Lurie Friedman LLP

 

 
 


PRACTICE AREAS
| Business Litigation | Representative Cases


EXPERIENCE OF LURIE FRIEDMAN LLP
IN REPRESENTATIVE BUSINESS LITIGATION

  • Dutch Pension Funds»
    We represented two Dutch pension funds in federal lawsuits against a major financial provider of investment and trust services. Our clients lost hundreds of millions of dollars when the provider failed to disclose material risks of collective investment funds that were rendered worthless upon the failure of Lehman Brothers. After depositions and exchange of expert reports, the cases settled on favorable terms.

  • "Top Hat" Plan»
    We represented a public company, its key executives and its deferred compensation plan in federal lawsuits in Philadelphia, San Francisco, New Orleans and Washington D.C. regarding the “top hat” status of the plan and the participants’ rights to account balances under ERISA. After several rulings in favor of our clients, the claims of all participants settled on favorable terms.

  • Private Equity Financing»
    We defended a digital watermarking company in litigation in Texas and New York brought by an investor/supplier who claimed that the company and its private equity owners breached their fiduciary duties in a round of financing that altered the company’s capital structure. After briefing and arguing motions to dismiss in the two jurisdictions, the case settled through issuance of a promissory note to the investor/supplier that was payable upon a change of control of the company.

  • Sale of Aircraft»
    We defended the seller of a 747SP aircraft in a lawsuit filed by a foreign government for breach of contract and recovery of $1 million in liquidated damages. After discovery, summary judgment motions and a seven-day federal trial, we obtained a jury verdict that the plaintiff had acted in bad faith and had suffered no actual damages. After post-trial motions and appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, we obtained dismissal of the litigation with our client paying nothing to the plaintiff.

  • Commissions Due to Sales Representative»
    We represented a sales representative company in an arbitration against two limited partnerships for commissions due for procurement of commercial aircraft. A three-arbitrator panel, including the former Chief Justice of the Maine Supreme Court, rendered an award in favor of our client, including attorney’s fees, after a one-and-a-half week trial.

  • Telecommunications Contract»
    We represented the reseller of long distance telephone service against a telecommunications company at the trial level, in multiple arbitrations, and on appeal regarding contractual obligations under a volume purchase agreement and related contracts. After successfully litigating forum selection issues, we obtained a renegotiation of the entire business relationship between the parties.

  • Disputes Among Restaurant Owners»
    We represented a co-owner and president of a major Boston restaurant and underlying valuable commercial property in claims against his close corporation and co-owners for breaches of fiduciary duty and nonpayment of his loans to the corporation. We also defended our client against claims of excessive compensation, misappropriation of corporate opportunities and mismanagement. After discovery and extensive mediation, we obtained a buy-out of our client’s interests in the corporation and property.

  • Public Records Disputes»
    We represented a board member of the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority in a lawsuit seeking disclosure of public records concerning settlements of certain disputes with the prime contractor on the Big Dig project. After extensive litigation and an interlocutory appeal to the Massachusetts Appeals Court, we obtained release of all of the public records in dispute.  In another case, we obtained a ruling that a redevelopment agency violated state law in failing to maintain and preserve emails and electronic documents regarding a controversial development project.

  • Breach of Stock Purchase Agreement for Golf Sportswear Company»
    We represented the purchaser of stock in a golf sportswear company in a multimillion dollar case in federal court in Pennsylvania to recover for breaches of representations and warranties concerning accounts receivable, inventory and supply chain problems. The case also involved issues regarding the enforceability of limitations of liability in the stock purchase agreement, the recoverability of categories of damages, the interpretation of a loan subordination agreement, and amounts allegedly owed to the company’s former president for wages, bonuses, loans and severance.  After extensive discovery and motion practice, the case settled on favorable terms including a substantial reduction in the promissory note payable by our client to the seller of stock.

  • Breach of Stock Purchase Agreement for Educational Software Company»
    We represented the sellers of stock in an educational software company in connection with post-closing disputes over release of escrow funds and payments owed the key stockholder employees. The disputes involved alleged misrepresentations regarding payment of current taxes and clear title to the stock. After extended negotiations with the acquiring company and the third party who asserted a claim to the stock, we obtained release of most of the withheld monies.

  • Human Resources Outsourcing Agreement»
    We represented a provider of human resource benefits outsourcing software and services in a claim against a Fortune 500 company that improperly terminated the agreement after merging with another company. After mediation with a retired New York state judge, we obtained a $1.5 million settlement.

