In a dispute involving a 17-year business relationship between companies in the plastic film industry, firm attorneys prevailed at trial and on appeal in this breach-of-contract case. When a firm client suspected it was being shortchanged by its materials supplier, the future of their small family business was at stake. Pierce Atwood stepped in and helped convince a jury in Rhode Island federal court to award $2 million in lost profits to our client and ensure that the 17-year contract would remain in force. The award and the contract helped ensure the future of this small business.

We successfully tried a NASDAQ-listed company's claims against an ASIC developer who had contracted to develop the client's next generation product. The 14 person jury returned a unanimous verdict in favor of our client for $36.7 million in damages, which is believed to be the largest verdict ever from a state court jury in Massachusetts. The jury also returned a verdict for the client rejecting the developer's approximately $7 million in counterclaims.

John Bulman has been appointed sole arbitrator in an AAA large complex case dispute relating to the engineering, design, procurement and construction of a power plant in the Eastern U.S.

Pierce Atwood won an insurance coverage appeal to the Massachusetts Appeals Court for our client, an insured food processing company. The appeal turned on the issue of whether an unexplained cause of damage to property constitutes an “occurrence” under a commercial general liability (CGL) insurance policy. The appeals court reversed summary judgment that the trial court entered in favor of the insurer, and remanded the matter to the trial court for further proceedings. The decision is significant because it is the first in the country where the court ruled that an insured’s liability based on application of the res ipsa loquitur doctrine could be sufficient to establish an “occurrence” under a CGL policy, despite not knowing the actual cause of damage. This is an important decision that is extremely beneficial to policy holders.

Represented US entity in distributorship dispute with UK company and its US sales and marketing subsidiary.  The matter was administered by ICDR and arbitrated in Rhode Island. Issues concerned reaching the correct respondent (which had approximately 13 related companies).  Received award for 100% of damages, plus attorney’s fees under Rhode Island statute, plus interest, and had the correct respondent liable for the award.  The matter is now in collection in the UK, which administers such awards under the New York Convention.

John Bulman has been appointed to chair an arbitration panel regarding a large complex dispute involving development of a new petrochemical plant.

Represented one of two partners in partnership dispute pertaining to operation of P&C personal lines insurance agency.  Ultimately we secured an agreement to arbitrate the dispute, addressing liability and then issues of valuation for a divorce between the partners.  Secured findings in favor of our client and very successful award of damages (high six figures) for his interest in the agency.

John Bulman is serving as an arbitrator in a matter relating to the construction of a natural gas-fueled combined-cycle generating facility in New England.

John Bulman has been appointed the sole arbitrator in a large complex construction dispute involving a multi-unit residential condominium development project located in suburban Boston.

Represented a construction manager seeking payment for labor and materials (plus profit) provided to a luxury condominium developer, prior to termination. Required to prove that the termination was for convenience and then to prove damages, which was challenging due to the manner in which financial records were maintained.  The developer offered nothing to settle until first day of hearings, when he offered slightly less than $1 million.  Ultimately an award was issued providing for payment to construction manager of slightly more than $5 million, representing almost a 100% recovery plus interest.

Represented the developer of limited service hotel in dispute with construction manager, leading to construction manager’s termination of the contract, arguing material breaches by the developer. The matter went through mediation and then arbitration with award being issued in favor of developer for cover. The proceeding also involved peripheral disputes with various trades who had liens on the project.

Pierce Atwood represents a large national bank in an overdraft fee MDL pending in the District of South Carolina.  During the course of the representation, we obtained dismissal of plaintiffs’ claims based on the bank’s past practice of ordering debits from high to low, and of usury claims based on the bank’s assessment of additional fees after a customer’s checking account continues to have a negative balance ten business days after the initial overdraft.  In addition, we successfully opposed plaintiffs’ motion to certify a class seeking actual damages for alleged violation of the Electronic Funds Transfer Act. 

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.

Defended a representative of Fidelity Investments in a deposition. 

Defense of a financial institution in U.S. District Court in Massachusetts in an employment action brought by former employees alleging deceptive employment practices.

Defended a gaming company in litigation over an alleged breach of a multi-million dollar royalty agreement.

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.

Defended individual against State of Maine criminal enforcement action for alleged illegal disposal and treatment of hazardous wastes.

