Case Results

Commonwealth v. J.K.

(1227CR000707)

My client was charged in Pittsfield District Court with operating under the influence of alcohol third offence with a loaded handgun. After protracted motion hearings, the case proceeded to a jury trial where my client won on all counts. I was able to get his license to operate a motor vehicle returned to him immediately as well his license to carry a firearm.

Commonwealth v. L.B.

Mr. B, an offensive lineman for the Boston Bruins at the time of his arrest, was charged with Operating Under the Influence of Alcohol in Charlestown District Court. After a trial, during which the judge viewed the “crime” scene, which is never done in a jury-waived case, Mr. B was acquitted of all charges.

Commonwealth v. B.R.

(0713 CR 002590)

Mr. R was charged with Operating Under the Influence of Alcohol as a second offender in Lynn District Court where I was successfully able to have the case dismissed with a Pre-Trial Motion.

Commonwealth v. S.C.

(06-2554)

Mr. C was charged with a fourth offense of Operating Under the Influence of Alcohol in Malden District Court. The case was won after I successfully argued a Motion to Suppress the Stop.

Commonwealth v. D.C.

(0738 CR 0554)

Ms. C was charged with Domestic Abuse and Assault and Battery against her husband in Haverhill District Court. This case was successfully concluded at a Motion hearing.

Commonwealth v. E.B.

(8959 CR 3600)

Mr. B had been charged with, among other things, Failing to Stop for a Police Officer in 1989, but had never appeared in court to resolve his case. I was successfully able to resolve his criminal charges at a Motion hearing in Plymouth District Court.

Commonwealth v. E.O.

(0513 CR 4514)

Mr. O, a police officer, was charged with Domestic Abuse. After a protracted Motion hearing, the case was dismissed in Lynn District Court.

Commonwealth v. J.G.

(0413 CR 4238)

This Operating Under the Influence of Alcohol jury trial was tried to conclusion in Lynn District Court. The trial lasted one (1) day, with the jury returning a verdict within one (1) hour of commencing deliberations, at which point my client was acquitted.

Commonwealth v. V.G.

(0240 CR 0613)

Ms. G was charged with Operating Under the Influence of Alcohol in Peabody District Court. The case was successfully tried before a jury of six (6), resulting in an acquittal for my client.

Commonwealth v. J.M. and J.M.

(0113 CR 001667 et seq.)

Both Defendants were originally charged with Mayhem, Assault and Battery by Means of a Dangerous Weapon and several counts of Assault and Battery in the Lynn District Court. I was able to convince the District Attorney’s Office to nolle prosequi the Mayhem charge (meaning that the charges were not only dismissed but it was as if it never happened). After protracted negotiations with the District Attorney’s Office, all charges were ultimately dismissed.

Commonwealth v. W.M.

(0053 CR 1606)

Mr. M was charged with Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol in Woburn District Court and was acquitted after trial.

Commonwealth v. C.C.

(0038 CR 001094)

Ms. C was charged with threats and making harassing phone calls, but after a two (2)-day jury trial in Haverhill District Court, the jury acquitted my client after deliberating for less than one-half of one hour.

Commonwealth v. E.F.

(00-1666)

Mr. F was charged with Operating Under the Influence of Alcohol in the Lynn District Court. The Commonwealth tried to introduce the results of the HGN (Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus Test). I hired Thomas Hedges, M.D., Chief of Neuro-Ophthalmology at Tufts — New England Medical Center as the Defendant’s expert witness to testify about a police officer’s inability to causally connect nystagmus to alcohol consumption. The case was ultimately dismissed.

Commonwealth v. P.D.

The Defendant was charged with Assault and Battery and Intimidation of a Witness in Lynn District Court as well as in Malden District Court. After lengthy plea negotiations, both cases were dismissed.

U.S. v. J.A.

(U.S. Dist. Ct. 99-11025EH)

My client was charged with Tax Evasion in the United States District Court. After lengthy negotiations, Mr. A was placed on probation rather than incarcerated, which is a “victory” in Federal Court sentencing.

Commonwealth v. M.M.

