Keefe, Keefe & Unsell P.C. Exemplary Legal Representation
In a recent high-profile legal malpractice case tried before U.S. District Judge Staci Yandle, Thomas Q. Keefe III of Keefe, Keefe & Unsell, P.C. delivered a masterful courtroom performance that placed the defense on their heels and underscored the firm’s reputation for fearless and strategic advocacy. The Madison – St. Clair Record recently reported on the legal malpractice trial.
The case centered around an $11 million settlement stemming from a defective bamboo shower stool sold by Signature Hardware that caused serious injury to Plaintiff. Keefe’s father, Thomas Q. Keefe Jr., originally brought the suit in 2016, and after extensive litigation, it was discovered that Signature was aware of multiple previous product failures but continued to sell the dangerous item. That pivotal revelation led to a motion for punitive damages—a motion that was granted by the court, dramatically increasing the case’s stakes.
The malpractice suit, filed by insurance company Ansur America against their former defense counsel James Borland and his firm Quinn Johnston, alleged negligence in the handling of the original product liability defense. Keefe III’s role in this trial wasn’t as plaintiff’s counsel in the original case but as a key witness, testifying to his own strategy and interactions with Borland during the initial defective product proceedings.
A Powerful Combination of Legal Insight, Strategy, and Courtroom Awareness
Keefe’s testimony was a powerful combination of legal insight, strategy, and courtroom awareness. He told jurors that his approach was intentional: “I didn’t want to give [Borland] more time. I wanted to keep him on his heels.” That quote perfectly captured Keefe’s aggressive and confident litigation style—designed to apply pressure and expose cracks in the opposing counsel’s case.
Throughout the trial, Keefe maintained that the facts of the case were so strong that failure by the defense to recognize and respond appropriately was not only negligent but a disservice to the client and the court. “There was no conceivable set of circumstances wherein our client walked into a courtroom and came out with a zero—none,” Keefe testified, emphasizing the undeniable strength of the plaintiff’s case due to Signature’s documented knowledge of the product’s defects.
One of the most striking elements of Keefe’s testimony was his analysis of the insurance dynamics at play. He explained that while the insurer, Frankenmuth Insurance (through its reinsurers), was on the hook for up to $11 million, punitive damages are typically not covered by insurance. This led to a critical conflict of interest between the insured company and its insurer. “The same lawyer can’t represent both because any evidence adduced on behalf of one would harm the other,” Keefe testified, laying bare the ethical complexity that Borland’s team failed to navigate.
Keefe’s candor extended to the strategic reasons behind not suing the Chinese manufacturer of the stool. When asked why he didn’t pursue the foreign company, Keefe replied, “Why would I? That’s a whole lot of legwork and a whole lot of hoops.” His practical, client-focused decision-making showed a deep understanding of real-world litigation challenges.
Another standout moment was Keefe’s description of a pivotal exchange that occurred during mediation. When Keefe’s father asked why only one lawyer was present from the defense, the response was, “What do you mean?”—a moment that crystallized for the Keefe team that the case had ballooned into a full $11 million exposure. Keefe recalled that one of the defense team members bluntly said, “You are effed,” confirming their vulnerability.
The case ultimately settled after just 37 minutes of jury deliberation on March 18, marking a clear acknowledgment of the strength of Keefe’s original case and the failure of the defense’s strategy. Although the verdict on legal malpractice was never rendered by a jury, the facts, testimony, and outcome of the case left little doubt about where the momentum—and credibility—lay.
What stands out most from this article is Keefe’s precise command of both legal doctrine and human dynamics in litigation. His understanding of the psychology of jurors, the weaknesses of insurance defense structures, and the leverage of timing and pressure were on full display. He made it clear that the defense team not only underestimated the case’s legal weight but failed to adjust even as their footing grew more unstable.
This case also reflects the values that define Keefe, Keefe & Unsell, P.C.: tenacity, preparation, and a commitment to client-first litigation. Even when not leading the trial team, Keefe III demonstrated that legal excellence extends beyond the courtroom—into the realm of strategy, ethics, and persuasive testimony.
The performance in this case reaffirms what clients have long known: when you choose Keefe, Keefe & Unsell, P.C., you choose a team that anticipates every angle, responds with bold clarity, and never backs down from a challenge.
Keefe, Keefe & Unsell, P.C. Keeps Opposing Counsel on Their Heels
If you’ve been injured in a personal injury case or another accident caused by negligence, don’t let social media jeopardize your right to compensation. Contact Keefe, Keefe & Unsell, P.C. for a free consultation to discuss your case and ensure your rights are protected.
At Keefe, Keefe & Unsell, P.C., we understand the full scope of the challenges of pursuing your personal injury case. If you or a loved one has been involved in a car accident, hurt at work or hurt due to someone else’s negligence, don’t settle for less than you deserve. Contact us today for a free consultation, and let us help you navigate the complexities of your claim. Consultations are always free: 618-403-7152