  • Alleged Fraud by Invoice Factoring Company»
    We represented a factoring portfolio service and management company, its principal and employees in defending against a state lawsuit alleging the company, its principal and employees defrauded a creditor out of millions of dollars through the submission of a series of alleged false or fraudulent invoices. After initial motion practice, the case was settled under reasonable terms, including dismissal of all claims against the company’s employees.

  • Disputes Among Juice Company Owners»
    We defended a trustee and beneficiary of a family trust in a shareholder derivative lawsuit involving operations of a successful juice company. The plaintiff claimed that the sale and leaseback of company property to an entity owned by some but not all of the family members was a breach of fiduciary duty and misappropriation of a corporate opportunity. After extensive discovery and mediation, the lawsuit was dismissed with prejudice.

  • Theft of Assets By Lawyer»
    We represented the largest creditor (owed $5.6 million) of a lawyer and his law firm for breach of contract, embezzlement and other fraud-related claims arising out of the misappropriation of client’s assets. The litigation began in the Massachusetts Superior Court and moved to the Bankruptcy Court, which ultimately found that there was no lawyer-client relationship and therefore denied recovery from the law firm’s errors and omissions insurance policy. See In re Mahoney Hawkes, LLP, 334 B.R. 41 (Bankr. D. Mass. 2005).

  • Embezzlement/Negligence by Bank»
    We represented a dress design and manufacturing company in a claim against its bank for improperly allowing the company’s controller to embezzle funds by issuing checks without the required two signatures. We obtained a settlement after sending a demand letter and negotiation with bank counsel.

  • Disputes Among Dental Practice»
    We defended a periodontist in a lawsuit brought by his former employer and the co-owner of his dental practice. After asserting counterclaims including shareholder derivative claims against the plaintiff and his professional corporation, we obtained a settlement.

  • Telecommunication Access Charges under Federal and State Tariffs»
    We defended a telecommunications reseller in multi-party litigation in South Dakota initiated by a series of local exchange carriers (LECs) seeking to recover originating access charges and centralized equal access charges under tariffs filed with the Federal Communications Commission and the South Dakota Public Utilities Commission. After successfully litigating motions to dismiss some of the claims, see Alliance Communications Cooperative, Inc. v. Global Crossing Telecommunications, Inc., 2007 WL 1964271 (D.S.D. July 2, 2007), we succeeded in obtaining summary judgment on the remaining claims against our client because our client was not a “customer” of the LECs and any benefit enjoyed by our client was not provided subject to the tariffs. See Alliance Communications Cooperative, Inc. v. Global Crossing Telecommunications, Inc., 2009 WL 3233711 (D.S.D. Sept. 29, 2009).  See also Alliance Communications Cooperative, Inc. v. Global Crossing Telecommunications, Inc., 2010 WL 582365 (D.S.D. Feb. 11, 2010).

  • Bonus For Government Relations Consultant»
    We represented a government relations subsidiary of a major Boston law firm in a claim against a former client for a bonus due for successful work. We won the right to proceed with the case in Boston after the defendant unsuccessfully filed suit in South Carolina and sought to have the dispute handled there. After mediation, we obtained a settlement.

  • Freeze-Out By Private Equity Investor»
    We represented the founders of a company that designed, fabricated and tested optical products, and asserted a freeze-out claim against a private equity investor which held most of the preferred stock in the company. After sending a demand letter and pursuing negotiations, we obtained a settlement specifying payouts to the founders and other common stockholders upon the anticipated sale of the company.

  • Misappropriation of Real Estate Opportunity»
    We represented owners of real estate used by a regional hardware chain for its offices, warehouse and distribution facility, and defended a claim by the owners of the hardware chain for misappropriation of the real estate as a corporate opportunity. After correspondence and presentations to the independent directors of the hardware chain, we obtained a decision that the hardware chain would not pursue the claim.

  • Professional Malpractice In Forming Mass. Security Corporation»
    We represented a public information technology company in claims against its law firm and Big Four accounting firm in connection with the formation of a Massachusetts security corporation subsidiary, the purpose of which was to reduce taxes. We won an arbitration award against the accounting firm after a weeklong hearing and then obtained a settlement from the law firm after opposing its summary judgment motion in separate litigation. The total proceeds obtained made our client essentially whole.

 
 

 

 
 

Copyright © Lurie Friedman LLP.  All rights reserved.