Venezuelan Warrant Recovery. Phil was litigation counsel for several hedge funds which recovered all warrants that failed to settle as part of a market operations failure dating back to the 1990s when the warrants were first attached to bonds issued in connection with the South American debt restructuring. {See, e.g., Ellington v. HSBC, USDC, SDNY, Dkt. No.1:06-cv-2353}

Corporate Dissolution. Phil successfully pursued, through hearing and award before the AAA, client’s claim for 50% interest in corporation, also defeating respondent’s counterclaim for a “partnership” interest in client’s separate real estate investments alleged to have been funded jointly. (Denslow v. Wood-Smith, AAA Case No. 19-180-00222-04.

Environmental Defense. Through protracted litigation, Phil was able to convince the Attorney General’s office that municipality’s relative culpability in operation of and dumping at the site would lead to an equitable contribution by municipality well in excess of EPA guidelines, reducing all PRP’s contribution from $2.6 million to $420 thousand, and client’s share to $151,250.00. (NYS v. Ametek, USDC, SDNY, Docket No. 7:05-cv-02186 (SCR)(LS)

Wireless Warranty Settlement. Phil was lead trial counsel in a major retailer’s multi-million dollar dispute with a wireless phone warranty provider. His and the firm’s efforts were instrumental in a confidential settlement of the case the day before jury selection in federal court.

Antitrust. Phil obtained summary judgment dismissing Price Fixing, Group Boycott and Business Tort claims against multiple clients, with the exception of a breach of fiduciary duty claim against one client. Plaintiff sought dismissal of that claim subject to reinstatement, if plaintiff were successful on appeal. Phil convinced the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals that it had no jurisdiction over such a non-final dismissal. Plaintiff was left with no right to appeal or reinstate any claim. {Wine Markets International, Inc. et al. v. Bass, et al., USDC, NDCA, Dkt. No. 3:98-cv-03807}

Employment Law. Appearing after an adverse mid-six digit verdict of race discrimination against one of his clients, Phil had the verdict reversed on appeal and proceeded through two weeks of the retrial before a jury in Brooklyn, when the plaintiff settled for merely 20% of the original verdict.

Catastrophic Personal Injury Defense. In addition to other defense verdicts and pre-verdict settlements, Phil obtained a defense verdict in a notable catastrophic injury case. Testimony from defense witnesses shown to be admissible as excited utterances, expert testimony that the mechanism of injury was inconsistent with plaintiff’s and another eye witness’s account, and Phil’s arguments were all credited by the jury. Pre-closing demand $1,500,000. {Kassim v. NYCTA, NYSup.Ct., Queens, Index No. 18874/93 - NY Jury Verdict Reporter XIX/35-18, March 4, 2002}