“THEY ARE VERY OPEN, COMPLETELY TRANSPARENT, AND HELPFUL IN GUIDING ME THROUGH ALL THE STEPS.”
In an era when many big firms and litigation boutiques view trials as uncommon or occasional events, Verrill’s Litigation & Trial Group offers unparalleled hands-on experience in actual trials. At last count, our team had tried more than 600 jury and non-jury cases, in addition to handling several hundred arbitrations and thousands of mediations and administrative proceedings.
Whether handling an antitrust case, defending directors and officers in a significant shareholder derivative action involving a major corporation, litigating multiparty real estate transactions, or resolving cases arising from complicated contractual and business disputes, we have handled it. We take on cases where the stakes are high and the issues are complex. Our background in litigating high-profile cases allows us to rapidly identify and focus on the key factors that affect a dispute.
Litigation is a dynamic process. Law is constantly evolving. We keep apprised of the latest developments and verdicts across the country. We anticipate appellate issues and plan the best strategy to safeguard our clients’ legal position.
Capacity
With more than 40 attorneys and 10 paralegals, our team has the capacity to take on the most complex matters across a broad range of industries. Matters are staffed according to complexity and exposure. While Verrill relies on associates and paraprofessionals as appropriate, our partners are involved in the day-to-day management and work of our clients’ cases.
Technology
We have invested in and rely heavily on technology to assist in the efficient management of cases. Our paralegals use leading-edge discovery and trial software portfolios (including Ipro Eclipse, Relativity, Catalyst, Eclipse SE, and Trial Director), enabling the team to handle, for example, a recent case involving over 30 million documents and 1.5 terabytes of data.
We leverage technology for efficient and in-depth legal research. We use an internal document management system (iManage) that is widely considered to be best-in-class. We also have an extensive library of pleadings from prior cases and a centralized bank of research memos.
Geographic Reach
Although our firm is based in New England, we try cases throughout the country. Most of our attorneys are licensed in several states, and we often have the opportunity to appear on a pro hac vice basis in those jurisdictions where we are not already licensed.
Our clients expect excellence in the work we do and the results we achieve. We accept nothing less for ourselves. Whether our Trial Group is engaged to protect a client’s interests before suit is commenced, during the litigation, or on the eve of trial, or we are hired to advocate for a client on appeal, we provide experienced counsel to our clients when they need it most.
Litigation & Trial Services
People
Experience
Verrill successfully represented Hudson Meridian Construction Group, LLC in defeating breach of contract and promissory estoppel claims totaling more than $1.7 million arising from alleged agreements for labor and materials on a Connecticut multifamily project. Following summary judgment dismissing the plaintiffs’ Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act and good-faith claims, the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut entered judgment for Hudson after trial on all remaining...
Verrill attorneys were victorious in defending against a special motion to dismiss filed by business competitors in a case with claims for unfair and deceptive business practices and abuse of process. Bristol Asphalt Co., Inc. v. Rochester Bituminous Products, Inc., 493 Mass. 539 (2024). The SJC used the case to clarify and simplify the legal framework that Massachusetts Courts use for evaluating a special motion to dismiss filed under the Anti-SLAPP Statute. The SJC has been focused on...
Verrill successfully represented an insurer before the U.S. District Court for the District of Maine in an insurance coverage matter alleging that the insurer improperly denied a defense and indemnification to a landlord under a homeowner’s policy. The landlord was sued for invading his tenant’s privacy. The District Court entered summary judgment for the insurer. The Court determined that the landlord’s actions and the tenant’s ensuing emotional distress were not an “accident”...
In a victory for consumers and the ride-hailing public, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court recently barred the Secretary of State from placing on the November ballot initiative petitions proposed by companies such as Uber, Lyft, and Doordash that sought to insulate them from liability for automobile accidents and other wrongs committed by their drivers. The consumers were represented by Thomas Bean and Sarah Grossnickle from Verrill Dana LLP and M. Patrick Moore from Hemenway & Barnes...
Argued and won case at the Supreme Judicial Court regarding the extension of deadlines under the Wetlands Protection Act and establishing standard of review for Enforcement Orders.
Handled and won multiple cases at the Appeals Court including case in which the Appeals Court upheld a tuition award against a student who did not have residency in the district while attending the public school and a case in which the Appeals Court upheld the zoning decision of a local board.
Resources
