Commercial Litigation
We apply our keen understanding of the law and the court systems combined with strong advocacy skills to benefit both personal and corporate clients. As strong negotiators, we focus on resolving disputes in order to avoid costly courtroom battles. When necessary, we use courtroom litigation forcefully and effectively to advance and defend our clients' interests. We regularly represent clients in construction disputes, appellate advocacy, collections, name and intellectual property protection, and security/lien priority disputes.
Areas of Service
- Alternate Dispute Resolution and Negotiation
- Appellate Advocacy
- Consumer/Business Collection Law
- Environmental Litigation
|
- General Business Litigation
- Name & Intellectual Property Protection
- Real Estate and Construction Disputes
- Trade Secret Theft by Former Employee
|
Case Studies
- We sued a shoreline municipality that had arbitrarily created a new zoning district bisecting our client's property. When we proved that the rezoning's purpose was to stop the second phase of our client's condominium project, the municipality settled, allowing the developer to complete the project and collect monetary damages for the delay.
- In a case where a struggling business owner had borrowed money from numerous sources and had given each creditor a lien as security, we were successful on behalf of a client in asserting a priority claim and getting our client paid ahead of other creditors when the business assets were liquidated.
- A client who bought a parcel of land together with an easement for ingress and egress found his access blocked by an irate neighbor who refused to acknowledge the easement. We were successful in bringing a quiet title action to enforce the access rights and prevent our client's property from being landlocked.
- When two controlling shareholders sought to force a buy-out of the third shareholder, we implemented a strategy which accomplished their goal without litigation by creative use of the rights of majority shareholders while affording a "fair" price to the minority shareholder.
|
|
