CONSIDER WHAT'S AT STAKE. OBJECTIVES MATTER. RESULTS MATTER. YOU NEED A BALLPLAYER WHO’S BEEN THERE BEFORE, SOMEONE WHO CAN READ THE SIGNALS AND MAKE THE PLAY.

WHAT IS THE MACKIEWICZ LAW DIFFERENCE? Being driven to make the law work for clients and doing so by uniquely resolving legal issues in transactions and lawsuits, that is the difference. In transactions, be they buy sell agreements, stock sale agreements, employee handbooks, member rights appreciation agreements, representing lenders with collateral such as land leases, third party stock accounts or even workouts where the security is as diverse as jet fuselages and engines, the attorney’s role is the same: Look forward, identify possible problems and address them in the documents. Lawsuits look backwards. The facts are known; how they are applied is what matters. Having years of experience as general counsel creating innovative approaches for when things go wrong instructs on how to draft documents when things come together.  Below is a sample of matters previously handled.

HERE IS A SAMPLING OF MY RESULTS:

TASK AT HAND: Establish that labor and delivery for a pregnant mother is not an injury.

STAKES: Multimillion dollar exposures to bank.

THE UNIQUE APPROACH: 6-month pregnant bank teller fell off chair and that evening went into premature labor delivering newborn with cerebral palsy. A year into liability case insurer filed declaratory judgment action against bank claiming policy exclusion denies coverage where there is injury to a parent that injures a child. Focus was placed ng on the point pregnancy results in a mother=s labor and delivery and is never an injury to her though premature labor and delivery may be a separate injury to the infant; and two, the policy language used the term child and it is unclear if while in utero one is a child.

OUTCOME: Court granted bank summary judgment and awarded attorney fees.

TASK AT HAND: Stymie claw back claim by international financial services firm’s CEO.

STAKES: $70,000 in alleged overpayment and unquantifiable exposure to client’s reputation.

THE UNIQUE APPROACH: Suit by CEO of international financial company to recover 10% of total bill on an uber elaborate vacation.  CEO had a choice: Being financially knowledgeable and lose, or feign ignorance in hopes to win.  This was exploited.  On cross examination, the CEO chose the latter, testifying to his having a MBA from NYU’s Stern School but did not know how to calculate gross profit margin. This testimony, the Times of London later observed in its business section, was “humiliating” and “embarrassing”.  

OUTCOME: Following trial Court entered judgment denying request to claw back any sums.

TASK AT HAND: Avoid liability for dismissing employee who revealed being HIV positive.

STAKES: $300,000.

THE UNIQUE APPROACH: Restaurant owner was charged for discrimination for dismissing employee who informed being positive for HIV. Claim brought before EEOC in Connetticut.  Demanded EEOC mediation and through that process demonstrated that the claim was not only unfounded but from a public safety standpoint there was a larger issue.

OUTCOME: Claim resolved in mediation for payment of negligible costs.

TASK AT HAND: Getting permission to build a castle on the sand.

STAKES: Multimillion dollar real estate project.

THE UNIQUE APPROACH: After developer was denied approval for ocean front project the law firm stepped in on the appeal.  In court proved municipality had not conducted the statutorily mandated master plan reexamination.  

OUTCOME: Approval was secured for development of municipality’s first ever ocean front midrise building.

TASK AT HAND: Make lender know you can’t take owner’s wife.

STAKES: $185,000.

THE UNIQUE APPROACH: Default judgment had been entered against business and its owner as well as on personal guarantees of owner and his wife.  However, lender violated Regulation B applicable to banks by having required the loan to the company be guaranteed to a nonowner spouse, and also that the damages calculated were incorrect since, in part, the attorney fee was not actual but a percentage.

OUTCOME: Vacated default judgment against husband and wife, caused suit against wife to be dismissed and crafted a successful workout payment plan for business and husband.

TASK AT HAND: Defend when insurance doesn’t and holding insurance professionals responsible.

STAKES: Multimillion dollar wrongful death claim.

THE UNIQUE APPROACH: Radiologist and radiology lab moved to new insurer.  Tail insurance was not offered nor purchased.  Estate of 17-year-old sued several health care professionals including lab and radiologist as to which it claimed they failed to properly report of mass on decedents chest. Defended main claim and sued insurance agent and agency for professional negligence.  

OUTCOME: Gained dismissal on suit by estate against radiology lab and radiologist on claim of untimely reporting test results and then successfully concluded coverage claim against insurer and agent.

TASK AT HAND: From documenting a transaction, to lawsuit, to arbitration and then victory.

STAKES: $300,000.

THE UNIQUE APPROACH: Client with substantial public works contract was selling business to competitor.  Purchaser refused to pay up front and required that payment be over time and tied to revenue derived from contract.  Negotiated and obtained clause that if ever a payment is made on contract and proportionate payment to client is not made then full amount is accelerated.  Default occurred. Streamlined process by using New York procedure of summary judgment in lieu of complaint which brought forward arbitration.

OUTCOME: Three-member AAA arbitration awarded full sum as well as all attorney fees and thereafter successfully defended outcome against claim of arbiter misconduct. 

TASK AT HAND:  Recognizing that when neighbor goes client must go high.

STAKES: Multimillion dollar pending sales on all condominium units.

THE UNIQUE APPROACH: Condominium developer could not complete sales because one side of building’s exterior was not completed since adjoining property owner refused to give access to set up scaffolding.  Client was told by other attorneys a law suit was necessary to compel compliance and it could take months or longer. Recognizing that under New Jersey law trespass does not occur when crossing over air rights, recommendation was made to use hanging scaffolding to complete siding by suspending the scaffolding from building’s roof and lowering along the side being sure not to touch the ground.

OUTCOME: In less than two days, and despite the neighbor calling the authorities and local politicians, the siding was installed, closings of the contracted unit sales occurred and a lawsuit was averted.

TASK AT HAND: Making the title make the difference.

STAKES: $100,000.

THE UNIQUE APPROACH: Action by purchaser of luxury sports car that bank lien was invalid since purchaser, who took possession without title, was a bona fide purchaser for value.  Though New Jersey gives preference to bona fide purchasers for value of used cars who take possession without a title from a dealer, an exception exists if the sale is by one auto dealer to another.  Through deposition proved the buyer used an intermediary acknowledged as being a dealer.

OUTCOME: Successfully obtained summary judgment.  Following decision buyer requested representation in malpractice action against former counsel.  Request was denied.

TASK AT HAND: Know when to use numbers to create strength.

STAKES: $500,000 of debt.

THE UNIQUE APPROACH: Portfolio of over 20 defaulted time share sales acquired through merger. Joined all borrowers in one lawsuit and served each with pleadings and all discovery demands including interrogatories, document demands, demand for admissions and deposition notices.  Since sums due on each were $20,000 or less, and obligations carried an attorney fee provision, this procedure increased borrower’s upfront costs to retain counsel that in turn compelled compliance.

OUTCOME: Collected all sums within less than 9 months either through full payout or payment plans.

TASK AT HAND: Letting adversary’s attorney’s aggressiveness do the work.

STAKES: Cessation of new business and damages with legal fees.

THE UNIQUE APPROACH: Client chose to expand and hired employee from competitor to jump start campaign.  Competitor instituted emergent application in Southern District of New York to enjoin employee from proceeding. Coordinated matter with attorney for employee and focused on the lack of unique qualities the employer raised as its customer list and trade secrets.  Also learned employer’s attorneys may have intimidated witnesses which was exploited and raised ire of the District Court Judge causing claim to be withdrawn.

OUTCOME: Case dismissed, employee hired and business flourished.