The Firm prevailed on one of two appeals before the Connecticut Appellate Court in a case brought by a major European bank seeking to impose individual liability on our client for a foreign judgment exceeding $300 million. The bank’s appeal argued that the doctrine of collateral estoppel precluded our clients from relitigating issues allegedly decided in the foreign judgment. The Appellate Court agreed with our arguments that it did not. Charlie Pieterse, Thomas O’Connor, and Wyatt Jansen handled the matter.
The New York Supreme Court of New York County granted the Firm’s motion to dismiss claims brought by a major European bank alleging that the Firm’s clients fraudulently received more than $150 million in assets. The Court agreed with our argument that our clients, a Monaco resident and a Turks & Caicos Islands corporation, were not subject to personal jurisdiction in New York. The decision was covered in the national and international media. The case team consisted of Charlie Pieterse, who argued the motion, Tom O’Connor, and Wyatt Jansen.
The Firm has been retained to serve as counsel to the largest commercial real estate service and investment firm in the world as the receiver of a 1.1 million square foot office complex in Fairfield County. We represent the receiver in all aspects of owning, leasing, and managing the complex; in connection with a potential sale of the property; and in litigation matters arising from its role as receiver. Cyd Smith is handling the real estate matters, and Rod Saggese is handling the litigation matters.
Luke Tashjian was elected Chair of the Tax Section of the Connecticut Bar Association.
The Firm negotiated a favorable settlement for our client, a division of an international construction conglomerate, in a $25 million lawsuit brought by the State of Connecticut. The suit arose from alleged deficiencies in the design and construction of a major public works project completed in the mid-1990s, on which our client served as construction manager. The case involved discovery spanning more than 25 years, as well as complex engineering, design, and construction issues concerning the standards in place at the time of the original design and construction of the project. After a 5-day mediation, we settled the case for a small fraction of the State’s initial demand. Jim Riley and Wyatt Jansen handled the matter.
Luke Tashjian presented at the National Business Institute regarding Business Succession Planning.
Charlie Pieterse and Michael Battema spoke at the National Business Institute’s seminar, “Estate Administration from Start to Finish.” Charlie and Michael’s topic was “Ethical Practice Considerations and Concerns in Probate Court.”
Luke Tashjian presented at the National Business Institute regarding Claims Against Estates.
Jim Riley testified as an expert witness on various issues of Connecticut commercial law before the High Court of Justice, Chancery Division, in London, England. Among the subjects of Jim’s expert testimony were Connecticut common law rules governing the construction of commercial contracts, the proper application of partial payments to indebtedness arising under a factoring agreement, whether certain charges were allowed in restating an account, and judicial awards of fees and costs pursuant to contractual fee-shifting clauses. Jim had previously submitted an expert report in the matter in December 2016.
The Firm prevailed on a motion to dismiss a civil action brought against its clients in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. In an 11-page written decision, the Court agreed that there was no personal jurisdiction over the defendant corporation and its owners, which is based in and who reside in Connecticut. Michael Battema led the defense effort, working with Jim Riley and Richard Mancuso, and coordinating with local counsel in Chicago.
Luke Tashjian presented at the Greenwich Land Trust on Tax Deductions for Donations of Conservation Easements and Donations of Real Property.
Charlie Pieterse and Michael Battema spoke at the Institute for Paralegal Education’s seminar, “The Probate Process from Start to Finish for Paralegals.” Charlie and Michael’s topic was “Ethical Perils in the Probate Process.”
The Firm obtained a favorable decision in a discrimination proceeding before the New York State Division of Human Rights, resulting in the dismissal of the charge. Our client, which maintains offices in Connecticut and New York, was charged with engaging in an unlawful discriminatory practice based on the employee’s gender, pregnancy and alleged disability following its termination of her employment in September 2016. The Firm denied the charge and submitted substantial evidence of the circumstances leading to the employee’s termination. Following its investigation, the Division of Human Rights concluded that there was no probable cause to believe that our client had engaged in an unlawful discriminatory practice, and dismissed the complaint. Jim Riley handled the matter for the Firm.
The Firm’s client, an importer, wholesaler, and distributor of paper products, was the subject of a transhipment audit by US Customs and Border Protection that threatened the imposition of penalties representing an existential threat to its business. We helped to assemble, coordinate, and lead a team of lawyers from Greenberg Traurig and Venable with customs investigations expertise, and directed responses to document summonses issued by the government. The investigation concluded without the assessment of any penalties. Jim Riley and Wyatt Jansen handled the matter.
Harry E. Peden and Kathryn O’Neill represented a long operating veterinarian practice, with two locations in New York, in the sale of its assets to a national veterinary group. As part of the sale, Harry and Katie assisted the Sellers with evaluating many purchase offers from a variety of potential buyers. The transaction involved the assignment of real estate leases, commercial contracts, and employment agreements for the principal veterinarians. In recent years, Harry and Katie have represented many veterinary groups in the buying and selling of practices.
The Firm successfully moved to dismiss a case on behalf of a client in a trust and estates dispute. The Connecticut Superior Court held that, despite the settlor of a revocable trust being conserved, the remainder beneficiary of an inter-vivos trust lacked standing to challenge the settlor’s amendment of the trust and appointment of a successor trustee. Luke Tashjian handled the matter.