- August 21, 2026
Amy J. Cassidy
Partner
Biography
BIOGRAPHY
Amy has over 20 years of experience working with insurance companies to evaluate and resolve claims stemming from complex and novel risks, currently including climate change, opioids, COVID-19, terrorism, sexual abuse and trafficking, and pesticides. A passionate advocate for her clients, Amy holds a proven track record of favorable settlements, summary judgments, and trial and appellate victories.
Pro Bono
In addition to her commercial litigation practice, Amy works with asylum applicants and victims of domestic violence, representing these individuals on a pro bono basis. The Chicago Volunteer Legal Services Foundation, among other recognized groups, has awarded Amy for her generous pro bono efforts.
Our experience handling complex high-stakes litigation, issues of first impression, and emerging coverage issues makes our clients comfortable trusting us with their most critical cases.
Memberships
- American Bar Association
- American College of Coverage Counsel
- Chicago Bar Association
- Defense Research Institute
- Law360's Insurance Editorial Advisory Board (2021 and 2022)
Awards & Rankings
- Best Lawyers®, The Best Lawyers in America®, 2025-2027
Before Nicolaides
Before joining the firm, Amy was a partner at a Chicago insurance coverage firm, where her practice had an emphasis on coverage litigation. Previously, Amy practiced law with Grippo & Elden LLC, focusing on both insurance coverage and general commercial litigation. Amy began her career at Piper Rudnick (now DLA Piper) in Chicago, after clerkships for The Center for Law and Social Policy in Washington, D.C. and Blue Ridge Legal Services in Harrisonburg, Virginia.
Outside Nicolaides
Amy enjoys spending time with her husband and sons, and traveling with friends and family. Amy plays the alto saxophone in jazz, rock, and classical groups.
-
West Virginia pollutionIn a high-stakes case involving coverage under a pollution legal liability policy, we presented issues of first impression and secured summary judgment in West Virginia federal court. The underlying class action case alleged injury and damage from exposure to carbon black from a manufacturing facility.
Case Study
- Before discovery, obtained summary judgment in construction-defect coverage litigation holding that insurer had no duty to defend or indemnify, because the lone alleged damage was from the rip-and-tear of work to get access to insured's non-conforming work.
- Secured dismissal of ERISA plan's lawsuit by arguing that ERISA precludes plan from seeking monetary recovery that is not from a specifically identified account or fund, establishing Seventh Circuit precedent; court recognized further that federal courts lack subject matter jurisdiction to declare that insurers owe coverage for unknown claims.
- Secured affirmance of summary judgment in favor of insurer client, agreeing client properly rescinded policy based on material misrepresentations in the application.
- Obtained appellate affirmation in Texas action on grounds that product failure was not an occurrence law and, alternatively, insured failed to present evidence sufficient to allocate covered and uncovered damages.
- Attained Eleventh Circuit ruling affirming judgment for several insurers based on late notice in asbestos litigation.
- Obtained summary judgment regarding allocation in Colorado construction defect case, leading to favorable settlement for excess insurer.
- Negotiated settlement by multiple insureds and multiple insurers of bodily injury lawsuit involving industrial accident.
- Obtained partial summary judgment and negotiated favorable settlement for excess insurer in complex litigation relating to common carrier bodily injury case under Massachusetts law.
- Obtained summary judgment for insurer that there was no coverage for class-action settlement of claims for improper dissemination of personal medical information.
- Secured summary judgment on basis that client did not violate eight different provisions of Kentucky's Fair Claim Handling Act, including a failure to settle and misrepresentation of policy terms; affirmed by Kentucky Appellate Court.
- Successfully asserted pollution exclusion and other policy provisions precluding coverage with respect to underlying lawsuit involving allegations that the insured's oil and gas explorations and production activities contaminated plaintiff's property.
- Advised insurers regarding coverage for climate change litigation under commercial general liability, pollution liability, products, claims-made, Bermuda form, and other types of policies, from primary to excess levels.
- Secured asylum for all refugees represented, on different bases of religion, political affiliation, or membership in particular social groups.
- Obtained summary judgment, and affirmance at appellate level, based on the trial court finding that a constellation of claims relating to the insured’s abandonment of cathode ray tubes in rented warehouses did not fall within coverage of the client’s pollution liability policy on basis that the claim was made prior to the policy period, the alleged clean-up costs were not because of a pollution incident, the alleged pollution incidents at one property were before the retrospective date, and two exclusions applied.
- August 4, 2026
- March 11, 2026
- March 7, 2026
- September 16, 2025
- August 21, 2025
- May 17, 2023
- April 22, 2022
- May 10, 2021
- April 6, 2021
- January 4, 2021
- August 31, 2018
- September 1, 2015