Mark G. Tauzier | Attorney

Top Local Lawyers

About Mark

Mark's practice involves the defense of professionals and businesses in various areas of litigation throughout the state of Florida. Mark has experience defending the interests of attorneys, accountants, directors/officers, insurance agents, and registered representatives. His practice also involves the representation of insurance companies in the preparation of insurance coverage opinions as well as the defense of insurance companies in insurance coverage disputes. As well, Mark is involved in the defense litigation of construction defect and construction professional liability (engineers, surveyors, etc.) cases.

In 2003 Mark earned his J.D. from the Loyola University School of Law. While at Loyola, Mark served as a teaching assistant for Legal Research and Writing as well as Moot Court. He was a member of Moot Court and was selected as a brief writer/oralist on the Fall 2002 Competition Team in Health Law. Following graduation, Mark became employed as an associate in the Commercial Litigation/Professional Liability department for a law firm in New Orleans, Louisiana.

Significant Representative Matters

  • Assisted in obtaining a favorable defense jury verdict while defending an attorney on claims of legal malpractice.

  • Assisted in obtaining a favorable decision in a matter involving securities litigation and securities fraud before the NASD.

  • Involuntary dismissal granted in defending a law firm on claims of legal malpractice and defamation in connection with claims that the law firm disseminated confidential information of a plaintiff to third parties.

  • Involuntary dismissal granted in defending law firm on claims that the law firm improperly handled a transaction for numerous clients. Dismissal was granted on the basis that the clients lacked privity of contract with the law firm.

  • Summary judgment granted in defending an accounting firm on claims that the accountant failed to detect embezzlement by its client's employee. Court dismissed claims on the basis that the statute of limitations had run on multiple instances of embezzlement.