Trial and Class Action Print PDF
PIB Law's litigation team represents a wide variety of clients – including Fortune 500 companies – in all aspects of litigation across the country. We handle trials and appeals in state and federal courts, as well as arbitration and mediation. We also act as business counselors, providing advice on the prevention of claims and avoidance of litigation. We provide critical guidance at all stages of a business dispute, allowing us to place our clients in the best possible position to obtain a favorable result.
The Firm stresses a team approach to resolve our clients' litigation issues. Our team has the judgment, experience, and resources to make candid assessments of our clients' circumstances and needs, to recommend the best course of action consistent with our clients' goals, and to maximize every opportunity for successful results.
While we are always prepared to go to trial when necessary, we recognize that our clients' primary goal is usually dispute resolution. We are dedicated to resolving our clients' business disputes in the most effective and efficient way possible.
- Retained by a global insurer after it was hit with a $59M punitive damages verdict to re-try the punitive damages phase. Successfully avoided punitive damages in the re-trial.
- Defended the world’s largest seller of heavy construction equipment in a consumer class action, in which we successfully defeated class certification under the Song Beverly Credit Card Act of 1971 and B&P Code 17200 in a published decision establishing that the SBCCA did not apply to business credit cards and narrowing the standing requirements for asserting B&P Code 17200 claims.
- Successfully defended the second largest cable company in the nation in a highly watched multi-million dollar fraud suit, which challenged the auction process utilized for television advertising industry wide.
- Obtained a defense verdict for a large insurance brokerage firm alleging disability discrimination, failure to engage in the interactive process, and failure to accommodate under the ADA, after a seven week trial that included testimony from 12 expert witnesses.
News & Insights
- New York’s Chief Administrative Judge Announces Lifting of Ban on Filing New, Non-Essential Matters in New York City and Surrounding Counties05.21.2020
- New York’s Appellate Division, Second Department Issues New Administrative Order Rescinding Administrative Order 2020-0317.2, and Setting New Deadlines for All Pending Motions05.08.2020
- Federal Court Decision: No Private Right of Action Under the CARES Act, and Lenders May Impose Restrictions on Loan Eligibility04.22.2020
- New York’s Appellate Division, Second Department Expands Its Virtual Operations; Transition to a “Virtual Court Model” Is “Nearly Complete”04.15.2020
- Administrative Order 85/20 Formalizes Memorandum from New York’s Chief Administrative Judge Regarding Partial Resumption of “Non-Essential” Court Proceedings04.10.2020
- PIB Law Obtains Favorable Ruling from Pennsylvania Superior Court Affirming Summary Judgment Motion in Mortgage Foreclosure ActionThe PIB Legal Blog, 05.20.2019
- New Jersey’s Appellate Division Rejects Foreclosure Defendant’s Argument that a Reinstatement Quote Is an Enforceable and Binding Settlement AgreementThe PIB Legal Blog, 04.04.2019
- U.S. Supreme Court Grants Certiorari to Resolve Split over the Statute of Limitations Period under the Fair Debt Collection Practices ActThe PIB Legal Blog, 03.08.2019
Areas Of Concentration
- Advertising and Marketing
- Appellate Litigation
- Arbitration, Mediation and Alternative Dispute Resolution
- Brand and Product Litigation
- Class Actions
- Commercial Litigation
- Construction Law
- Consumer Financial Services
- Corporate Compliance and Internal Investigations
- Crisis Management
- Intellectual Property Litigation
- Investment Management Litigation
- Patent Litigation
- Privacy and Cyber Security
- Real Estate
- Sweepstakes and Promotion Law
- Trade Secrets
- Trademark Prosecution, Litigation and Portfolio Management
- Unfair Competition