Representative Cases

The following are some of the reported cases and other matters in which we have been involved:

American Navigation Systems, Inc. v. Roe et al., U.S. District Court (D. Mass.) Case 4:11-cv-10304-FDS
We represented two inventors who were sued by a company that owned (by assignment) their patents. The suit sought a declaration that a third person was properly named as an inventor. On November 4, 2011, the United States District Court allowed our clients' motion to dismiss the complaint, agreeing that the patent owner had no standing to assert the claims.

Winlevoss, et al.v. Facebook, et al., U.S. District Court (D. Mass.) Cases 1:07-cv-10593-DPW; 1:04-11932-DPW
We were co-counsel to the Winklevoss brothers and ConnectU in these cases that were dramatized in the movie, The Social Network .

In the Matter of the Estate of Bartley J. King, 455 Mass 796 (2010)
Prior to retaining us, our clients unsuccessfully contested a will in the Probate Court.  After they were assessed approximately $575,000 in legal fees and costs, they turned to us to handle their appeal.  The Supreme Judicial Court reversed the fee award and remanded the case to the Probate Court for further proceedings.  In the course of the its decision, the Court clarified the standard for fee shifting in contested proceedings in the Probate Court under G.L. c. 215, §45, discussed the fees billed to the prevailing party and directed the Probate Court to follow the well-established law on reasonableness of attorneys fees if, after a further hearing, the Probate Court determines that an award is warranted.

The General Hospital Corporation d/b/a Massachusetts General Hospital v. QLT Phototherapeutics (Canada), Inc., United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts, Civil Action No. 09-10364-WGY
We represented MGH in this suit against a Canadian drug company to enforce the terms of a “most favored nation” clause in a license agreement relating to the sale of Visudyne, a drug used to treat diseases of the eye.  The case was successfully resolved when QLT agreed to pay MGH $20 million.  According to Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly, the case was the largest civil settlement in 2009 in Massachusetts.

Securities and Exchange Commission v. David K. Donovan et al., U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, Civil Action No. 08-10649-RWZ
The SEC sued our client, a securities broker, and a stock trader at Fidelity for allegedly trading on insider information.  After trial in November 2009, the jury exonerated the Firm’s client.

Emptoris, Inc. v. Opera Solutions, et al., Middlesex Superior Court, Civil Action No. 06-01239
We represented Emptoris in a suit related to various contracts.  After a trial in October 2009, a jury found for Emptoris on claims involving more than approximately $1,200,000.

Claudio Delise, M.D. v. Jose Scerbo, M.D., 75 Mass. App. Ct. 1111 (2009)
The Appeals Court affirmed a judgment in excess of $500,000 in favor of our client who was a partner in a South Shore ob-gyn practice and who sought an accounting from his former partner following dissolution of the practice.

Gargano v. Zimmer & Associates, LLC et al., United States Court of Appeals for the First Cicuit, No. 08-1777
After having obtained the dismissal of the complaint against our clients, as well as sanctions against the plaintiff (in the form of all attorneys’ fees and costs), in February 2009 the Court of Appeals affirmed the award of sanctions below and also allowed our motion for fees and double costs related to the appeal.

Robert Bartolotti v. Robert Hayden, 449 Mass. App. Ct. 193 (2007)
In a case of first impression, we successfully argued before the Supreme Judicial Court that a right of first refusal without a fixed price is not invalid under the common law rule against perpetuities. 

In the Matter of Evan M. Slavitt, 449 Mass. 25 (2007)
In this bar disciplinary case, the Supreme Judicial Court reversed a one-year suspension ordered by the Bar Overseers and imposed a two-month suspension on our client who had  been charged with making false statements to a court and in a letter of recommendation to the Board of Bar Examiners on behalf of a bar applicant.  The SJC reversed the finding that our client had made a false statement to a court.

CSC Consulting v. Powell, et al., Suffolk Superior Court C.A. 07-0887-BLS (March, 2007)
We successfully obtained an injunction for CSC Consulting in this case involving the enforcement of a non-competition agreement.

Schneider v. Fidelity Investments, NASD Case No 05-200 (January 2007)
We represented Fidelity in this five day NASD arbitration which resulted in a decision favorable to Fidelity.

