top of page
Paul Flick.crop.jpg

Paul R. Flick
Office: 214.361.8885
Direct: 214.382.3483
Fax: 214.363.4902


  • LinkedIn

Paul R. Flick is an insurance litigator and trial lawyer. Paul assists policyholders--big and small--to maximize the recovery from their policy when their insurance carriers refuse to pay legitimate claims, along with obtaining any other associated defense costs and expenses. Paul resolves coverage disputes, handles declaratory judgment actions, Stowers, and other recovery matters under PL, E&O, D&O, CGL, HO, Commercial Property, Cyber/Tech, E&S, P&C, Inland Marine, manuscript forms, OCIPs and CCIPs. Paul is regularly engaged for coverage opinions, assessments, tenders, and demands. Paul also assists insureds with property damage, business interruption, and other claims associated with first-party homeowners and first-party commercial property insurance policies.


Paul got his start defending product manufacturers, international oil & gas services companies, heavy equipment rental companies, and other national big box retailers in catastrophic injury, wrongful death, and other tort litigation. At the same time, Paul also assisted insurance carriers by preparing coverage opinions, litigating declaratory judgment actions, indemnity actions, and defending breach of contract, bad faith, and other extra-contractual lawsuits. He is regularly called upon to draft coverage opinions, assessments, tenders, demands, and to litigate coverage disputes, declaratory judgment actions, and Stowers and other recovery matters under PL, E&O, D&O, CGL, Cyber/Tech, E&S, P&C, Agribusiness, manuscript policies, OCIP's, and CCIP's.


Paul also has significant experience in the emerging cannabis and hemp industriesBeginning in 2009, Paul was practicing with the foremost industry expert Robert T. Hoban at the forefront of legalization and evaluated the myriad of complex issues associated with regulation and business operations. At that time, issues ran the gamut of partnership disputes, the application of insurance coverage to the market, insurance products, financial, and regulatory matters, along with all of the the risks and liabilities associated with the cultivation, sale, marketing, labeling, and production of cannabis products. He draws upon that experience to provide insight and advice to businesses in other, new, and emerging markets. Mr. Flick recently developed an interest in analyzing coverage issues associated with Fine Art & Collectibles, Museum, Crisis, and other related matters given the significant and varied collections (public and private) in Dallas-Fort Worth, Houston, and Austin.

Admissions & Affiliations:

  • Texas

  • Colorado

  • United States District Court, Northern District of Texas

  • United States District Court, District of Colorado

  • United States District Court, District of Wyoming

  • United States District Court, Western District of Tennessee

  • United States Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals

  • United States Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals

  • State Bar of Texas, Insurance Law Section

  • Dallas Bar Association

  • American Bar Association, Insurance Law Section



  • Board Certified, Insurance Law, Texas Board of Legal Specialization



University of Wyoming, College of Law, J.D. 2002 

  • Outstanding Law Student, 2002

  • Student Clinical Director, Wyoming Defender Aid Program, 2001-2002 (Defender Aid Clinic)

  • Office of the Federal Public Defender, James H. Barrett, Cheyenne, Wyoming, 2000-2001

  • Research Assistant, Professor Diane Courselle, University of Wyoming, College of Law, Summer 2000

Clemson University, B.A. 1998, with honors

Selected Trials:

Larry Wagoner, et al. v. Schlumberger Technology Corporation, U.S.D.C., D. Wyo., Case No. 07-CV-244J. Defended Schlumberger in a three and one-half week jury trial involving allegations of a traumatic brain injury. In the opening statement Plaintiffs asked the jury to award $5 million; in closing $15 million.  After deliberating about five hours the jury awarded only $29,800.  The case was mediated twice prior to trial and presented to several mock juries.

  • Wagoner, et al. v. Schlumberger Tech. Corp., 2008 WL 5120750 (D. Wyo. June 19, 2008) (Regarding Rule 702/Daubert motion to exclude expert biomechanical engineering testimony related to the ultimate cause of a TBI).

