Q. You started out as an engineer?

A. Yeah, I grew up on Long Island and got my bachelor's degree in electrical engineering from Manhattan College. I went to work at Grumman Aerospace (now Northrup Grumman). Grumman was the primary contractor for aircraft-carrier based F-14s deployed by the U.S. Navy. We provided fleet support as well as engineering safety, reliability and other logistical support for the electronic guts, airframe and engines. At the time, I still lived on Long Island but spent several months at the Naval Air Station Oceana in Virginia Beach and the Miramar base in California – where the movie "Top Gun" was based. It was a lot more interesting than pushing paper in an insurance company.

Q. What did you guys think about "Top Gun"?

A. The F-14 was Grumman's flagship naval aircraft so there was a sense of pride when the movie came out and gave the plane so much notoriety. The running joke was that on Ladies' Night at the Officers' Club guys who weren't pilots rented orange jumpsuits to attract the ladies. But that wasn't something I did.

Q. How did you move from engineering to law?

A. I worked with the F-14 chief safety engineer at Grumman, a 29-year-old whiz kid who was also involved in expert consulting and courtroom testimony. He always wished he had a law degree, and urged me to go to law school. He said my work with risk and safety analysis was a good start. My engineering background certainly helped in law school: the logic, analytical and reasoning skills made it easier for me to understand legal concepts. The tough part was memorizing all the cases.

Q. What helped?

A. Mnemonics, although I can't remember the cases now.

Q. What do you do at Mutual Marine?

A. As senior vice president and claims counsel, I'm primarily responsible for managing some 500 claims along several lines of business, overseeing outside counsel, working with about 20 attorneys from three to six firms on any given day.

Q. How has the job changed over time?

A. I have been here since 1997. Technology now gives you access to more information, which you have to process more quickly. And it seems you can always get more information, whether it's from legal databases or looking up profiles of attorneys and law firms on Google. It also compresses deadlines between the parties, and removes some jurisdictional boundaries: I can have a law firm in New Jersey research a Texas case – although I would probably have to hire a Texas firm to litigate it.

Q. What do you look for in putting together a claims team?

A. In the more complicated areas, you want someone with a specialized skill set and familiarity with the other network professionals that work within those specialized lines of business. For marine insurance, you want someone who knows admiralty law and has good relationships with admiralty lawyers, average adjusters, and marine consultants . If you're doing professional liability, you'd look for someone with a law degree or legal experience and the ability to review and synthesize complex documents. You almost have to be creative and artistic to be able to quantify complex professional liability exposures. When you have something as nuanced as an accountant allegedly embezzling from an estate over a period of years, there's so many ways to peel that onion back. The situation could ultimately be intentional malfeasance, or simply just a bad accountant who was in over his head. In these complex situations, it's more difficult to trace the causal chain to the source of the liability and quantify the exposure. Contrast that with someone breaking his kneecap due to a fall off of a bicycle due to poor product design, where liability, causation and quantum are much easier to figure. But there's no such thing as a garden variety claim. Every claim has its own merits, its own parties, its own circumstances.

Q. What's the most unusual case you've had?

A. A few years ago, the funniest case I had was where our client manufactured cardboard boxes, including pizza boxes. Someone was driving a step van and had a pizza, in a cardboard box, sitting on the passenger seat next to him. The step van hit a car, and the driver alleged that the pizza box, due to poor design, released steam, fogged the windshield, thus impairing his vision, which resulted in the accident. I don't remember what toppings may have been on the pizza. The case was dismissed before a trial. You have to admit that the plaintiff was very creative in his allegations, I'll give them that.

Q. I read an article once by a Mutual Marine exec who argued that when you have no liability, you shouldn't make a "nuisance value settlement" and settle just to save on the cost of litigation. It's a noble idea, but his point also seemed to be that plaintiff attorneys will target you as a sort of pushover. Do you agree?

A. I'm not sure what definition of "nuisance value" is being referred to but there are cases where you may have a strong "no liability" argument that can be supported by both the facts and the law. In those instances, it's prudent and in the best interests of the client to bring your argument to the court. Of course, there's always some trial risk, whether it arises from the jury pool, the hearing officer, the witnesses, the dynamics of the trial litigators. Those risks form a part of your settlement analysis as well. I think most cases settle on the merits when all parties recognize substantive risks and are willing to set aside the transactions risks.

Q. Mutual Marine, as its name implies, still does some marine insurance. The BP ocean drilling disaster is the biggest news item of the day. Can you speak to that case?

A. Historically, underwriters recognize off shore drill rigs as a marine risk. Recently, the risk has been exacerbated by the increase in hurricane activity over the past few years, especially in the Gulf of Mexico. Global energy needs may continue to motivate deep water drilling such as the Deepwater Horizon project. Underwriters will need to look at drill rig insurance risks even more closely and analytical so as to identify and project the frequency, nature and severity of new risks posed by such deep water drilling.

Q. What three things do you hate most about your job?

A. 1 - Being cooped up in an office. 2 – Being cooped up in an office. 3 – see numbers 1 and 2.

Q. What do you do when you're not cooped up in an office?

A. Go to the gym, play basketball, cycle, listen to classic rock and I love being out and about with my four sons – I've coached many of their teams over the years. When I was younger I was into the New York Giants and would follow them around. My buddies and I would go to watch them in Philadelphia when they played against the Eagles.

Q. That sounds pretty brave given the rowdy reputation of Eagles fans.

A. It was fun. Or stupidity. There were fights all the time. Luckily, I avoided them.

Q. What do you like about your job?

A. You tell your kids you work in insurance and they think it's boring. But when you work for an insurance company, you almost routinely run into a policyholder involved in a big newsworthy event like 9/11, the Iceland volcano, or Hurricane Katrina. Since you have to understand those matters as part of your job, you get more intimate with the news, which makes the job more interesting. Insurance gets involved in everything.