Biography | Meg Twomey

Meg Twomey represents businesses and individuals in general liability defense. Her practice focuses primarily on the defense of claims related to automobile & trucking liability and premises liability. She handles all aspects of claims, from investigation and risk assessment, to pre-suit demands, through every stage of litigation. She also has experience in insurance coverage matters, evaluating questions of coverage under a variety of types of policies.

While her practice focuses on effectively managing the entire litigation process, Meg understands that clients prefer quick and cost-effective solutions to complex and potentially protracted liability cases. She strives to accelerate turnaround through procedural dismissals, substantive dismissals, successful tenders and negotiated settlements. Meg draws on the collective experience and resources of the entire firm in realizing desired legal outcomes. Ever mindful of the increasing economic pressures under which clients conduct their businesses, she accesses centralized resources and firmwide talent to arrive at innovative and cost-effective solutions to the most complex legal issues.

Education

University of Michigan Law School (J.D., 2016)
University of Georgia (B.B.A., A.B.J., 2011)

Bar Admissions

Georgia

Court Admissions

Supreme Court of Georgia
U.S. District Court, Northern District of Georgia
U.S. District Court, Middle District of Georgia

Meg Twomey

Twomey Secures Summary Judgment for Insurance Broker in Negligent Misrepresentation and Fraud Claim

Meg Twomey (Of Counsel-Atlanta, GA) secured summary judgment for an insurance broker client in a negligent misrepresentation and fraud claim in the State Court of Jackson County. The plaintiffs, a general contractor and its insurance carrier, sought subrogation for workers’ compensation paid to the employee of a subcontractor. Our client, the subcontractor’s broker, merely sent the certificate of insurance to the general contractor. The plaintiffs attempted to argue that the broker induced the general contractor into hiring the subcontractor, despite the broker’s knowledge that employees hired out of state would not be covered under the workers’ compensation policy. The court held that the plaintiffs failed to show a false representation or negligent misrepresentation by omission, and failed to show justifiable reliance on the COI. The plaintiffs elected not to appeal.

Meg Twomey