  • Wagoner, et al. v. Schlumberger Tech. Corp., 2008 WL 11320101 (D. Wyo. June 20, 2008)(Regarding admission of Rule 702 testimony related to the expert’s additional research and opinions developed regarding 3Tesla MRI Diffusion Tensor Imaging and fiber tracking that the expert neuroradiologist performed after his deposition and based upon questions raised during his deposition).

  • Wagoner, et al. v. Schlumberger Tech. Corp., 2008 WL 11320100 (D. Wyo. June 19, 2008) (Granting defendant's motion to strike plaintiff's expert neuroradiologist).

Beckie Grabau, et al. v. Target Stores, a Division of Target Corporation, U.S.D.C., D. Colo., Case No. 06-CV-01308.  Defended Target in a one-week jury trial.  Admitted violation of Colorado’s Premises Liability Act, C.R.S. §13-21-115, and an admission Plaintiff suffered from Complex Regional Pain Syndrome a/k/a Reflex Sympathetic Dystrophy. After deliberating for more than six hours, the jury awarded less than one-quarter of the damages sought at mediation, before trial and before closing statements.  

  • Grabau v. Target Corp., 22009 WL 723340 (D. Colo. March 18, 2009) (Regarding recoverability of expert witness fees and litigation costs in Federal Court).

  • Grabau v. Target Corp., 2008 WL 659776 (D. Colo. Mar. 6, 2008) (Regarding admissibility of billed versus paid amounts of medical specials).

  • Grabau v. Target Corp., 2008 WL 659781 (D. Colo. Mar. 6, 2008) (Granting defendant's motion in limine regarding untimely disclosure of evidence pursuant to Rule 26).

  • Grabau v. Target Corp., 2008 WL 659777 (D. Colo. Mar. 6, 2008) (Granting defendant's motion in limine regarding untimely disclosure of evidence pursuant to Rule 26(f)).

  • Grabau v. Target Corp., 2008 WL 616068 (D. Colo. Feb. 29, 2008) (Granting defendant's motion in limine to exclude of evidence of subsequent remedial measures).

  • Grabau v. Target Corp., 2008 WL 179442 (D. Colo. Jan. 17, 2008) (Regarding denial of motion for leave to amend Complaint to add claim for exemplary damages due to futility).

  • Grabau v. Target Corp., 2008 WL 659775 (D. Colo. March 6, 2008) (Regarding standard per FRCP 26 for exclusion of evidence due to late disclosure of surveillance videos of plaintiffs).​

  • Grabau v. Target Corp., 2007 WL 4754045 (D. Colo. May 7, 2007), report and recommendation adopted as modified, 2008 WL 179442 (D. Colo. Jan. 17, 2008) (Regarding designation of a non-party at fault pursuant to C.R.S. §13-21-111.5).

  • Grabau v. Target Corp., 2006 WL 3838218 (D. Colo. Dec. 26, 2006) (Regarding denial of leave to amend Complaint to add party who would destroy diversity jurisdiction).


Walter Miech v. Sheridan County, Wyoming, Rural Firefighter District, U.S.D.C., D. Wyo., D.C. No. 00-CV-178-D. Defended Sheridan County in a two-week jury trial for claims of breach(s) of an alleged employment contract.  Defense verdict.

Selected Litigation & Appellate Matters

Durlacher, et. al. v. Hoffschneider, et. al., 925 F.Supp.2d 1246 (D. Wyo. 2013). Briefing on complicated jurisdictional issues stemming from a snowmobile accident that resulted in death of an Olympic wrestler who was a resident of Virginia, trained at the Olympic Training Center in Colorado Springs, Colorado, was injured in the Medicine Bow-Routt National Forest near Centennial, Wyoming, and then later passed away in Fort Collins, Colorado after undergoing surgery for injuries sustained in the accident. Complicating factor(s) included improper installation of an newly designed internal fixation device on decedent's fractured sternum, an unqualified representative of device manufacturer attended the surgery, and multiple potential non-parties at fault.

