
Our litigation practice has always been a central practice area. As shown by our emphasis on mediative resolutions, we implicitly view litigation as a means of last resort. In other words, it should be undertaken generally after less formalized resolution efforts have been unfruitful. The reasons for this include increased cost, unpredictability, and protraction of a dispute or proceeding once litigation has been started. Of course, there are times when "pulling the trigger" on litigation from the outset is the right approach, as in cases where it is clear that an adversary will not comply in good faith with settlement efforts or simply needs a motivational show of force to be cajoled into settlement. In those cases in which it has been determined that starting litigation immediately is appropriate, it is important to prosecute or defend against claims using strong and proactive advocacy. Notwithstanding our belief in a vigorous tactical offense or defense, we do recommend establishing an orchestrated strategy and litigation budget at the outset, even though it may be necessary later to adjust earlier budgetary benchmarks to achieve the object of the litigation. This is best illustrated by the fact that clients that have come to us after being represented by other litigation counsel, expressing that they are disillusioned by the realization that they have expended substantial sums of money, and see themselves as having accomplished no movement toward resolution since litigation started. The foregoing summarizes our litigation philosophy. Business, real estate and estate and trust disputes comprise the core of our litigation practice. These broad categories subsume a wide variety of disputes. Examples of certain species of disputes in which we successfully represent clients are as follows: BUSINESS & CORPORATE:
REAL ESTATE:
ESTATES & TRUSTS:
|