(Dist. Ct.: 9939 CR 571; Superior Ct.: 94772069-75)

Mr. M was charged with violating the terms of his probation by being arrested for Indecent Assault and Battery on a child under the age of fourteen (14). The probation violation hearing was tried in Essex County Superior Court for two (2) days, after which the case in chief that resulted in a probation violation was successfully resolved in Gloucester District Court.

Commonwealth v. S.P.

Mr. P was charged with Operating Under the Influence of Alcohol as a second offender, Operating Under the Influence of Drugs, Possession of a Class D Substance, Operating After Suspension and Speeding. I tried the case in Malden District Court, after which Mr. P was acquitted of all charges.

U.S. v. J.G.

(97-10196-01EFH)

Mr. G was charged with Interstate Transportation and Racketeering in the U.S. District Court and was facing incarceration; however, after protracted negotiations, Mr. G was placed on a short period of probation, which is considered a “victory” in Federal Court sentencing.

D. v. C.

After an initial hearing at which my client was not represented by counsel, her husband obtained custody of their nine (9)-year-old daughter. I was hired to obtain custody of the children for Ms. C and after a protracted trial in Essex Probate Court, custody was ultimately returned to my client, along with a generous award of child support.

M. v. M.

After a lengthy trial in Essex Probate Court I was successfully able to obtain custody, child support, alimony and the greater share of the marital home for my client, as well as her share of her husband’s pension and health insurance.

S. v. T.

After a twenty five (25)-year marriage, husband left his wife for a much younger woman. As wife’s counsel, I was able to convince the trial judge that she should receive the marital home free and clear of the outstanding mortgage as well as the greater share of the money in the various brokerage accounts, while receiving fifty percent (50%) 401(k).

J.H. v. T.H.

Fearing for the safety of his children, a client hired me to obtain custody after allegations of neglect and abuse by wife and her boyfriend were substantiated. After a trial on the merits my client was successful in his Complaint for Custody.

P.H. v. C.H.

After being divorced for several years, husband hired me to obtain a modification of an alimony judgment in Suffolk Probate Court. Successfully demonstrating that the wife had not been forthcoming on prior and current financial statements, the judge granted his Complaint for Modification.

M.P. v. D.P.

After leaving her husband for another man, my client hired me to seek custody of the two (2) minor children, which I was successfully able to do.

R.P. v. D.P.

Husband client, who greatly out-earned his wife, requested my representation for a divorce. He received 65 percent of the marital home compared to his wife’s 45 percent, was not ordered to pay alimony and received a 50 percent reduction in child support, among other things.

T.K. v. A.D, K.D., P.P.Y.C.

While a passenger with her fiancé on a boat operated by her future father-in-law, Ms. K was severely injured when the boat exploded in Boston Harbor immediately after her future father-in-law had filled the tanks with gas. Suit was brought against the boat owners as well as the yacht club that had provided gas to the boat owner. This explosion was so severe that Logan International Airport had to be shut down for a brief period of time. On the eve of trial, both insurance companies made offers of settlement that were acceptable to the plaintiff.

H.M. v. C.M.

While a passenger in a vehicle driven by C.M. whose vehicle hit a telephone pole, H.M. was thrown through the windshield and suffered a fractured skull. The case was resolved with a sizeable award of damages to my client.

A.M. v. S.C.W.

While a patron at a car wash, my client was struck by a vehicle entering one of the bays of the facility and sustained serious, long-term injuries. The car wash as well as the operator of the motor vehicle were sued, and my client received a generous settlement from both insurance companies.

V.D. v. A.S.

While walking on a throw rug at a friend’s home, my client was seriously and permanently injured when the rug slid, causing him to fall and break several bones in his leg and hip. After he was successfully able to demonstrate the defendant’s negligence, he was awarded a significant sum of money.

M.F. et al. v. Mass Turnpike Authority

Plaintiff was operating a motor vehicle in the Sumner Tunnel in Boston and was stopped at the request of a Turnpike employee to allow a construction vehicle to pass. The vehicle struck her car, injuring her two (2) passengers and her when the car was pushed into the tunnel wall. All three (3) occupants of the vehicle were compensated by Massachusetts Turnpike Authority.