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.

Prevailed on summary judgment to obtain dismissal of privacy tort claims against a major supermarket.

On behalf of North America’s largest vinyl siding manufacturer, we recently obtained dismissal of breach of warranty and consumer protection claims in a putative nationwide class action filed in the Northern District of New York.  The court held that the four named plaintiffs’ claims were not subject to personal jurisdiction in New York, and based its decision in part on the Supreme Court’s 2017 decision in Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court.

We represented a check processing company and its debt collector affiliate in a series of putative class actions filed in California, Kansas, Maine, New York, and North Carolina, and consolidated in Multi-District Litigation in the District of Maine.  After obtaining dismissal of all of the lawsuits originally filed outside of Maine, we negotiated a favorable nationwide class action settlement for our client of all remaining claims.

John Bulman is currently sitting on a Dispute Review Board for a nuclear power plant construction project. Industry professionals are chosen to sit on Dispute Review Boards by the interested parties involved with a construction project for their experience, their independence, their commitment to the project, and their training as mediators and arbitrators. 

Lead counsel in obtaining dismissal of employment claims against hotel operator in U.S. District Court in Boston.

Obtained dismissal of employment discrimination claims against a hotel management company.

We received two favorable appellate decisions on behalf of our developer client, Montrose School Park, LLC, in a series of cases challenging permits for a residential cluster development in Beverly, Massachusetts. Browne v. Conservation Commission of Beverly, 85 Mass. App. Ct. 1121 (2014) (unpublished) and Browne v. Planning Board of Beverly, 91 Mass. App. Ct. 1125 (2017) (unpublished).

We received a favorable trial decision from the Superior Court on behalf of our client, 246 Main Street Realty, LLC, holding that the plaintiffs failed to prove adverse possession of a portion of the parking lot for the client’s commercial building.

In a matter recognized by Rhode Island Lawyers Weekly as one of the most important opinions of 2012, we obtained a favorable order for a general contractor seeking to enforce an Ohio arbitration clause. The matter was of particular importance because it was the first time a court concluded that the Federal Arbitration Act preempted a Rhode Island statute that prohibits out-of-state arbitration in certain construction matters.

Pierce Atwood obtained a favorable outcome for our clients at the First Circuit Court of Appeals in Penobscot Nation v. Mills, the case brought by the Penobscot Indian Nation asserting control over the use and water quality of the Penobscot River in Maine. On June 30, 2017, by a 2-1 vote, the First Circuit panel affirmed the Maine U.S. District Court’s ruling that the tribe’s claims are barred by the 1980 Maine Indian Claims Settlement Act. The First Circuit majority also rejected the tribe’s claim that the state has interfered with the tribe’s sustenance fishing rights. Pierce Atwood represents a coalition of municipal and private wastewater discharge licensees on the Penobscot River.

Obtained a favorable settlement for an owner of a spiritual retreat facility against its contractor and design professionals through a seven-party mediation following an incident that involved a burst sprinkler pipe, substantial property damage, and discovery of pervasive latent construction defects. Before the mediation, Pierce Atwood worked closely with the owner and the owner’s representatives to review the defective conditions and press for performance of the remedial work by the construction and design professionals.  Multiple demands on the contractor’s performance bond had to be made to ensure performance of the corrective and incomplete work.  Once the work was completed, Pierce Atwood represented the owner in the multi-party mediation that dealt with challenging issues involving construction defects with the fire protection system, reimbursement for additional costs due to the delayed project, complex insurance coverage issues (including with the owner’s property insurer), contract terms (waiver of subrogation, waiver of consequential damages), continuing warranty obligations, and the scope and finality of the release. At the end of the mediation process, the owner was paid for costs it incurred during the delayed project and it paid nothing against the claims submitted by its contractor and design professionals.

We obtained a favorable trial verdict for our client Synectic Software Solutions, Inc., software developer and maker of VendSys Vending Management System, in a copyright and trade secrets lawsuit brought by Gimme Vending, LLC.  The case related to a failed business relationship concerning the attempted integration of Gimme's Bluetooth hardware with Synectic's handheld software.  When Synectic successfully integrated with a competing Bluetooth device maker, Gimme filed suit alleging that Synectic copied its software.  After an expedited trial on the merits completed less than a month after Gimme filed suit, the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts rejected Gimme’s claims of copyright infringement, misappropriation of trade secrets, unfair competition and breach of the parties’ license agreement, and ruled that Gimme was not entitled to any monetary damages.  

