Dedicated Commercial Litigation Practice
The firm handles all manner of non-compete, overtime, wage/hour, unpaid bonus, Americans with Disabilities Act, and other labor disputes.
• Lead defense counsel in Ramirez v. Modern Cobbler Shops, Inc., et al., 16-cv-09409 (N.D. Ill.) (Fair Labor Standards Act matter): obtained dismissal of case on summary judgment, March 30, 2017.
• Lead defense counsel in Wiggen v. Joint Resources, Inc., et al., 15cv06870 (N.D. Ill.) (ADA matter): obtained dismissal of case on summary judgment, August 24, 2017.
• Lead defense counsel in Valdez v. Vrati Corp., et al., 15cv09365 (N.D. Ill.) (putative overtime/wage class action).
• Strategic Technology Institute, Inc. v. McCormack (Montgomery Co. Md. Cir. Ct. 2012): Defended former business development executive against allegations of trade secret theft. Case settled early in discovery for a fraction of the damages sought by the former employer.
• Lead defense counsel on behalf of regional propane company in federal Americans with Disabilities Act case.
Other Commercial Litigation
• Rivo USA Co., Ltd. v. Arro Corp., 17cv08513 (N.D. Ill.): complex commercial litigation; discovery entailing 16 depositions in two jurisdictions.
• Schaefer v. Graf, 18-cv-08236 (N.D. Ill.): represent plaintiffs in Bitcoin investment fraud case (alleging constructive fraud, conversion, fraud
and misrepresentation in the offer and sale of securities, and 1934 Act violations).
• Represented plaintiff in declaratory judgment action (denying alleged Lanham Act violation). Thycotic Software, Ltd. v. Zoho Corp., 12cv00348 (D.D.C. 2012).
• Hershey v. Hershey, 2011cv07450 (Fairfax Co. Va. Cir. Ct. 2011): successfully obtained emergency injunctive relief removing trustee of multi-million dollar trust.
• Drafted prevailing brief, P.R. Elec. Power Auth. v. Action Refund, 483 F. Supp. 2d 153 (D.P.R. 2007) (awarding client $600K+ on summary judgment for breach of contract).
Civil Rights Litigation
• Rogers v. The City of Hobart, et al., 21cv111 (N.D. Ind.): claims of false imprisonment, among other counts, resolved in exchange for payment of $82,500 under terms of settlement with defendant police officer and defendant municipality.
• Anderson, et al. v. Legacy Development SC Group, et al., 11cv1169 (E.D. Va.): briefed and argued Defendants’ Motion for Reconsideration of District Court’s December 9, 2011 denial of Motion to Dismiss. Action alleged fraud under the Interstate Land Sales Full Disclosure Act and the South Carolina Unfair Trade Practices Act on $4MM+ of real estate sold in South Carolina. Entered appearance on behalf of defendants on January 6, 2012; after hearing oral argument, Court granted Motion for Reconsideration, and dismissed the case, on February 3, 2012.
• Lead counsel, Computerized Training Systems Ltd. v. D.P. Associates, Inc., 12cv00851 (E.D. Va.). November 2, 2012: argued successfully in opposition to Defendant D.P. Associates’ Motion to Dismiss. Case thereafter settled.
Real Estate Disputes
• Trial counsel on behalf of restaurant franchise-owner defendants in Market Square at Potomac Yard v. Diversified Business Inc., et al., CL-2011-2435 (Arlington Cty. Cir. Ct., VA). Plaintiff sought $277,000 for alleged breach of commercial lease; after bench trial, court entered judgment solely in the amount of $39,500 against Defendants.
• Obtained summary judgment on behalf of condominium owner invalidating certain newly-enacted terms of condominium by-laws. Zhao v. 5455-67 Ellis Co-operative Building Corp., 16CH11457 (Cook Cty. Cir. Ct. Aug. 18, 2017).
• Personal injury/product liability: In federal case alleging that defendants' medical device had failed to perform as warranted and caused serious injury to plaintiff's foot during surgery, resulting in significant damages, to plaintiff, case settled out of court two months before the scheduled trial date. Jacobe v. Arthrex, 11-cv-00821 (E.D. Va. 2012).
• Lead appellate counsel for qui tam plaintiff, United States ex rel. Carter v. Halliburton Co., 710 F.3d 171 (4th Cir. Mar. 18, 2013) (argued appeal resulting in reversal of district court order of dismissal in False Claims Act matter).
The Supreme Court of Illinois does not recognize certifications of specialties in the practice of law and the certificate, award or recognition is not a requirement to practice law in Illinois. The information on this website is for general purposes only and should not be interpreted to indicate a certain result will occur in your specific legal situation. The information on this website is not legal advice and does not create an attorney-client relationship.