Top Women Attorneys In Massachusetts – Boston Magazine, April 2014 Margare Pinkham for Employment Law and Elise Busny for General Litigation.
The Massachusetts Appeals Court decision in T. Butera Auburn LLC v. Williams relied on the Rhodes v. AIG Domestic Claims, Inc. decision addressing punitive damages in unfair or deceptive trade practices case under c. 93A. The Appeals Court affirmed the
Article Coming Soon.
February 10, 2012 – SJC issues decision in Rhodes v. AIG Domestic Claims, Inc., 461 Mass. 486 (2012) – Margaret Pinkham of Pinkham Busny LLP won a major victory in a case that has been described as an insurance “game-changer” after
In recognition of outstanding commitment to providing volunteer legal services for the poor and disadvantaged in Massachusetts, the Supreme Judicial Court Standing Committee on Pro Bono Legal Services presented the eighth annual Adams Pro Bono Publico Awards to Attorneys Andrew
represented Burlington homeowner on claim of adverse possession and prevailed on claim involving 700 square feet of property after October 2012 jury trial in Middlesex Superior Court and more…
Personal Injury – obtained largest jury verdict in Massachusetts in 2004 in case where plaintiff was paralyzed after being rear-ended by tractor-tanker and more…
IT monitoring company – defended principals and 6 employees in claim by former employer in Connecticut after principals’ non-competition agreements expired, alleging unfair competition and trade secrets violations arising out of new company’s success in winning clients from previous employer. Case settled after discovery in form of credits for sub-contracting services provided to previous employer.
Individual note holder – reached settlement on defaulted demand note within two weeks of filing complaint as a result of successfully obtaining ex parte pre-judgment attachments against borrowers.
Mortgage lender – obtained temporary restraining order for client approximately 3 hours after it received a cease and desist order from state regulator, which order was issued in violation of client’s due process rights.