First Circuit Affirms Challenge to Local Ordinance Restricting Competition on City Projects: In a case of first impression, and on behalf of Merit Construction Alliance and its members, we successfully challenged the enforcement by the City of Quincy (Mass.) of the residency, apprenticeship and health and welfare benefits provisions of its so-called “Responsible Employer Ordinance” in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts. The First Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court's ruling, holding that the Responsible Employer Ordinance (REO) is unconstitutional under the Privileges and Immunities Clause of the U.S. Constitution, and is preempted by the federal Employee Retirement Income Security Act. The decision has wide-ranging implications, as there are some 20 or more municipalities in the Commonwealth with similar ordinances, which are now vulnerable because they are arguably unenforceable.

The First Circuit affirmed summary judgment for our client Standard Insurance Company in a disability benefits case. The court held that Standard was not liable for payments of benefits to treat Chronic Lyme Disease beyond the 24 month limitation period set by the ERISA plan for limited physical and mental conditions.

In two separate class actions, in which Pierce Atwood separately represented Unum Life Insurance Company and Sun Life Assurance Company, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit held that using Retained Asset Accounts (RAAs) to pay death benefits claims on group life insurance policies does not violate the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), where the policies either require or permit payment by RAA.

Representation of Homefront Health Care in seeking appointment of a Receiver.

We received a favorable trial decision from the Land Court on behalf of a private client, overturning a special permit that authorized an abutting owner to replace a residential cottage on Nantucket Harbor with a commercial use.

Pierce Atwood partner Michael Daly successfully represented an insured food processing company in an appeal before the Massachusetts Appeals Court to obtain insurance coverage for accidentally damaging its customer’s product.  The appeal turned on the issue of whether an unexplained cause of damage to property constitutes an “occurrence” under a commercial general liability (CGL) insurance policy.

We represented a leading energy provider in mediation of approximately $150 million in related claims by two contractors arising out of a $1.55 billion transmission line construction project.  The claims arose from an allegation that environmental compliance on the project was overly restrictive, leading to both delay and significantly increased costs of compliance.  After two days of mediation per claim that included presentations by expert witnesses, we resolved the disputes for a fraction of the requested amount. 

John Bulman mediated a dispute over an interstate highway construction project between a state department of transportation (DOT) and a regional heavy contractor. 

John Bulman mediated a four-party property damage subrogation action currently pending in Massachusetts Federal Court.

Since 2017, Pierce Atwood has represented Avangrid Networks, Inc. and its affiliates CMP and NECEC Transmission LLC on all aspects of the development of the New England Clean Energy Connect (NECEC), a $1 billion, 147-mile high-voltage direct current transmission line that will interconnect the New England transmission system with the Hydro-Quebec (HQ) transmission system at the Canadian border in western Maine. The NECEC will deliver 1,200 MW of hydropower generated by Hydro-Quebec to the New England grid around the clock for at least 40 years. As found by the Maine PUC, this project promises to reduce the cost of electricity in Maine and New England by tens of millions of dollars each year, increase the reliability of the New England electric grid, and reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 3.0-3.6 million metric tons annually (the equivalent of removing 700,000 cars from the road).

We successfully defended our clients Turner Construction Company and Stryker Biotech in a case that settled important issues of contract and evidence law affecting New Hampshire litigants. In Axenics, Inc. v. Turner Construction Company the New Hampshire Supreme Court ruled in favor of our clients that (1) a subcontractor cannot bring an unjust enrichment claim against an owner who has paid the general contractor in full, and (2) internal memoranda, work product, or other materials created for the purpose of settlement cannot be used at trial as evidence of liability or damages, even if they are never conveyed to the other side. This hotly-contested case came to the Supreme Court on appeal of a $1 million-plus judgment for the plaintiff-subcontractor, after an eighteen-day bench trial before Merrimack County Superior Court and Business and Commercial Dispute Docket Judge Richard McNamara.

