Business Litigation

Pre-Trial and Trial Litigation at Federal and State Levels

Our business law firm, situated in New Jersey and Philadelphia, specializes in a wide variety of complex business disputes in a broad range of areas such as intra-company ownership disputes and business divorce litigation, intellectual property matters, complex real estate and commercial leasing disputes, prerogative writ litigation, complex contractual disputes, securities litigation, restrictive covenant and unfair competition matters. In doing so, the Firm’s approach to litigation is direct, aggressive, proactive, and strategic. From the inception of our engagement in connection with a business dispute, we focus on counseling our clients in how best to position the dispute to either win in court or to resolve the matter favorably for our clients’ favor through settlement or otherwise. At the same time, we work efficiently to manage costs in accordance with client budgets and to provide our clients value at every stage of the dispute.

 

The breadth of experience and diverse practice area expertise of our legal team allows us to engage effectively in virtually any type of litigation. Our attorneys are well versed in all pre-trial and trial phases of sophisticated litigation at all levels, including proceedings before federal and state courts throughout the country. In addition, our litigators are skilled in administrative hearings before regulatory agencies, such as the state, county, and municipal land use bodies, state environmental and securities agencies, Department of Defense, the FTC, FINRA, and the United States Patent and Trademark Office, as well as utilizing all types of alternative dispute resolution devices such as arbitration and mediation proceedings.

 

Our senior attorneys at our NJ and Philly law offices have substantial courtroom experience skillfully trying to verdict a wide variety of complex civil matters in state and federal courts located around the country, as well as conducting high stakes commercial arbitration matters. Our attorneys have experience in litigating cases involving complex contractual disputes, financial matters, shareholder and intra-company disputes, real property, financial and investment matters, construction, employment claims, and intellectual property.

 

Click here for more information about our Litigation Chair – Gregory A. Lomax.

 

For more information on our business litigation services and attorneys, contact our NJ or Philadelphia law firm offices. Leave your legal problems to us.

Current and Recent Litigation

Health & Body Store, LLC v. JustBrand Ltd., 2012 WL 4006041 (E.D.Pa., Sept. 11, 2012) (Post-remand decision by district court granting preliminary injunctive relief compelling defendant former employees to return two commercial websites commandeered by the Defendants when they left the Plaintiff’s employ.)

Health & Body Store, LLC v. JustBrand Ltd., 2012 WL 1700263 (3d. Cir., May 11, 2012) (Successfully vacated on appeal a denial of client’s preliminary injunction application seeking to compel, among other things, the return of two commercial websites by two former employees and minority owners of the Plaintiff employer.)

Allen v. LaSalle Bank, N.A., 2012 WL 1898612 (D.N.J.) (May 23, 2012) (Successfully obtained a dismissal with prejudice in a purported consumer class action against a mortgage servicer client relating to alleged overcharges in mortgage foreclosure matters.)

Allen v. LaSalle Bank, N.A., 629 F.3d 364 (3d Cir. 2011) (Case of first impression relating to whether communications by a creditor’s counsel directly to debtor’s counsel is immune from liability under the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1692).

Rodriguez v. Our Lady of Lourdes Medical Center, 552 F.3d 297 (3d Cir. 2008) (Successfully argued for dismissal of a purported federal False Claims Act qui tam and New Jersey Conscientious Employee Protection Act claims against a hospital client).

In re Pinelands Commission, Resolution No. PC4-04-74, 2007 WL 1541915 (App. Div.) (Defended a second Endangered Species Act challenge to a large South Jersey development firm’s project located within the New Jersey Pinelands.)

Roadmaster (USA) Corp. v. Calmodal Freight Systems, Inc., 153 Fed. Appx. 827, 2005 WL 2761287 (3rd Cir.) (Defended a freight carrier’s appeal seeking to substantially increase a damage award against the plaintiff.)

Henderson v. Camden County Municipal Utilities Authority, 176 N.J. 554, 826 A.2d 615 (2003) (Argued in a case of the first impression that a county municipal utility authority was not statutorily permitted to charge its ratepayers compound interest, thereby saving a class of ratepayers millions of dollars in future interest payments.)

Samost v. New Jersey Pinelands Commission, 356 N.J. Super. 363, 812 A.2d 1113 (App. Div. 2003) (Defended an Endangered Species Act challenge from environmental groups to a large real estate development located in the New Jersey Pinelands.)

In re Tax Credit Application of Pennrose Properties, Inc., 346 N.J. Super. 479, 788 A.2d 787 (App.Div. 2002) (Defended a rival real estate developer’s challenge to a multimillion-dollar tax credit award.)

In re Reorganization of Medical Inter-Insurance Exchange of New Jersey, 328 N.J. Super. 344, 746 A.2d 25 (App. Div. 2000) (Defended a regulatory challenge to a demutualization plan of one of New Jersey’s largest medical malpractice insurers.)

In re Levy, 256 B.R. 563 (Bankr. D.N.J. 2000) (Defended a bankrupt debtor’s attempt to extinguish a large judgment lien on a first impression argument that the debtor’s requested relief was barred under the doctrine of laches.)

National Micrographics Systems, Inc. v. Canon U.S.A., Inc., 825 F. Supp. 671 (D.N.J. 1993) (A widely followed decision establishing standards to determine the enforceability and ramifications of “forum selection clauses” in commercial agreements.)