Disciplined in Sophisticated Defense and Insurance Litigation

Hudson Jones is a Partner at Butler, in our Tampa office. He works in our firm’s Property Coverage group practicing in Extra-Contractual issues. Some examples of his case types include catastrophic loss, first-party coverage issues, general liability coverage, and property insurance. 

Hudson studied law at the West Virginia University College of Law. While attending law school, he was active in the American Constitution Society, Public Interest Advocacy Group, Sports Law Society, and the Student Bar Association. Hudson focused his studies on Litigation and Trial Advocacy and gained legal experience by serving as assistant to two professors, contributing in numerous legal scholarship articles and books. He graduated in 2007, and went on to work as an Assistant Public Defender in the Florida Public Defender's Office in the Sixth Judicial Circuit. In the three years he spent at the Public Defender's office, he tried 52 jury trials as a defense attorney and litigated numerous criminal cases. In 2010, Hudson worked at a private firm, where he focused on defending employers, insurance carriers, self insurers and third-party administrators in insurance and workers' compensation matters, before ultimately joining Butler.

As an undergraduate, Hudson attended Harvard University, where he was a Division I scholar-athlete and a four-year varsity wrestler. He also participated in numerous service and volunteer efforts, including the Boston Partners in Education Tutoring Program and Habitat for Humanity. He graduated, cum laude, from Harvard with a Bachelor of Arts in Government in 2004.


  • Florida


  • Book Award, Judicial Power and Restraint, West Virginia University College of Law
  • Book Award, Labor Law, West Virginia University College of Law


  • Harvard University
    Bachelor of Arts in Government
  • West Virginia University College of Law
    Doctor of Jurisprudence


  • Defense Research Institute (DRI)
  • Florida Defense Lawyers Association (FDLA)
  • Hillsborough County Bar Association (HCBA)
  • The Florida Bar
November 24, 2014 PUBLICATIONThe Coverage Action 'Fixed' Bad Faith Damages: Are The Total Damages Binding?

Florida state and federal courts struggle with excess damage verdicts in first-party bad-faith actions arising out of uninsured motorist/underinsured motorist (UM) coverage. Recent case decisions produce mixed results for insurers. But mention UM coverage, bad faith, and total damages, and Florida Statute Section 627.727(10) immediately comes to mind. Comments by two judges framed the Section 10 debate.

Read More »
June 26, 2014 PUBLICATIONUninsured Motorist Bad-Faith Claims: Separate Action, Separate Trial, Separate Damages

First-party bad-faith claims arising from uninsured motorist (UM) coverage are separate and independent actions, too. If the uninsured motorist coverage action is truly separate and distinct from bad faith, one naturally expects a separate trial on bad-faith liability and extracontractual damages. However, there is a unique problem confronting first-party bad-faith claims arising from uninsured motorist coverage under Florida Statute Section 627.727(10). One decision characterizes the problem as a ‘‘conundrum'' created by Florida law.

Read More »
June 27, 2013 PUBLICATIONWhy Sue For Bad Faith When Consequential Damages Are Available?

Bad faith aside, insurers often assume a claim's ‘‘total" exposure under the insurance contract is the policy's limit.  Courts traditionally allow insureds to recover contractual damages based on the limit, plus legal interest.  However, a new trend is emerging in some jurisdictions.

Read More »
November 01, 2012 PUBLICATIONOngoing Efforts to Preserve Our Unique Right

The problem of the vanishing jury trial is a familiar one to DRI members, for whom this loss is keenly felt. This decline in jury trials presents not only an economic threat to membership, but also a decline in fair and just adjudication.

Read More »

Blog Posts

November 06, 2017 BLOG POSTContingency Fee Multipliers: Florida Supreme Court Rejects Rare and Exceptional Circumstances Requirement

The United States Supreme Court analyzed the availability of contingency fee enhancements under fee-shifting statutes in Burlington v. Dague, 505 U.S. 557 (1992). There, the Court held that a contingency enhancement was not permitted under fee-shifting provisions of the Solid Waste Disposal Act and Clean Water Act. It reversed a 25% lodestar enhancement. Justice Scalia wrote the majority decision. He emphasized that fees are “certain” or “contingent.” Id. at 560. A fee is certain if it is payable without regard to the outcome of the suit; it is contingent if the obligation to pay depends on a particular result obtained. Id. at 560-61.

Read More »
March 07, 2017 BLOG POSTFederal Diversity Jurisdiction: Proving Citizenship of Limited Liability Companies

Jurisdiction gives a federal court the power to hear a case. Jurisdiction matters at the outset of a lawsuit. It matters during discovery. It even matters after summary judgment. Jurisdiction matters because federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction.

Read More »


December 05, 2019 NEWSButler Sponsors DRI Insurance Coverage and Practice Symposium

Butler is proud to be a sponsor for the Defense and Research Institute (DRI) Insurance Coverage and Practice Symposium...

Read More »