) Annual Convention, Vancouver, Canada, 2008**
- “Cross Examination of the Defense Accident Reconstructionist”, Western Trial Lawyers Association, Sun Valley, Idaho, 2008
- “Cross Examining the Defense Accident Reconstructionist”, WSTLA, Prague, Czech Republic, 2007
- “Handling the Traumatic Brain Injury Case, Powerful Demonstrative Evidence”, Brain Injury Association of Washington, 2006
- “Preparing Compelling Illustrative Exhibits in Brain Injury Cases”, WSTLA, 2006
- “Subrogation, Rights of Reimbursement, Liens and ERISA: A Case Discussion”, Washington State Bar Association, 2004
- “Preparing Effective Settlement Materials in Brain Injury Cases”, WSTLA, 2003
- “Medicine You Can Really Use”, WSTLA, 2003
- Annual Insurance Law Seminar, WSTLA, 2003
- “Jury Selection, Motions Practice, Powerful Openings, Presentation of Evidence”, Personal Injury Litigation for Washington Attorneys, National Business Institute, 2003
- “Brain Injuries: Understanding & Developing the Claim for Damages”, WSTLA, 2003
- “The Basics of Insurance Bad Faith Law in Washington State”, Oregon Trial Lawyers Association, Portland, OR, 2002
- “Holding Product Sellers Liable When the Manufacturer Is Insolvent or Judgment Proof”, The Luvera Seminar, WSTLA Annual Convention, 2002
- “Recovery and Remedies in Insurance Bad Faith Litigation”, WSTLA, 2001
- “Preparing Effective Settlement Media”, WSTLA, Paris, France, 2001
- “Preparing Effective Demonstrative Exhibits”, WSTLA, 2001
- “Recovery and Remedies in Insurance Bad Faith Litigation”, WSTLA, 2001
- Annual Insurance Law Seminar, WSTLA, Spokane, WA, 2001
- Seattle University Moot Court Board Seminar, 2000
Some of Brad's Cases
- Wuthrich v. King County
The 2016 Wuthrich v. King County decision makes roadways in our state safer for everyone. In a unanimous decision handed down on Wuthrich, the Washington State Supreme Court held that a municipality has a duty to take reasonable steps to address overgrown roadside vegetation that makes the roadway unsafe for drivers approaching an intersection.
Wuthrich advances roadway safety for anyone who travels the roads in Washington State. As our state’s highest court maintains: A municipality has the overarching duty to provide reasonably safe roads and must be held to the same standards as that applied to private parties.
Our state’s supreme court now explicitly rejects old law that held that a municipality’s duty is limited to mere compliance with applicable law. Moreover, an “inherently dangerous condition” does not exclusively depend on a condition that “exists in the roadway itself.” A hazard may exist as a situation along a highway, such as overgrown bushes that obstruct drivers’ view of oncoming traffic.
The Wuthrich decision stems from a June 2011 lawsuit that Guy Wuthrich filed against Christa Gilland and King County. Guy was riding a motorcycle on Avondale Road NE in King County, approaching an intersection with NE 159th Street on June 20, 2008 at about 5:15 PM. Drivers on 159th St. have a stop sign at the intersection, but drivers on Avondale Road do not. Christa Gilland was driver a car on 159th Street. When she reached the intersection with Avondale Rd., she stopped to wait for passing traffic. She did not see Guy approaching from her left. She turned left onto Avondale Road and collided into Guy’s motorcycle, resulting in serious injuries to Guy. The lawsuit alleged that the County was liable for Guy’s injuries because the wall of overgrown blackberry bushes on County property obstructed Ms. Gilland’s view of traffic at the intersection. The trial court dismissed the action against the County on summary judgment. The Court of Appeals affirmed in a split decision.
Ray Kahler argued before the Supreme Court and you may watch his oral argument here.
- Sitton v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.
(2003) Insureds of State Farm brought a class action against State Farm to recover for breach of contract and fiduciary duty, bad faith, violation of the Consumer Protection Act, and unjust enrichment by denying or limiting claims for personal injury protection (PIP) benefits after medical utilization review. The trial court certified the class and bifurcated trial. Discretionary review was granted by the Court of Appeals. The Court of Appeals held that: (1) the class action was properly certified on the ground that common questions of fact or law predominated, and a class action was superior; (2) the plan for bifurcated trial violated due process by allowing the jury to make a damages award without requiring individual claimants to establish causation and damages or providing the insurer the opportunity to show a reasonable justification for denying individual claims; and (3) bifurcated trial would not violate insurer’s right to a jury trial.
- Insurance Company v. Doe
(2004) Our firm pursued an appeal involving the cancellation of insurance policies by a hospital and its insurer after our client had passed away from medical negligence after surgery. The hospital went bankrupt and we challenged the right of the hospital and insurers to cancel its policies under a state law that prohibits a retroactive annulment of the polices after an occurrence, including a death. The lower court had ruled that the cancellations were valid because a claim on the policy was not filed until after it was cancelled. The Washington Supreme Court held that the state law made null and void and such cancellation of the policy after a death irrespective of when the claim was filed.
- Confidential v. Insurance Company and Law Firm
(January 2014) Confidential settlement for $1.9 million, for an insurance company’s bad faith refusal to settle a claim, forcing its insured through a public jury trial resulting in a huge excess verdict against him and significant negative publicity that essentially ended his oral surgery practice.
- Confidential v. Confidential
(August 2013), $3.2 million settlement for a seaman who lost four fingers on a fish processing ship when a defective fish pan shaping machine unexpectedly slammed down on his hand.