Published Cases

Our firm’s member has litigated many noteworthy cases, such as the following:

• JLM Chems., Inc. v. Summit Resource Group, Inc., No. 08-CV-10296, 2009 WL 1108662 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 24, 2009). In a worldwide chemical distribution company’s action against an out-of-state distribution company and its president for breach of a six-figure contract for the sale of goods, fraud, and conspiracy, David S. Rich successfully moved to dismiss the complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction.
• Barron Partners, LP v. Lab123, Inc., No. 07-CV-11135, 2009 WL 129043 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 20, 2009). In a hedge fund’s securities fraud action alleging that the seller entities deceitfully induced it to invest in a new public company, Mr. Rich, on the hedge fund’s behalf, successfully moved to dismiss, for failure to state a claim, the sellers’ fraud and negligent misrepresentation counterclaims.
• Barron Partners, LP v. Lab123, Inc., No. 07-CV-11135, 2008 WL 2902187 (S.D.N.Y. July 25, 2008). In a hedge fund’s securities fraud action alleging that the seller entities deceitfully induced it to invest in a new public company, Mr. Rich, on the hedge fund’s behalf, successfully opposed the seller entities’ motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim.
• United States ex rel. John Glover v. Federation of Protestant Welfare Agencies, No. 05-CV-6522 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 5, 2008) (oral opinion). In a qui tam and retaliatory discharge action under the federal False Claims Act by a terminated executive of a federally funded social service agency, Mr. Rich and a colleague successfully opposed the defendant agency’s summary judgment motion.
• Pastore v. Witco Corporation Severance Plan, 196 Fed.Appx. 18, 2006 WL 2335161 (2d Cir. 2006). In an ERISA action to recover severance benefits, Mr. Rich appealed from the District Court’s order granting summary judgment dismissing a participant’s complaint. The Second Circuit vacated in most respects the District Court’s order and remanded for further proceedings, vindicating Mr. Rich’s contention that the plan administrator acted arbitrarily and capriciously in denying benefits to the participant.