Justia Legal Services & Lawyers Directory

I am a trial lawyer and handle civil cases throughout Massachusetts. I have tried over over 100 cases to a jury verdict. I am experienced in the defense handling of insurance claims in Massachusetts state and federal courts, as well as administrative agencies and appeals.

Significant cases I have defended include:

PRODUCTS LIABILITY. Burgos v. Danly Machine, U.S. District Ct., D.Mass., 17 Verdicts, Settlement and Tactics 361-362, 1997 WL 33345564, Natl. Jury Verdict Rptr. 10:15. Defense verdict for manufacturer of 50 ton power press sued by injured worker struck by metal blanks. Roberge v. Roberge, U.S. District Ct., D.Mass., 1999 WL 33488789, 15 New England Jury Verdict Rptr. 7:C8. Verdict of no defect in defendant's bicycle operated by boy whose jaw was fractured in accident. In DaConceicao v. Tru-Grit, U.S. Dist. Ct., D.Mass. 4/02), a jury returned a verdict of no liability for breach of warranty or negligence against the supplier of a knife-making machine. Summary judgment was granted for the manufacturer in Witte v. Thermold (Worc. Dist. Ct. 7/07) for an injury caused when a shower handle broke.

WRONGFUL TERMINATION. Tuper v. North Adams Ambulance Service, Inc., 428 Mass. 132 (1998). After summary judgment on defamation and tortious interference claims, defense verdict was returned in wrongful termination case. On appeal Mass. Supreme Judicial Court upheld trial ruling that unemployment hearing decision finding employee was discharged without just cause was inadmissible and not binding in later breach of contract suit. Weissman v. Altra Marine Products (U.S. District Court, D.Mass), 1995 WL 1933839, 10 New England Jury Verdict Rptr. 12:6. Favorable verdict against manufacturer sued by representative for breach of agreement, fraud, tortious interference with advantageous relations with customer.

DEFENSE VERDICTS IN REAR-END COLLISIONS. In Rouvellat v. Guarco, 187 F.3d 622 (1st Cir. 1999), a federal jury found a defendant motorist not negligent where plaintiff claimed over $100,000 in medical and wage losses, following refusal of a generous settlement offer at mediation. In Martin v. McKenna, 2005 WL 4397793 (Hampden Super. Ct.), a jury found no negligence despite the admission in evidence that the case was previously tried to a judge who awarded $30,000 and that award was Aprima facie@ evidence in favor of the plaintiff. Similarly, in Mulvey v. Roy, 2006 WL 4654733 (Hampden Super. Ct.), the jury found no negligence on the part of a motorist who rear-ended another vehicle starting a four-car chain collision.

DEFENSE VERDICTS FOR INSURANCE AGENTS/ERRORS & OMISSIONS. In Capozza v. Johnson, 6 Western Mass. Law Trib. 4, 1 (April 2005), 2005 WL 115548 (Hampden Super. Ct.), a jury found the agency did not err in obtaining insurance coverage on a Mercedes, there was a $1.5 million verdict against the co-defendant motorist. Similarly in Greaves v. K-D Agency, 2006 WL 4654729 (Worc. Dist. Ct. 7/06), a jury returned a verdict of no negligence where an insured had reduced his coverages below his mortagage balance and was underinsured for a fire. In Chenevert v. Remillard, 1999 WL 3348883, following an uninsured theft claim a jury found no negligence, deceit or contract breach in the procurement of a homeowners policy. In Miller v. Moulton, (Palmer Dist. Ct. 3/98), a judge entered judgment for the defendant agency following trial on a claim an agent was responsible for an insured being uninsured for a restaurant fire. In Harder v. Cebula, (Palmer Dist Ct. 3/93), a defense finding was entered after trial exonerating an agent for uninsured damages for a boiler loss.

SUMMARY JUDGMENT FOR AGENTS/E&O. In both Leger v. INA, 38 Mass. App. Ct. 1102 (1995), and Grey v. Finn, (Franklin Super. Ct. 11/1/00), an agent was granted summary judgment following an uninsured fire loss. In Lata v. Remillard (Norfolk Super. Ct. 10/29/04), summary judgment was granted on a claim an agent failed to procure sufficient underinsured motorist limits. In Sacadura v. Ideal (Springfield Dist. Ct. 7/04), a directed verdict was granted at trial where a homeowner sued his agent to cover an uninsured dog bite loss.