John Bulman mediated a P3 (public-private partnership) dispute relating to a transportation infrastructure project in the Western U.S.

Served as chair of a panel addressing the termination of construction manager on a major biophysics research building.  Beyond overseeing highly contentious proceedings, issued lengthy decision construing scope of section 4-61 of the Connecticut General Statutes, the Connecticut dispute resolution law pertaining to this public construction contract.  Decision was subject to judicial review and was affirmed.

Lead counsel in obtaining dismissal of federal and state privacy claims against a large retailer in U.S. District Court in Boston.

Represented S.D. Warren (now known as Sappi North America) as Petitioner both on brief and orally in this U.S. Supreme Court case concerning the ability of state environmental agencies under the Clean Water Act to regulate federally licensed hydroelectric dams.

A single mother and her three children are able to stay in safe, suitable housing thanks to our attorneys. After our client lost her Housing Choice Voucher (Section 8) following a faulty administrative hearing, we were able to secure a new hearing before an attorney who is well-versed in the program and applicable HUD regulations. Thanks to our pro bono counsel, our client’s voucher has been restored and she and her family can stay in their home.

Pierce Atwood, along with Eimer Stahl LLP, represented Citgo Petroleum Corp. as one of the defendants in State of Rhode Island v. Atlantic Richfield Co. et al., case number 1:17-cv-00204, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island. In April 2022, Citgo, Shell Oil Co. and Sunoco Inc., agreed to pay a combined $15 million settlement to resolve Rhode Island's claims against the companies, without admitting to the state's allegations.

We recently represented a bank in a putative nationwide and statewide class action concerning student loan services filed in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.  After we and counsel for other defendants filed motions to compel individual arbitration, the case was settled on favorable terms.

Pierce Atwood successfully represented the Maine House Republicans and the Maine Heritage Policy Center before the Maine Supreme Judicial Court regarding the validity of Maine’s ranked-choice voting law. In a first-in-the nation ruling, the SJC unanimously agreed with our argument that the ranked-choice voting law was unconstitutional because it violated the Maine Constitution’s plurality vote requirement. The ruling has national implications for proposed ranked choice voting laws in states that have similar constitutional provisions.  

In an action concerning a commercial lease dispute brought against our client J.C. Penney by its landlord, we prevailed on a motion to dismiss in Maine federal court. The court affirmed that Maine law does not include an implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and, accordingly, that J.C. Penney did not violate any such covenant in the course of its commercial relationship with the landlord.

Represented one of three siblings in a dispute pertaining to care of mother with dementia and matters regarding handling of trust funds by one of the two brothers. We had the dispute stayed, pending mediation/arbitration, under which mediation occurred on the first day and when it failed, the matter immediately proceeded to arbitration before the same person who had been mediator. We received a total win for our client who was named solely responsible for the mother’s medical care, plus was given sole authority over the trusts. Brother was also ordered to reimburse the trusts for payments improperly made to himself and his wife while he managed finances.

Pierce Atwood delivered a successful outcome to the regional sewer authority Narragansett Bay Commission (NBC) at an American Arbitration Association (AAA) construction arbitration relating to a claim that a differing site condition impacted the installation of a concrete drop shaft.  The 30-foot diameter drop shaft was 220 feet deep and connected to the NBC’s one-mile long retention tunnel designed to capture sewerage that historically flowed into Narragansett Bay during rain storms.  During the contractor’s grouting operations at an adjacent structure, the contractor’s drop shaft experienced a large amount of water intrusion (up to 250 gallons per minute).  The contractor spent $1.1 million to pump out the water and seal the concrete walls of its drop shaft.  Pierce Atwood attorneys John Bulman and Katie Kohm handled the defense and the hearings before the panel of three AAA arbitrators.  The arbitrators gave credence to Pierce Atwood’s main arguments, found that the contractor failed to carry its burden of proof, and dismissed the contractor’s claim in its entirety.

Served as local counsel to ConocoPhillips in successful defense of CERCLA contribution claims.

Pierce Atwood successfully defended a nationwide nonprofit business association and its for-profit affiliate in a putative class action on behalf of members alleging unfair trade practices, breach of fiduciary duty, breach of contract and misrepresentation; we successfully obtained dismissal of five of seven counts and defeated class certification as to the remaining two counts.