Chervin v. The Travelers Insurance Company, 448 Mass. 95 (2006)
We represented Travelers in this appeal which involved novel issues concerning subrogation actions brought by insurers.  In the decision, the SJC clarified the law of malicious prosecution in Massachusetts. 

TAL Financial Corp. v. CSC Consulting, Inc., 446 Mass. 422 (2006)
We represented an equipment lessee in a case involving a claim for liquidated damages and rent.  The Supreme Judicial Court affirmed the trial court’s decision awarding damages claimed by the lessee and ruling that the liquidated damages provision in the lease was unenforceable.  The SJC also reversed an award of attorney’s fees to the lessor, on the ground that the fees incurred by the lessor were unreasonable.

Gargano v. Zimmer, 124 Fed. Appx. 18, 19 (1st Cir. 2005)
Our clients were contractors from the Cayman Islands who had been sued by a Massachusetts client.  The First Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court’s dismissal, which was based on the conclusion that the Firm’s clients were not subject to personal jurisdiction in Massachusetts.

CMGI Inc. Co. v. American & Foreign Insurance Company, Essex County Superior Court, Civil Action No. 02-1653C
We represented CMGI is this insurance coverage case in which, after a two week jury trial in early 2005, a verdict was returned in favor of CMGI on all claims and awarding our client more than $1 million.  

Liberty Mutual, Ins. v.  United Technologies Corp., 2003 WL 269673 (Mass. Super. Ct. Jan. 13, 2003)
We represented Liberty Mutual in this dispute involving a claim by a policyholder, United Technologies, for more than $2 million in retrospective insurance premiums.  The Court entered summary judgment in favor of Liberty on all liability issues, leading to a settlement favorable to Liberty.

Omega Healthcare Investors v. First American Tit. Ins. Co., 2003 WL 79037 (D. Mass. Jan. 9, 2003)
We represented Omega Healthcare Investors in this case that involved, among other things, title insurance.  The carrier argued that policies issued to Omega (as a lender) lapsed when a subsidiary of Omega took title to mortgaged properties pursuant to a deed in lieu of foreclosure. The Court ruled in favor of our client, leading to a settlement of this and a companion case on terms favorable to Omega.

In Re Initial Public Offering Securities Litigation, 241 F. Supp. 2d. 70 (S.D.N.Y. 2003)
We represented Cannacord Adams (formerly Adams, Harkness & Hill, Inc.) in this on-going class action lawsuit in which plaintiffs asserted claims under the federal securities laws based on allegations about the manner in which issuers and underwriters distributed shares of stock in connection with 309 stock offerings.

Richard Goldstein, et al. v. The Savings Bank Life Insurance Company of Massachusetts, 435 Mass 760 (2002)
Our client, Savings Bank Life Insurance Company of Massachusetts (SBLI) prevailed on this appeal.  The case raised questions of first impression concerning the proper calculation of a life insurer’s statutory “safety fund.”

Nomos Corp. v. Zmed, Inc., 226 F. Supp 323 (D. Mass. 2002).
We were co-counsel to Zmed, Inc. in this patent infringement action related to the technology used for radiation treatment therapies.  Zmed obtained summary judgment that a “commercial product” did not infringe a patent asserted by Nomos and, after a 5-day trial, a jury found that Nomos suffered no damages as a result of Zmed’s sale of an allegedly infringing “beta” version of its product.

Michael Panzarella v. Travelers/Property & Casualty Company, Hampden County Superior Court, Civil Action No. 96-012 (April 2002)
We successfully defended Travelers against a claim that it acted in bad faith in failing to settle a personal injury case.  Travelers had offered between $125,000 and $250,000 to settle a personal injury case.  The jury returned a verdict of $1.8 million.  In the bad faith action, the plaintiff sought damages of $4 million.  The Court, after a week long jury-waived trial, rejected substantially all of the plaintiff’s claims of bad faith.

Museum of Fine Arts v. Elizabeth A. Beland, 432 Mass. 540 (2000)
We represented the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston in this case that involved an attempt by the trustees of a testamentary trust to force the sale of a collection of paintings left to the MFA (including paintings by Monet and Pissarro).  The SJC upheld the MFA’s position and ordered that the paintings not be sold.