Dana H. Hoffman

Background

A litigation team member at Young Moore and Henderson, Dana has evolved her law practice from the defense of automobile cases for insurance companies to complex defense litigation in industries including healthcare, trucking and transportation, and electric utilities. Her clients include Schneider National, Inc., U.S. Xpress, Autumn Corporation and Federated Rural Electric Insurance Exchange. Dana makes frequent appearances in court at the trial and appellate levels, trying cases and arguing motions in venues ranging from local courtrooms to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. In all these venues in every corner of North Carolina, Dana is proud to serve her clients.

Dana serves on many of the firm’s management committees and is an active recruiter. Recently, members of the Trucking Industry Defense Association (TIDA) re-elected Dana to a three-year term as a member of its Board of Directors. Dana has an AV Peer Review Rating from Martindale-Hubbell. Dana joined the firm in 1990 and was appointed a shareholder in 1995.

Practice Areas

• Trucking and Transportation
• Nursing Home/Long Term Care Litigation
• Insurance Defense
• Medical Malpractice Defense
• Professional Liability

Education & Bar Admissions

• J.D., Wake Forest University School of Law, 1990
• B.A., University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 1987

Admitted in

• North Carolina, 1990
• U.S. District Courts for North Carolina
• U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit
• U.S. Supreme Court

Awards & Achievements

• Trucking Industry Defense Association (TIDA), Board of Directors (2009-2015), Executive Committee member (2011-    ), Secretary (2012-    )
• Partnership Award, Schneider, 2009
• Recipient, American Jurisprudence Award
• Wake County Bar Association – Secretary, 1998
• North Carolina Young Lawyers – Division, Chairperson, Third Grade Education Committee, 1993-1995

Professional & Civic Activity

• Electric Cooperative Bar Association
• Trucking Industry Defense Association (TIDA), Board of Directors (2009-2015), Executive Committee member (2011-    ), Secretary (2012-    )
• N.C. Association of Defense Attorneys

Publications & Presentations

• “Evidence Preservation/Spoliation,” ACI 3rd National Forum on Defending and Managing Trucking Litigation, November 2012.
• “Utilization of Accident Resources at the Scene,” TIDA, recurring.
• “More Medical Issues,” TIDA Newsletter, Fall, 2009.
• “Sleep Apnea – Emerging Concerns for Driver Safety,” Trucking Industry Defense Association, presenter, October 2008.
• Autumn Conference, course planner and presenter (2006, 2009, and 2012)
• “Defense Strategies in Long Term Care Litigation,” speaker, 2004
• “Just the Facts – What Every Attorney Should Know about Nursing Homes,” North Carolina Bar Association Seminar, course planner and presenter, 2003
• “Mentally Jousting with a Fully Armed Opponent,” North Carolina Bar Association Seminar, author and presenter, 2002
• “Analog Law in a Digital World,” International Client Seminar: ALFA, moderator, 1999.
• “Adjusting the Automobile Injury Claim,” National Business Institute, lecturer and author, 1998.
• “American Inns of Court Series on North Carolina Civil Procedure,” West Group, contributing author, 1996.
• A Practical Guide to North Carolina Insurance Law: Bad Faith Claims and Bad Faith Avoidance, co-author, 1996

Milestones

Although it is rare to recover money for a client who is named as a defendant, Dana’s aggressive defense of a national trucking company resulted in such a favorable outcome in a wrongful death action. Arbitrations are becoming more commonplace in litigation. Dana has successfully argued for the enforcement of her clients’ arbitration agreements in several North Carolina courts. Dana and her team have also achieved very favorable outcomes for these same clients following multi-day arbitration hearings. In her latest arbitration hearing, the panel of arbitrators entered an award very favorable to Dana’s client (and significantly lower than any settlement demands made by the plaintiff).

Disclaimer: The above information may not necessarily reflect the attorney’s entire record, and the outcome of any particular future matter cannot be predicated on the attorney’s or law firm’s past results.