Pierce Atwood has handled thousands of matters in its 130-year history. If you know what you’re looking for, feel free to use the search field above. If you know the attorney or area of expertise most relevant to your needs, use the drop down menus. Or, if your search is not that specific at this point, select a practice area that is most relevant to your interests.
Served as chair of arbitration panel addressing claims by public owner against Design Builder of waste-to-energy generating equipment. Following issuance of award against Design Builder, at the request of the Design Builder, successfully mediated a resolution in a follow-up dispute with its vendors/subcontractors and consultants.
Pierce Atwood represented Portland Pipe Line Corp. in legislative opposition to, and in litigation challenging, an ordinance that prevents the use of its pipeline for transporting certain types of crude oil from Canada to tankers in Portland Harbor. Portland Pipe Line Corp. withdrew the lawsuit in July 2021.
In a case that should be of interest to manufacturers and distributors, and especially to suppliers of building products, Pierce Atwood’s class action defense team defeated class certification in a building products case in the District of Massachusetts. Plaintiffs alleged defective design and manufacture of decking sold by our client. After extensive fact and expert discovery, Plaintiffs filed a motion for class certification, and a hearing was held. On September 21, 2015, District Judge Denise Casper issued her decision denying Plaintiffs’ motion, ruling that individualized issues of causation and injury precluded findings of commonality, typicality and adequacy under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(a). The judge based her ruling, in part, on evidence that only a small percentage of purchasers had reported problems with the decking, and that almost all of the warranty claims those purchasers submitted had been honored.
John Bulman has been asked to serve as an arbitrator in a consumer dispute based on the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act regarding alleged violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act and breach of contract.
Defense of a financial institution in U.S. District Court in Massachusetts in an employment action brought by former employees alleging deceptive employment practices.
Anne Meade v. S.D. Warren, et al. 00-018, Somerset County Superior Court, Maine, Docket No. CV-00-018. Mass tort case (not a class action) arising from a “cancer cluster,” alleging damages for personal injuries and illnesses allegedly resulting, inter alia, from exposure to toxic or harmful chemicals disposed of, emitted, or released at or from the Central Maine Disposal Corporation Landfill in Fairfield, Maine.
The litigation attorneys in our Augusta office successfully defended a mechanical services company in connection with work done on a hydroelectric facility.
In a putative class action in Maine Superior Court filed on behalf of borrowers with mortgages allegedly discharged improperly by Bank of America, Pierce Atwood helped the bank obtain a voluntary dismissal of all claims in the face of the bank’s motion for summary judgment. Quebbeman v. Bank of America, N.A., Maine Superior Court No. BCD-CV-15-01 (Order dated November 9, 2015).
We successfully defended a major retailer in parallel federal multi-district and state level class actions after a data security breach resulted in exposure of electronic payment card data.
