Download PDF
Vincent J. Velardo

Vincent J. Velardo


UT – Salt Lake City
T: 801.797.1901 | F: 801.384.0554


Vince has more than 25 years’ experience as a litigator, and has handled a wide variety of matters in State and Federal Courts. Vince focuses his practice on insurance coverage involving first-party property, third-party liability and bad faith claims, as well as contract litigation and unfair competition. He has extensive experience handling client matters for employment liability, professional liability, construction and environmental/toxic torts. Vince also provides counsel on trademark disputes, premises liability and civil rights matters.


Representative Matters

  • Goldenwest Federal Credit Union v. Cincinnati Insurance Company, 2019 WL 5578476 (D. Utah)
  • Blueridge Homes, Inc. v. Method Heating and Air Conditioning et al., 450 P.3d 114, 2019 UT App 149
  • Quick Response Commercial Division LLC v. Cincinnati Insurance Company, 2015 WL 5306093 (N.D.N.Y. 2015)
  • Allied Interstate v. Kimmel & Silverman, 2013 WL 4245987 (S.D.N.Y. 2013)
  • HPS Management Co. v. St. Paul Surplus Lines Ins. Co., et al, 956 N.Y.S.2d 548 (2nd Dept. 2012)
  • Dollar Phone Corp. v. St. Paul Fire and Marine Ins. Co., WL 1077448 (E.D.N.Y. 2012)
  • Sonoco Products Co., Inc. v. Fire & Cas. Ins. Co. of Connecticut, 337 N.J.Super. 568, 767 A.2d 1018

Representative Experience

  • Obtained summary judgment on behalf of consulting firm client against Plaintiffs who alleged our client  committed or aided and abetted fraud during the sale of two commercial buildings; the court granted our attorneys’ defense motion and later granted our motion for court costs and attorneys’ fees.
  • Obtained summary judgment on behalf of a construction company client, as well as a water conservancy district client, both allegedly having caused damage while installing pipelines near Plaintiffs’ home as part of critical water infrastructure and implicated installation of pipelines in several Utah counties wherein Plaintiff sued for property damage, loss of marketability and compensation for nuisance; the Court found as a matter of law that both the related construction noise and work was not a nuisance.
  • Obtained summary judgment on behalf of a financial institution client for a case involving the alleged mishandling of a cashier’s check, and Plaintiff appealed, though subsequently denied per an Order of Affirmance by the District Court; Plaintiff filed a Petition for Writ of Certiorari with the Utah Supreme Court seeking review of the legal analysis of the District Court and Court of Appeals, but the Supreme Court denied Plaintiff’s petition in July 2021.