Appellate Litigation

High net worth individual—Appellate win

Secured a victory for a high net worth individual as plaintiff/appellant in a second appeal concerning an underlying arbitration decision involving a prenuptial agreement. Following an adverse decision in the trial court denying her motion to open the judgment in her marital dissolution action on the basis of fraud, we filed our first appeal in 2020 and, in 2021, the appellate court reversed the trial court’s decision and remanded the matter for a probable cause hearing regarding the fraud. The trial court then denied our client’s motion to open the marital dissolution judgment after finding no probable cause that the underlying martial dissolution action was procured through fraud. We appealed the trial court’s probable cause decision and, for the second time, the appellate court ruled in our favor. Specifically, the appellate court determined that we presented evidence that satisfied the probable cause standard that the underlying marital dissolution action was based on fraud and, as a result, remanded the case with the direction to open the judgment for the limited purpose of allowing further discovery in conjunction with our client’s claim of fraud. 

Data center property owner—Reduction in Town’s valuation of real property

Lead trial and appellate counsel in taxpayer’s challenge to the Town’s assessment of its real property for purposes of taxation. The trial court reduced the valuation of the property by more than $36 million, resulting in significant tax savings for the client. The court’s decision was upheld on appeal. Digital 60 & 80 Merritt LLC v. Board of Assessment Appeals, 211 Conn. App. 559, cert. denied, 343 Conn. 926 (2022). 

US Bankruptcy Trustee—Third Circuit court of appeals win

Obtained a favorable ruling for the bankruptcy trustee of a national provider of claims management services to the insured and self-insured market from the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, upholding a decision by the US District Court for the District of Delaware that the bankruptcy court did not err in granting a settlement agreement between the trustee and the former owners and chief executive offices of the debtor after a contested settlement approval hearing.

Construction company—Third Circuit win

Successfully defended a construction company against various claims, including violation of the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act, breach of contract, theft, and unjust enrichment on grounds of preclusion. The District Court granted our motion to dismiss and the decision was affirmed by the Third Circuit.

Products liability appeals—New Jersey Supreme Court 

As counsel to several health care and business groups appearing as amici curiae, successfully handled significant products liability appeals, convincing the New Jersey Supreme Court that labels on the acne drug Accutane were adequate under New Jersey law, and that the state should adopt the Daubert factor-based approach for determining the admissibility of expert testimony. In the latter landmark case, which altered New Jersey law on expert testimony admissibility, the Supreme Court’s decision relied upon and cited McCarter’s argument. Also successfully briefed and argued in another appeal that New Jersey’s two-year statute of limitations should apply in products cases involving a prescription medicine. 

Overstock.com—Major Appellate Victory Reversing a $7.3 Million Judgment

Secured an appellate victory on behalf of Overstock.com in the Delaware Supreme Court in a unique case involving Delaware escheat law and a qui tam action. The Court, sitting en banc, unanimously reversed a multi-million dollar false claim judgment entered against Overstock.com.

Mail-order retailer—Appellate victory

Affirming the Appellate Division of New Jersey Superior Court’s complete dismissal of a $25 million lawsuit brought by an asset-based lender against our client, a mail-order retailer.

Global Insurance Broker—Third Circuit  win

Represented a global insurance broker in a multi-million dollar lender-placed insurance class action in federal court. The United States District Court for the District of New Jersey dismissed the action on the grounds that the filed-rate doctrine barred the plaintiffs’ claims. On appeal, the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, addressing an issue of first impression in that court, affirmed the trial court’s ruling by a unanimous published decision.

New Jersey Supreme Court—Amicus curiae

Represented an industry organization appearing as amicus curiae before the New Jersey Supreme Court in an appeal of a mortgage foreclosure action where the borrower argued that, under a provision of New Jersey's Uniform Commercial Code, the assignee of the mortgage could not foreclose because the original note had been lost prior to the assignment. Addressing an issue that had divided courts in other jurisdictions, the New Jersey Supreme Court unanimously adopted the position advanced in the amicus brief, holding that, notwithstanding the loss of the note, the assignee could bring the foreclosure action consistent with New Jersey statutes and common-law principles governing the assignment of mortgages.