Warren v. Am. Bankers Ins. of FL, 507 F.3d 1239 (10th Cir. 2007). Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1) for lack of ripeness. The damages claims against an excess insurer are not ripe until the plaintiff has exhausted the primary insurance coverage, and claim for declaratory relief is not ripe unless the plaintiff can show there is a reasonable likelihood that the excess policy will be reached.

Titan Indem. Co. v. Travelers Prop. Cas. Co. of Am., 181 P.3d 303 (Colo. App. 2007), writ of certiorari denied, 2008 WL 1777405 (April 21, 2008). A CGL “professional services” exclusion excluded coverage for liability arising out of the insured’s failure to schedule an IME or pay medical bills as required under a contract with a third party.  

Mortgage Cadence, LLC v. Bay Docs, Inc., Denver County District Court, Denver, Colorado.  Achieved summary judgment on behalf of Defendant Bay Docs, Inc., in business tort, intentional interference with business relations, theft of trade secrets, and IP dispute. Awarded costs. 

S.W., a minor, by and through his parents and next friends, David Wacker and Rhonda Wacker; and David Wacker and Rhonda Wacker, individually v. Towers Boat Club, Inc., Blaster Bouncer Jumping Castles and North Poudre Irrigation Company, Jefferson County District Court, Golden, Colorado, Civ. Case. 10 CV 1507. Achieved summary judgment on behalf of the Towers Boat Club in TBI case involving a minor following a microburst wind event which ripped the "bouncy house-like" play structure from the ground during a July 4 holiday party at the Towers Boat Club.

Walter Meich v. Sheridan County, Wyoming, Rural Firefighters District, 109 Fed. Appx. 280 (10th Cir. 2004). Affirmed the jury instruction submitted by Sheridan County at trial and affirmed the defense verdict.

Wyo. Workers' Safety & Comp. Div. v. Michael Parrish, 100 P.3d 1244 (Wyo. 2004). Created new law in Wyoming regarding the compensability of workers' compensation claims when the evidence demonstrates that claimant's work effort with current employer contributed in a material fashion to the aggravation of claimant's historical degenerative back condition. Teh  when it summarily affirmed the underlying award.

Robinson v. State, 64 P.3d 743 (Wyo. 2003). After multiple post-conviction proceedings, a limited remand from the Wyoming Supreme Court to further develop the record on appeal, multiple District Court hearings to develop said record, the Wyoming Supreme Court found no ineffective assistance of counsel during trial or appeal, and no Brady violation(s). 

Asch v. State, 62 P.3d 945 (Wyo. 2003). Trial court abused its discretion by allowing defendant to be shackled in courtroom throughout trial.  *Created new law in Wyoming.

Lewis v. State, 48 P.3d 1063 (Wyo. 2002). Police officer's failure to read Miranda rights before meeting with and taking a statement from the Defendant and Defendant's Pastor was harmless error. 

Selected Arbitration Matters:

In re: Colorado Drilling Corporation v. Schlumberger Technology Corporation (AAA Arbitration). Achieved favorable resolution of an MSA dispute with a directional drilling operation which totaled approximately of ten percent (10%) of the overall demand.​

In re: CKD Drilling, Inc. v. Schlumberger Technology Corporation (AAA Arbitration).  Achieved favorable resolution of claim for historical per diem payments involving multiple years, locations, and differing drilling methods.


Selected Presentations and Articles:

  • "Anatomy of An Insurance Policy," State Bar of Texas, Insurance Law Section, February 24, 2021.

  • "Novel Issued and Emerging Trends in Bad Faith Litigation," American College of Coverage Counsel, 2022 Annual Meeting, May 11-13, 2022 (editor of written materials for conference).

  • "ADA, FMLA, and Workers' Compensation in Wyoming," Lorman Education Services, March 3, 2004.

bottom of page