Frederick B. Tedford

Email: ftedford@tedfordpond.com
Telephone: (860) 293-1200 X101
Facsimile: (860) 293-0685
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/TedTedford
Download vCard
Download Profile (PDF)

After obtaining his law degree, Attorney Tedford served as a member of the United States Air Force Judge Advocate General Corps. Since that time, he has gained more than 35 years of experience as a tort and product liability trial attorney. He devotes a substantial portion of his practice to fire and explosion litigation, in which he has over 18 years experience.

Attorney Tedford is a former national counsel and national coordinating counsel for product manufacturers and distributors. He currently serves as national coordination and litigation counsel for several Fire Science and Product Liability clients. He is also a frequent lecturer on this subject.

Litigation Experience

Attorney Tedford has litigated to verdict cases where the arson defense was asserted, and has successfully recovered on subrogation claims for his insurance clients. Notably, he was counsel for the plaintiff in the landmark fire science litigation case of Travelers Property Casualty Corp. v. Namerow, 261 Conn. 784 (2002).

Attorney Tedford has litigated hundreds of high value matters in courts throughout the country, including cases involving:

  • Defense of a fire suppression company in a major shipyard fire
  • Defense of water heater thermostat manufacturer in a case involving the scalding of a baby
  • Defense of a gas cap manufacturer in cases where lawn mower fires caused severe burn injuries to the operators of the mowers
  • Defense of a product manufacturer where a fire in a manufactured home caused the death of an adult and two children
  • Defense of a foam insulation manufacturer where three welders were killed when foam insulation in the barge on which they were working caught fire
  • Batted ball head injuries resulting from the use of metal softball bats
  • Firefighters who sued for wrongful death following the crash of their fire engine
  • Negligence and product liability claims brought by a quadriplegic injured in a diving board accident
  • Personal injuries from lead paint exposure
  • Personal injuries from a motorcycle-automobile accident
  • Construction accident involving multiple parties and contract disputes
  • Defense of a major chemical manufacturer in lawsuits brought by burn victims
  • Death and personal injuries resulting from a night club fire
  • Claim for personal injuries by plaintiff leaping from a third-story window to avoid being burned in fire
  • Property damage and personal injury stemming from an explosion of chemical products in a warehouse fire
  • Defense of insurers in civil arson cases
  • Multi-million dollar product liability / fire claim against a tractor-trailer manufacturer
  • Alleged personal injuries and wrongful death from exposure to asbestos fibers
  • Defense of a multi-million dollar claim for fire damage to a nursing home
  • Insurance fraud cases involving commercial as well as personal lines coverage
  • Subrogation claims against a clothes dryer manufacturer
  • Subrogation claims against a bathroom ceiling fan manufacturer
  • Litigation involving fire suppression systems.

Litigation Philosophy

During my years of practice, I have learned that the client’s needs constantly vary depending on the circumstances. Sometimes it is in the client’s best interests to aggressively litigate a case through trial. In other instances, a prompt and efficient resolution is more appropriate in view of the potential liabilities or the costs of defense. In every case, however, the client’s interests are served through an early, competent evaluation of the strengths and weaknesses of the case, an assessment of the potential cost of defending the matter through trial, and the development of a strategy which will meet the client’s goals.

The strength of a case must be balanced against the costs of litigation and the business interests impacted by a verdict or settlement. In certain cases, a prompt settlement is a victory for the client. In other cases, the nature of the claim and the strengths of the client’s position warrant vigorous pursuit through trial. In either instance, my goal is to develop a theory early in the case, thereby placing the client in a position of strength to leverage a reasonable settlement or a favorable verdict.