![frink keathan b contact frink keathan b contact](https://live.staticflickr.com/3762/9629166779_7eea8aaca0_b.jpg)
The complaint was 106 pages long with 86 pages of appendices. Nearly four years later, on March 27, 2015, Drummond filed the RICO lawsuit against the law firm and others. The letters urged the recipients to take notice of Drummond’s actions in Colombia, including its alleged relations with paramilitary groups and the resulting human rights violations. Two letters were sent to Dutch government officials and one to the Itochu Corporation, a potential Japanese investor. On October 21, 2011, Drummond filed a one-count defamation complaint against Collingsworth and the law firm alleging that Collingsworth wrote three letters defaming Drummond in 2011 at the behest of Llanos Oil Exploration Limited, a Drummond rival. The complaints alleged Drummond aided and abetted a Colombian paramilitary group in the wrongful death of union activists and other civilians related to Drummond’s Colombia mining operations. (“Drummond”) under the Alien Tort Statute and the Torture Victim Protection Act of 1991 in the Northern District of Alabama. On March 20, 2009, one of the law firm’s partners (“Collingsworth”) filed three human rights lawsuits against Drummond Company, Inc. The RICO suit involved allegations that stemmed in part from the law firm’s representation of plaintiffs in earlier filed human rights lawsuits. The law firm notified the insurer of a Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”) suit filed against it during the policy period. In 2014, the insurer issued a Lawyer’s Professional Liability Policy to the law firm. We reverse and remand the case for further proceedings. We agree with the insurer on the second issue. It argues the court erred in granting the insured law firm’s motion and denying the insurer’s motion for summary judgment because: (1) coverage is excluded under the policy’s “prior litigation” and “related professional legal services” exclusions and (2) the court failed to consider the insurer’s other affirmative defenses and counterclaim for recission of the policy in ruling on the motion for summary judgment. (MAY, J.) An insurer appeals a final judgment on the insurer’s duty to defend. Burns, Jeff Bowen and Jesse Bair of Burns Bowen Bair LLP, Madison, Wisconsin, Pro Hac Vice for appellee Conrad & Scherer, LLP. Rogow, P.A., Boca Raton, for appellee Conrad & Scherer, LLP. Stein and Mark Hicks of Hicks, Porter, Ebenfeld & Stein, P.A., Miami, and Stephen Hunter Johnson and Nathaniel Haim Sari of Lydecker Diaz, Miami, for appellant. Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County Keathan B. COLLINGSWORTH, Individually and as Agent of CONRAD & SCHERER, LLP, Appellees. IRONSHORE SPECIALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant, v.