SUMMARY JUDGMENT IN LEGAL MALPRACTICE CLAIM. In Bratcher v. Moriarty, Donoghue & Leja, P.C., 54 Mass. 111 (2002), the court found no duty existed between the lawyer for the widow in a wrongful death action and the co-administrator of the decedent=s estate.

FAVORABLE VERDICTS FOR AT-FAULT TRUCKING COMPANIES. In Fernandez v. May Trucking Co., 1993 WL 1466090, and Bird v. Lott Trucking, 2001 WL 1041973, jury verdicts were obtained in a nominal amount well below the last offer of settlement. In Digiovanni v. Borden and McCormick v. Borden (U.S. Dist. Ct. 10/92), a jury awarded nominal damages to a mother and daughter claiming injury from a rear-end collision. Similarly, in Gendron v. Waste Management, 2002 Mass. Super. LEXIS 32057895, a jury rejected a claim of permanent disability and awarded only special damages to a plaintiff.

DEFENSE VERDCTS WHERE MOTORIST STRUCK BICYCLIST/PEDESTRIAN. In Evans v. Devereaux Foundation, 1992 WL 1352918, a jury found a motorist who struck a pedestrian in a cross-walk not negligent. In Boyle v. Silluzio, 2005 WL 2148520, the jury found a negligent motorist who struck a bicyclist at an intersection cross-walk was not causally responsible for plaintiff=s damages. In Delmolino v. Doyle (34 Mass. Lawyers Weekly 593, Nov. 7, 2005), a pedestrian struck by a backing motorist in a parking lot was found not negligent.

SUMMARY JUDGMENT FOR NURSING HOME IN WRONGFUL DEATH ACTION. In Fentross v. Geriatric Authority of Holyoke, 2002 Mass. Super. LEXIS 533, a dismissal was obtained for failure to make presentment under torts claims act.

PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT ENFORCING DAMAGES CAP IN BRAIN INJURY CLAIM.In Reynolds v. Williston Northampton School, 2006 Mass. Super. LEXIS 46, court allowed motion for summary judgment enforcing charitable cap on claim of brain injury allegedly suffered by spectator due to premises defect at private school's hockey facility rented to outside group.

DIRECTED VERDICTS. In Roman v. Pulaski Club (Hampden Super. Ct. 10/92), a judge dismissed a negligent security claim against a private club where one patron assaulted another. In Ditto v. Town of Palmer, 1995 WL 1722613, a road defect claim alleged to have caused a motorcycle accident was dismissed at the close of the plaintiff=s evidence.

PREMISES DEFECT CLAIMS. In Lash v. Apollo, 1995 WL 1768599, 10 Nat'l. Jury Verdict Rptr. 7:26, a jury rendered a verdict of no negligence where a deliveryman was claiming $150,000 in special damages and permanent impairment from a fall at allegedly unsafe premises.

DEFENSE VERDICTS OF MOTOR VEHICLE ACCIDENTS. In Glabicki v. Sarad, 1991 WL 1063382, no negligence was found on the part of a truck driver for a broadside accident where plaintiff had significant special damages and permanency. In Antuna v. Bergollo, 2004 Mass. Super. LEXIS 2216614, a jury found no negligence on the part of a motorist who took a right on red and whose vehicle was then struck. In Reyes v. Florence Casket (Springfield Dist. Ct. 5/04), a jury found no negligence on the part of delivery truck alleged to have sideswiped a vehicle backing into a parking spot. In Meadows v. Travel Time, 7 New England Jury Verdict Rptr. 2:16, a bus company was found not negligent by a jury for a disc injury allegedly caused when the bus went over a speed bump at an inappropriate speed.

APPEALS COURT REVERSAL OF PLAINTIFF'S VERDICT. In Gibbons v. Nichols [Tenneco], 1994 Mass. App. Div. 28, the Appellate Court vacated a finding for the plaintiff in an intersection accident and granted a new trial due to judicial error against the defendant.

NEW TRIAL GRANTED IN $1.5M VERDICT. In CIGNA Fire Underwriters Ins. Co. v. MacDonald & Johnson, Inc., 86 F.3d 1260 (1996), a federal judge allowed judgment notwithstanding the verdict of $750,000 on tortious interference counterclaim against insurer, and new trial on breach of contract claim verdict of $500,000, which was reduced to $250,000 on re-trial.

The Law Office of Daniel Karpman, established in 1992, is a full service law firm with offices in Springfield, Massachusetts and Northampton, Massachusetts. We offer personal and cost-effective legal solutions to individuals and businesses.

Attorney Karpman received his law degree from Western New England College School of Law, and has an M.B.A. in Management and Finance from New York University Graduate School of Business.

You can expect the highest quality in legal counsel through personal, responsive, and individualized service. We strive to develop and sustain long-term relationships with our clients by earning their trust and through our steadfast commitment to meeting our clients' legal needs.

Our goal is to practice law with integrity, good judgment, and common sense, while zealously advocating for our clients.

Please visit our website at www.dkarpman.com.

CLICK ON RIGHT TO SEE WEBSITE

I graduated from Washington University in 1985 and obtained my J.D. degree from Northeastern University School of Law in 1988. I clerked for the justices of the Massachusetts Superior Court from 1988-1989 and in 1989 began practicing as an attorney with Burres Fidnick and Booth. I became a partner at what then became Burres Fidnick Booth and Kaufman in 1996. In 2004, after 15 years of working with my law partners I decided to start a solo practice. Since 1989 my practice has concentrated in the area of domestic relations. This includes divorces, paternities, divorce modifications, work with non-traditional families, guardianships.

In 1994, I founded Amherst Mediation Services. My decision to offer mediation as an alternative to the traditional litigation system stemmed from my years of experience in the Probate and Family Court and in particular my concern that in many ways the court system was not the most efficient and best equipped system for handling family crisis such as divorce. Mediation offers participants more control over their own destiny and works to increase rather than discourage communication. Mediation is also far cheaper and often far quicker than traditional litigation. However, mediation is not appropriate in every situation. I continue to provide my clients with legal services. In my capacity as an attorney I provide services which are professional, courteous and sensitive to my clients' financial needs, emotional needs and family situation.

Attorney L. Jed Berliner has practiced in bankruptcy, commercial litigation, creditors' rights and debtor's remedies since 1982, having generally practiced since 1976. He has headed Berliner Law Firm of Springfield, Massachusetts since 1988, which operated a satellite office in Northampton, Massachusetts from 1990 to 2007.

Attorney Berliner received his Bachelor of Arts Degree from Cornell University in 1972 and his Juris Doctor from the University of Kansas in 1977. He now practices exclusively in consumer bankruptcy law and related consumer protection areas.

Professional memberships include the American Bankruptcy Institute, the National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys (conference speaker), The National Association of Chapter 13 Trustees (associate member) and the National Association of Consumer Advocates. Civic duties include participation in the 2007 Financial Literacy Program at South Hadley High School, South Hadley, MA, and serving on the Zoning Board of Appeals for his hometown of Hampden, Massachusetts since 1987 (Chair 1990-2000).

Attorney Berliner is a contributor to LETTERS FOR BANKRUPTCY LAWYERS: ESSENTIAL COMMUNICATIONS FOR CLIENTS, CREDITORS, OPPOSING COUNSEL, AND OTHERS edited by Marc S. Stern and Joel Pelofsky (American Bar Association 2006). He is a founding member of the Bankruptcy Law Network (www.bankruptcylawnetwork.com) and is a regular contributor to the National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys and the Bankruptcy Roundtable, two specialized bankruptcy forums on the Internet. Attorney Berliner is a mentor to bankruptcy practitioners throughout the Commonwealth. He contributed to the local rules on electronic filing rules through his past membership on the initial ad hoc committee, and is recognized by his peers as an expert in consumer bankruptcy issues. He enjoys universally being rated ?excellent” in his client surveys. Among his successes in litigation are the prohibition of foreclosure deficiency notices without an inapplicable-in-bankruptcy legend from Silva v. Harmon, D MA 2003 (CA 01-30140-MAP), and the prohibition of an out-of-state law firm controlling in-state bankruptcy litigation from MBNA v. Steele, Bankr D MA 2003 (02-4137). He changed local practice in 1996 when he successfully argued against payment of a Chapter 7 trustee's fees as a prerequisite for conversion to Chapter 13, and also has successfully challenged (1) the practice of Chapter 13 meetings of creditors being held in Worcester, MA for Springfield, MA cases, (2) Chapter 13 trustee objections to plans having a liquidation analysis with assets valued at a liquidation standard, instead of the higher replacement value standard, and (3) Chapter 13 trustee objections to liquidation analyses using estimated fees of a hypothetical Chapter 7 trustee. Attorney Berliner is at the cutting edge in his region for mortgage defense litigation. He takes his greatest pride in avoiding needless, costly litigation and risks for his clients by successful pre-filing planning.