PDP is expanding its practice to include a suite of ADR & Legal Consulting Services led by retired MA Superior Court Judge Brian A. Davis.
We defend public employees and public officials against claims of discrimination and violations of civil rights, allegations of false arrest, and use of excessive force.
PDP has substantial trial experience in product liability cases. Damages tried include the entire personal-injury spectrum, wrongful death, disembowelment, personal injury and property damage, including both compensatory and punitive-damage claims.
Our firm has defended a wide variety of suits arising out of actions taken by public employees and elected officials, including selectmen, mayors, building inspectors, members of zoning commissions, police officers and teachers in the course of the execution of their duties
PDP has represented defendants in the asbestos litigation for more than two decades and we are intimately familiar with all aspects of these claims. We are conversant with the workings of the consolidated asbestos dockets in each of the states in which we practice and frequently act as lead counsel.
We are well-versed in the interpretation and application of liability insurance policies under state and federal law. Our familiarity with insurance policy norms and standards allows us to provide robust protection to clients in all aspects of their coverage disputes.
We defend school districts, elected and appointed officers, and school employees in actions arising out of the performance of their public duties, including student discipline, school liability and employment claims.
Our broad scope of litigation experience also provides hard-won perspective for advising clients how to avoid litigation by adopting appropriate employment practices and risk management procedures.
PDP attorneys have extensive trial court experience and success in civil litigation lawsuits. We have skill in handling a wide variety of general litigation.
PDP provides coordinating counsel services to organizations.
We have significant experience in prosecuting and defending a broad range of business and commercial litigation. Our aggressive preparation and investigation tactics are at the core of creating positive results for business and commercial clients at dispositive motions, mediation, and trials.
PDP's appellate attorneys are critical strategic components to our firm's success in civil litigation and insurance coverage proceedings. Their intimate involvement in all facets of the case strengthens the last line of defense.
Our Labor and Employment Law practice at PDP represents the municipal, business and insurance communities in all facets of employment and workplace issues, from employment practices liability defense to traditional management-labor matters
Judge Davis offers skilled mediation services, creating a respectful environment where parties can reach mutually agreeable solutions with his expert guidance and insight.
Arbitration with Judge Davis provides a flexible, efficient approach to dispute resolution. His impartiality and extensive experience ensure fair, timely decisions in complex cases.
Gain objective insight with Judge Davis’s neutral analysis, offering an informed assessment of case strengths, legal strategy, and settlement options for optimal dispute resolution.
Judge Davis delivers comprehensive legal consulting, drawing on his judicial and litigation experience to support clients in trial preparation, strategy, and persuasive argument development.
Case Studies.
PDP Partners Melissa Malloy and Maria DeLuzio win appeal before the Vermont Supreme Court in Shirley Ann Carpin v. Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp., et al.
Maria Deluzio and Noelle Phelan Secure Summary Judgment in Vermont Superior Court in Take-Home Exposure Latent Injury Case.
PDP Partner Adam Simms recently obtained a favorable summary judgment ruling in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts on an issue of first impression.
On Wednesday, Partner Adam Simms obtained a summary decision from the Massachusetts Appeals Court that affirmed summary judgment in favor of the firm’s clients, the City of Amesbury and its former mayor (in his individual capacity).
Justin L. Amos prevailed in the Appeals Court of Massachusetts on behalf of the Building Commissioner for the Town of Dennis.
Congratulations to Partner Adam Simms who recently obtained a dismissal of numerous claims asserted against the Town of Duxbury in a suit brought by a real estate developer that attempted to challenge the Town's statutory right of first refusal and eminent domain powers.
Partner Jason W. Crotty, Esq. recently obtained a favorable Motion for Summary Judgment decision on all counts of a complaint pled against a sergeant in a small Cape Cod police department.
Attorneys John J. Davis and Katie Cooper Davis have obtained a favorable decision in a negligence action on behalf of a local school district that had asserted statutory immunity. The Massachusetts Superior Court found that no school district employee had taken any affirmative action that 'originally caused' [the] condition or situation" that led to a student's self-inflicted injury.
Congratulations to Partners Adam Simms and Seth Barnett, who recently prevailed in the Appeals Court of Massachusetts on behalf of the Town of Stoneham and several former members of the Select Board. The case involved a former town employee who brought whistleblower retaliation and civil conspiracy claims following the Town's decision to privatize a municipal golf course.
Founding Partner John J. Davis and Partner Seth Barnett recently secured a dismissal on behalf of Wellesley Public Schools, after successfully establishing that Wellesley had unequivocally protected its right to the use of affinity group sessions in its public schools.
A year recap of our notable firm victories.
John J. Cloherty successfully represented the Town of Norfolk and its Conservation Commission in claims involving a parcel of land that the owners were trying to develop. The developers claimed delays and unfair and capricious application of the wetlands regulations amounted to an unconstitutional taking of the property. After a Superior Court ruled in favor of the Town on summary judgement, the Appeal Court affirmed the decision ruling against the developers.