Unfortunately, far too many businesses find themselves in difficult situations: from traditional breach of contract issues, to partnership disputes, to simple deals becoming too complex. Our perspective in dealing with business problems is influenced not only by our extensive legal experience, but by our 35 years as a corporate executive and start-up entrepreneur.
We are attorneys who very much like being trial lawyers and find that many commercial disputes can be resolved through litigation. But just as importantly, we find that many commercial disputes can be resolved quietly, through the threat of litigation – either explicitly or implicitly.
Many times, clients present what they think is a legal problem that is primarily a business problem. We bring our uniquely combined experiences to bear in helping to formulate a real-world, cost effective strategy for addressing these problems.
Overall, we bring both a legal and business perspective to resolving commercial disputes. If you have a business problem – or opportunity – that needs a fresh perspective, talk to us.
Contact our experienced attorneys today at 1-646-290-7251 or Commercial@PollockCohen.com to arrange a free, confidential consultation. In many cases, we can offer creative and success-based fee arrangements so that we’re fully aligned with you.
The following are certain highlights of our respective experiences as part of trial and litigation teams:
Won “entire fairness” case, representing minority investors in a real estate investment and development firm, tried before the Delaware Chancery Court. See Ross Holding & Mgm’t Co. v. Advance Realty Grp., LLC, 2014 WL 4374261 (Del. Ch. Sept. 4, 2014).
Co-wrote the en banc briefs which resulted in Section 2A of the Lanham Act being struck down as unconstitutional by the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. (The decision was later unanimously affirmed by the Supreme Court.) See In re Tam, 808 F.3d 1321 (Fed. Cir. 2015), as corrected (Feb. 11, 2016) (en banc), aff’d sub nom. Matal v. Tam, 137 S. Ct. 1744 (2017).
Won post-trial appeal before Third Circuit Court of Appeals in employee religious discrimination suit. See Jo A. Yochum v. FJW Inv., Inc., 715 F. App’x 174 (3d Cir. 2017).
Won three-week federal court counterfeit fraud trial, including an award of punitive damages, which was upheld by the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. See Koch v. Greenberg, 14 F. Supp. 3d 247 (S.D.N.Y. 2014), aff’d, 626 F. App’x 335 (2d Cir. 2015).
Won breach of employment contract dispute in New Jersey Superior Court.
Won dismissal of SEC enforcement action. See Sec. & Exch. Comm’n v. Gentile, 2017 WL 6371301 (D.N.J. Dec. 13, 2017).
Won decision in the New York Court of Appeals (New York’s highest court), resolving a dispute among the appellate courts and finally setting the standard for third-party discovery. See Kapon v. Koch, 23 N.Y.3d 32 (N.Y. 2014).
Won closely held LLC dispute and related defamation claim tried before New Jersey Chancery Court.
Achieved favorable settlement, mid-arbitration, of multi-million dollar breach of fiduciary duty and related claims against real estate general partner.
As part of a $50 million estate battle, secured the eviction and stripping of any standing of a contesting party, with zero payment to the party.
Achieved favorable settlement of New Jersey franchise dispute on eve of trial.
Served as trial consultant in a $130 million successful verdict a medical malpractice case in Suffolk County, New York.
Achieved favorable business partner separations in various dysfunctional LLCs.
Secured a confidential settlement with major health insurance company involving out-of-network coverage.
When monetary damages are awarded in a lawsuit, the plaintiff gets a “judgment”. The next step is actually collecting the money – which is not always easy – and is known as enforcing the judgment.
We’ve all heard of the plaintiff who “won a million dollars at trial.” But courts don’t award money; instead, they award a judgment of monetary damages. This is a crucial distinction – a piece of paper that says “judgment” is not money. At least not yet. To actually get the money owed, experienced counsel may need to investigate where the defendant has hidden assets. Then, diligent lawyers can find and seize bank accounts and other assets in order to actually collect on the judgment.