Joseph H. Aronson and Jon A. Halaby obtained a defense verdict on behalf of a trucking company, Winthrop-Atkins, Corp., and its driver, in a jury trial in Norfolk Superior Court arising out of a serious motor vehicle accident that occurred in July 2003 in Hanson, Massachusetts. At issue were conflicting accounts of how the accident occurred, including an account from a third-party witness who testified that the plaintiff had turned into the path of the defendant's driver, making it impossible to avoid the collision. In the end, the jury deliberated for less than two hours and rendered a verdict with a finding that the defendant's driver was not negligent.

Stephen D. Rosenberg and Eric L. Brodie obtained a defense verdict on behalf of a plumbing contractor, J.C. Cannistraro, LLC, after a 7-day jury trial in Suffolk Superior Court. The plaintiff, a union painter, alleged that he fell after stepping on a piece of copper pipe that was hidden by sawdust generated by a millwright contractor, and his complaint named the plumbing contractor, the millwright contractor, and the general contractor as defendants. The defense of Cannistraro, the plumbing contractor, was based upon the plaintiff's description of a pipe that was not used in the area where the accident occurred, as well as the timing of the accident, which occurred after the plumbing work in the area had been done for several days. After deliberating for two days, the jury returned a defense verdict with a finding that the plumbing contractor was not negligent.

Stephen D. Rosenberg was quoted at length in the January 2008 issue of The Institutional Real Estate Letter on the subject of subprime related losses and the obligations of pension fiduciaries under ERISA. In the article, “Investing in Good Governance,” Mr. Rosenberg discussed in detail the extent to which the fiduciary obligations imposed by ERISA are being used by the class action bar to pursue the type of litigation that used to be conducted exclusively under the securities laws, and discussed as well the steps that retirement plan fiduciaries can take to protect themselves against such lawsuits. You can read the article by clicking on this link.

Stephen D. Rosenberg was quoted at length in the January 2008 issue of The Institutional Real Estate Letter on the subject of subprime related losses and the obligations of pension fiduciaries under ERISA. In the article, “Investing in Good Governance,” Mr. Rosenberg discussed in detail the extent to which the fiduciary obligations imposed by ERISA are being used by the class action bar to pursue the type of litigation that used to be conducted exclusively under the securities laws, and discussed as well the steps that retirement plan fiduciaries can take to protect themselves against such lawsuits. You can read the article by clicking on this link.

Stephen D. Rosenberg's article, "Patent Litigation Doesn't Have to Be Prohibitively Expensive," has been published in the November 2007 issue of New England In House. The article, which identifies six key areas where patent litigation expenses can be controlled, can be viewed by clicking on this link. A reprint of the article can also be viewed here.

Stephen D. Rosenberg's blog, the Boston ERISA and Insurance Ligitation Blog, has been named as a "top blog" by the Lexis Nexis Insurance Law Center. Mr. Rosenberg's blog was chosen by insurance editors at Matthew Bender and LexisNexis Mealey's Insurance publications as one that can be relied upon to provide its readers with timely review and analysis on insurance and insurance related topics.

The firm's attorneys, including Sylvia Chu, secured the dismissal of an arbitration claim brought by another insurer against their client, Lexington Insurance Company. Arbitration Forums, Inc. was persuaded that the affirmative defense of lack of jurisdiction precluded AFI from hearing the insurer's claim.

David T. Mitrou was quoted extensively in the October 1, 2007 edition of the Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly in an article entitled, "Plaintiffs' Bar Seeks Presence During Clients' Medical Exams." Mr. Mitrou discussed the defense perspective regarding the issue of whether a plaintiff's attorney should be allowed to attend a Rule 35 independent medical exam of a plaintiff.

Jon A. Halaby and David T. Mitrou spoke at a seminar sponsored by Massachusetts Continuing Legal Eduation. The seminar, which was entitled, "Handling Motor Vehicle Accident Cases," was also moderated by Jon Halaby, and the seminar addressed various topics, including client interviews, fact gathering, application of the standard automobile insurance policy, handling cases from the defense perspective, governmental entities as defendants, alternative dispute resolution, liens and other issues affecting settlement, and trial strategy.

David T. Mitrou recently successfully obtained summary judgment on behalf of United Insulation Specialties, Ltd. in Great Northern Ins. Co. v. Architectural Env’ts, Inc. et al, 514 F. Supp. 2d. 139 (D. Mass. 2007). This $9 million property damage subrogation action arose from a 2005 fire occurring in Cambridge, Massachusetts. U.S. District Court Judge Nathaniel Gorton, in adopting the 65-page Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Judith Dein, enforced a "waiver of subrogation" provision present in the construction contract between the project owner and general contractor, inuring to the benefit of the general contractor and its subcontractors. The decision was significant in that the law of Massachusetts, and the First Circuit, was silent as to the enforceability of a "waiver of subrogation" provision in a construction contract where it was alleged that the contractors' liability was premised upon gross negligence and statutory violation. Read the decision by clicking here.

The United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit denied rehearing and affirmed an ERISA decision in favor of Aetna Life Insurance Company and the Coca-Cola Bottling Company of New England, which were represented on appeal by Stephen D. Rosenberg and Eric L. Brodie. Mr. Rosenberg argued on behalf of the defendant-appellees, in a case involving fact-specific application of a disability plan’s preexisting condition exclusion and competing medical opinions. Also at issue was the proper standard of review, and in particular whether to apply the deferential standard presently called for by governing First Circuit precedent, or a higher standard of review used by other circuits. For more information about this case, please contact e-mail Stephen D. Rosenberg.

Marc L. LaCasse, working on a pro bono basis, mounted a successful challenge of a constitutionally questionable noise bylaw enacted in Provincetown, Massachusetts. Mr. LaCasse represented two street performers, including Marcia Mello, a Delta blues singer and guitarist, who had been cited by police for violating the local noise ordinance, which prohibited "unnecessarily loud, excessive or unusual noise." However, the bylaw did not define what qualified as "unnecessarily loud," "excessive," or "unusual," leaving it open to wide interpretation and thus a potentially unconstitutional limitation that violated the street performers' First Amendment rights to artistic expression. After Mr. LaCasse challenged the ordinance, Provincetown officials dismissed the citations and promised to amend the bylaw this fall. Mr. LaCasse's representation of Marcia Mello and the other buskers was noted in the Hearsay column of the August 27, 2007 Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly.