Litigation Attorneys

Our clients entrust their high-stakes legal matters to Bond’s litigation practice because our approach is strategic, effective and efficient.

Bond’s litigators have deftly handled sophisticated cases in federal and state courts and arbitral forums throughout the United States. Our lawyers represent a wide range of clients from Fortune 100 companies to individuals and small businesses serving diverse industries. Our exceptional wealth of experience and diversity ready us to assemble a lean and high-caliber litigation team to meet the specific needs of each particular matter.

Read Full Overview >

After New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo signed the Child Victims Act (CVA) into law in February 2019, Bond assembled a team of attorneys from multiple practices across the firm (e.g., litigation, labor and employment, school law, higher education and business restructuring, creditors’ rights and bankruptcy) to assist clients with any questions they might have regarding this new law. In addition, this team prepared multiple informational webinars on the Child Victims Act and prepared to assist clients in defending claims arising from events decades in the past, as well as advise about asset protection and restructuring.   

We are presently defending more than 30 CVA cases involving allegations of abuse spanning a 50-year period, ranging from teachers to clergy to hospital and university employees to social workers and physicians. Our clients include private and public schools, religious entities, individuals, colleges, universities and other institutions. These cases extend from the westernmost reaches of New York State to Long Island. Our position as a premier statewide firm allows Bond to provide attorneys with specific knowledge and experience in each local venue to handle these cases; our understanding of the practices of the assigned judges and local procedures provide a level of insight and effectiveness that our clients value. 

As part of that representation, we have worked with our clients to locate critical applicable insurance, which frequently is difficult because these allegations often date back to the 1960s or earlier. When insurance is available, we work cooperatively with the insurance carrier to discuss strategies and potential pre-trial resolutions.

Cases brought under the Child Victims Act require a sensitive approach. Often, because the incidents in question go back decades, there are no available documents from which to either prove or disprove the allegations of abuse. The defense of the institution, consequently, turns on its lack of knowledge of the alleged abuser’s propensity to commit such acts. Bond takes great care to zealously protect the reputation of the institution in CVA cases without attacking the alleged victim. 

Bond also works with clients to avoid future claims of abuse. We have conducted numerous frontline training programs for mandated reporters of child sexual abuse.

We have successfully defended higher education institutions, school districts, municipalities, corporations and their officers and employees against claims arising under federal and state civil rights statutes, including Title IX (gender equity), Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 1981, 1983 and 1985 and the New York Executive Law.

Representative Matters:

  • Defense of civil rights complaints against various New York State police departments.
  • Obtained declaratory judgment that amendments to General Municipal Law § 959 could not be applied retroactively. Matter of Dannible & McKee, LLP v. New York Dept. of Economic Dev., 110 A.D.3d 1166 (3d Dept. 2013).
  • Obtained dismissal of Article 78 Petition alleging violation of the Open Meetings Law. Matter of Schillaci v. Village of Sackets Harbor Zoning Bd. of Appeals, 151 A.D.3d 1744 (4th Dept. 2017).
  • Defended a Section 8 housing administrator in a class action suit alleging racial discrimination and segregation in the local administration of a public housing program. 

The attorneys in our complex federal and commercial litigation practice group possess experience with a wide range of federal and state litigation, including:

  • Class actions, collective actions, derivative actions, and other aggregate and multi-party cases;
  • Civil and criminal antitrust litigation and government investigations;
  • ERISA fiduciary liability and benefits litigation, including stock drop, plan conversion, prohibited transaction, and anti-inurement cases, as well as U.S. Department of Labor investigations;
  • Federal securities law claims involving securities fraud, Investment Advisor Act claims, proxy and corporate takeover disputes, corporate governance claims, and FINRA proceedings;
  • False Claims Act (qui tam) investigations and litigation;
  • Whistleblower litigation before OSHA and in federal court under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, as amended by the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act;
  • Intellectual property litigation, including patent, trademark and copyright infringement cases;
  • FLSA and state law wage-and-hour litigation;
  • Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) claims;
  • Trade secret misappropriation cases;
  • Consumer fraud litigation; and
  • Major bankruptcy court adversary proceedings.

The litigators in Bond’s complex federal and commercial litigation practice have built an extensive record of successful engagements which include:

  • Obtained jury verdict for trade secret misappropriation, unfair competition and breach of contract and an award of compensatory and punitive damages in the amount of $2.65 million.  Spindler v. North American Transmission Forum, et al., 5:15-cv-00779 (2018).
  • National Waste Associates v. Waste Harmonics, 194 A.3d 1, 183 Conn.App. 734 (2018) – represented defendant Waste Harmonics -- alleged causes of action for breach of non-solicitation and non-compete clauses, trade secret misappropriation, economic interference claims – verdict in favor of defendant Waste Harmonics on all claims after bench trial; decision upheld on appeal.
  • Obtained temporary restraining order restraining former franchisee from violating restrictive covenant.  New Horizons Educ. Corp. v. Krolak Tech. Mgmt of Syracuse, LLC, 2018 U.S. Dist LEXIS 180550 (N.D.N.Y. 2018).
  • Obtained preliminary injunction restraining tax return preparer from violating restrictive covenant.  HRB Resources d/b/a H&R Block v. Schon, 6:19-cv-00339-MAD-TWD (N.D.N.Y. Apr. 25, 2019).
  • Defended energy service companies in putative consumer class actions alleging overcharges.  Gonzales v. Agway Energy Servs., LLC, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 180307 (10/22/18).
  • Defended financial services and other companies in putative class actions brought under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.  
    • Lackawanna Chiropractic P.C. v. Tivity Health Support, LLC, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10631 (1/22/19);
    • Ruffrano v. HSBC Fin. Corp., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 132674 (8/1/17).
  • Successfully prosecuted a breach of patent license agreement for an international lighting solutions company in the Southern District of New York.
  • Secured dismissal of a qui tam relator’s claims for failing to reimburse the government for payments made to Medicare beneficiaries in violation of the Medicare Secondary Payer Act under the False Claims Act.  
    • United States ex rel. Takemoto v. Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co., 674 Fed. Appx. 92 (2d Cir. 2017); 
    • United States ex rel. Takemoto v. Hartford Fin. Servs. Grp., 157 Supp. 3d 273 (WDNY 2016);
    • United States ex rel. Takemoto v. ACE, Ltd., 157 F. Supp. 3d 273 (WDNY 2015).
  • Secured dismissal biotech company in suit alleging antitrust violations relating to termination of distribution agreements. Rochester Drug Coop., Inc. v. Biogen Idec U.S. Corp., 130 F. Supp. 3d 764 (WDNY 2015).
  • Obtained early dismissal of three direct purchaser antitrust class actions against major agricultural cooperative.
  • Obtained summary judgment on all counts for a large utility, in a case brought by a group of employees asserting claims of contractual vesting, promissory estoppel, breach of fiduciary duties, anti-inurement violations and prohibited transactions allegedly arising out of an amendment to the company’s retiree welfare benefits platform.
  • Obtained a preliminary injunction against a multi-national conglomerate on behalf of a local medical products manufacturer in a trademark infringement action the New York Law Journal called a case of “David versus Goliath.”
  • Defended medical technology company against retaliation complaint under the whistleblower provisions of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, as amended by the Dodd- Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, filed first with the Occupational Safety and Health Administration and then in federal district court.
  • Successful representation of regional airline company and its officers and directors through trial and appeal against direct and derivative claims by ESOP participants asserting breach of fiduciary duty and prohibited transaction claims under ERISA and state law claims for breach of contract and corporate waste.
  • Obtained summary judgment (affirmed on appeal) dismissing an FLSA “off the clock” – donning and doffing collective action.

We represent owners, general contractors and subcontractors with respect to all types of construction litigation claims. These matters include pursuing and defending breach of contract claims, extra work and delay claims, as well as negligence claims in the design and construction of projects.

We help our clients manage risk and control costs at each stage of the e-discovery life cycle – including well before litigation even arises. Our attorneys and support professionals provide creative, individualized and cost-effective e-discovery consulting and information management services.

Our attorneys have experience in a wide range of e-discovery and information management issues – in a variety of litigation areas – including commercial, securities, employment, environmental and intellectual property. In addition to our attorneys, our practice-support professionals are knowledgeable in a variety of computer systems, software applications and document management and litigation support platforms, as well as information storage and retrieval systems. Their experience in the technical management of electronic discovery projects translates into the practical experience required to efficiently identify, collect and process electronic information. Our practice-support professionals leverage their experience to assist clients in the technical aspects of preservation, forensic collection, processing, management and review of electronic information as it may relate to best archival practices, compliance, investigations, discovery and/or litigation.

Our litigation attorneys, along with the firm's labor and employment law attorneys, have extensive experience in employment related litigation.

Representative Matters:

  • Served as trial counsel for employer and obtained unanimous jury verdict for the employer dismissing sex/gender discrimination and retaliation claims asserted by a former employee.  Lauren O’ Neill v. Dataminr, Inc., 15-cv-09485 (JGK) (S.D.N.Y. December  2017).
  • Defended county against claims by a former assistant district attorney alleging sexual harassment, sex-biased discrimination and retaliation by the district attorney.  
    • Donatello v. County of Niagara, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 71951 (6/2/16); 
    • Donatello v. County of Niagara, 2015 U.S. Dist. Lexis 163957 (12/7/15).
  • Defended clients in collective and class action lawsuits under the FLSA and the New York Labor Law:
    • Dowd v. 6675 Transit RD LLC, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 176108 (12/5/15); 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 194588 (11/27/17);
    • Spano v. V & J Nat’l Enters., LLC, 264 F. Supp. 3d 440 (WDNY 2017);
    • Taylor v. Delta-Sonic Car Wash Sys., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14394 (1/31/17);
    • Bordeau v. V&J Empl. Servs., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 225578 (3/27/18).
  • Defended former NYS Assembly member accused of sexual harassment and retaliation by a former staff member. Farah v. Wozniak, 2018 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 10113 (4/13/18).
  • Successfully defended financial institution from claims of employment discrimination and hostile work environment based on plaintiff’s sex. Reilly v. First Niagara Bank, N.A., 2019 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4984 (6/19/19).
  • Represented a multipurpose arena and an NHL team in a class-action suit under the Americans with Disabilities Act which was resolved favorably and timely so that the new arena opened in time for the beginning of the season.

We have extensive experience in representing:

  • health maintenance organizations
  • hospitals
  • nursing homes
  • physicians
  • professional corporations
  • other health care organizations and professionals

We provide services in:

  • credentials disputes
  • guardianships
  • health insurance suits
  • malpractice claims
  • Medicaid-Medicare fraud and reimbursement
  • Health Care Quality Improvement Act and physician databank matters
  • privileges disputes
  • professional discipline and misconduct proceedings
  • professional shareholder and director disputes
  • other regulatory disputes with local, federal and state agencies.


Representative Matters:

  • Defense of health benefits insurer in various actions asserting claims under ERISA and common law relating to the denial of health benefits.  
  • Successfully obtained summary judgment and dismissal of action alleging various claims under ERISA relating to the denial of health benefits. Biller v. Excellus Health Plan, Inc., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 121150 (N.D.N.Y. 2015).
  • Successfully defended a hospital in federal court against a claim by an emergency room physician that the hospital interfered with his right to contract.
  • Successfully petitioned court to permit transfer and sale of certain assets, property and liabilities of a skilled nursing facility. Matter of Odd Fellow and Rebekah Rehabilitation and Health Care Center, Inc., 2017 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 6641 (12/22/17).
  • Defended the Hospital Association of New York State in a federal class action against the New York State Commissioner of Social Services regarding the alleged conversion of Medicaid and/or Medicare benefits.
  • Obtained dismissal of claims patient asserted against doctor for alleged violation of her constitutional rights relating to her being committed to a psychiatric institution. Graham v. Ferretti, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19595 (E.D.N.Y. 2018) adopted by 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 45569 (E.D.N.Y. 2018).

Bond has extensive experience representing clients in connection with insurance coverage matters involving virtually all types of policies. This experience includes commercial and general liability, excess or umbrella coverage, employment practices liability, finished products and completed operations and a wide variety of employee benefits coverages, including health, disability and life.

The firm has also handled numerous coverage matters involving errors and omissions (E&O) liability insurance in professional service industries such as legal and accounting. Additional areas where the firm provides coverage advice include property insurance, maritime protection and indemnity insurance, employers’ liability insurance, environmental matters and the obligation to provide maintenance and cure benefits.

Bond attorneys regularly counsel corporate clients concerning the scope of coverage afforded under these policies, help evaluate competing proposals and assist in negotiating and, when necessary, litigate disputes involving the coverage afforded under insurance policies.

The firm’s coverage practice also extends to the regular representation of corporate officials under directors’ and officers’ (D&O) liability insurance policies. Related to this is our work involving fidelity, fiduciary and bankers’ blanket bonds. 

Litigation Insurance Coverage Team:

Liza R. Magley
Thomas A. Martin
Andrew H. Reiss
Thomas K. Rinaldi
Amanda Rosenfield Lippes
Stephen A. Sharkey
Richard L. Weber

Bond defends a wide variety of cases on behalf of insurance carriers. Personal lines defense matters such as premises and auto liability claims form a significant part of our defense work. We also defend commercial liability claims with an emphasis on construction site accident claims. Frequently we represent insurance carriers on first party claims and coverage matters.

Representative Matters:

  • Defended multiple premises liability actions for insured and self-insured clients.
  • Obtained summary judgment, dismissing action, for property owner in premises liability action. Jason Cody v. CNK-Stonecastle, LLC, Index No. 2064/2014 (NY Sup. Ct. Orange Cty. 2014).
  • Obtained summary judgment, dismissing action, for media company in action arising out of motor vehicle accident. Johnson v. Time Warner Entertainment, 115 A.D.3d 1295 (4th Dept. 2014).

The law of intellectual property is a vital ingredient in domestic and international commercial transactions and is a focal point of our practice, particularly since our firm represents a number of world recognized academic institutions and manufacturers of high technology products. As a result, our trial attorneys have significant experience in litigating various intellectual property disputes, from both the plaintiff and defense perspectives, including patent disputes, trade dress claims, copyright and trademark registration matters and infringements.

Representative Matters:

  • Defense of inventors in action asserting claim to intellectual property rights in medical technology.
  • Pursuing claims for patent infringement cases in the Southern District of New York for an international lighting solutions company.
  • Defended a provider of proprietary botanical ingredients in a declaratory judgment action claiming non-infringement, invalidity and unenforceability of its patents.  
    • Cott Corp. v. Decas Botanical Synergies, LLC, U.S. Dist. LEXIS 134168 (9/19/12);
    • Cott Corp. v. Decas Botanical Synergies, LLC, U.S. Dist. LEXIS 156223 (12/23/11).
  • Represented a manufacturer of housewares in trademark infringement actions. Caldwell Mfg. Co. N. Am., LLC v. Amesbury Group, Inc., U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89447 (8/11/11).
  • Defended claims of alleged infringement of a maintenance manual for products purchased. Moog, Inc. v. Newport Aeronautical, Inc.,  2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 81929 (6/23/16).
  • Represented plaintiff in landmark intellectual property case which held defendant file-sharing service Napster, Inc., could be held liable for contributory infringement and vicarious infringement of plaintiff’s copyrights. A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc., 239 F.3d 1004 (2001).

Some of our litigators focus on the First Amendment and State Constitutional issues that are of concern to newspapers, broadcast media, magazines, news services and a variety of other organizations that disseminate information. We represent our clients in the defense of defamation and privacy-related actions, the "vetting" of feature articles and new stories and with responses to subpoenas, often based on Shield Law protection and First Amendment privileges. Frequently our attorneys enable clients to obtain access to information, through the Freedom of Information Act and Open Meeting Law.

Representative Matters:

  • Defense of telecommunications carrier against claims under the Communications Act. U.S. D.I.D. Corp. v. Windstream Communications, Inc., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 97867 (S.D.N.Y. 2012).

Mediation and arbitration can offer an alternative to the time and expense of taking a case to trial. Mediation is unique in that the parties maintain control over the conversations and any decisions that are made. Mediators play a neutral role in the confidential proceedings, facilitating conversation between the parties to reach a mutually beneficial settlement.

The arbitration process is similar to litigation, but a neutral, unbiased third-party acts as the judge in a private setting rather than a courtroom. Each party presents its arguments and the arbitrator’s responsibility is to render a decision on the issues. An arbitrator is given more flexibility than a trial judge in how the proceedings will go and how much weight to give evidence.


  • Commercial Dispute
  • Personal Injury
  • Wrongful Death
  • Construction
  • Labor Law
  • Business/Contract Disputes
  • Product Liability
  • Insurance Subrogation
  • Fire Loss
  • Estate Disputes
  • Farm Accidents

Click here to view brochure.

The litigation department attorneys have extensive experience representing persons who are injured due to someone else's negligence. Our attorneys have tried many plaintiffs' cases to successful jury verdict, but also, where appropriate, have advanced our clients' best interests through settlement, mediation or arbitration. The practice is expansive and involves many different types of cases and accidents, including automobile, motorcycle, construction site, falls from ladders or scaffolds, wrongful death claims, defective and unsafe products, medical malpractice, and assault and battery.

The firm represents both plaintiffs and defendant-manufacturers in state and federal court. Our lawyers have a wide range of product liability experience with both consumer products and industrial equipment. We represent a variety of manufacturers throughout the Northeast. These companies include manufacturers of elevators, escalators, cranes, man-lifts, boom trucks, screening machines, nail guns, motors and other industrial equipment.

Representative Matter:

  • Defended pharmaceutical company against allegations of negligent design, manufacture and marketing of a prescription drug. Sortisio v. Accetta, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 113736 (12/7/2009).

Our attorneys have significant experience in defending such professionals as attorneys, accountants, engineers, insurance agents, investment and real estate brokers and appraisers against malpractice claims. In addition, we have significant experience in prosecuting claims of that nature for plaintiffs. We also address credentialing, licensing and misconduct issues for all types of professionals. We are very used to working with experts for the purpose of reviewing professional files and formulating defense strategies.

Representative Matters:

  • Defended psychiatrists accused of inappropriate relationships with patients and other health care providers accused of medical malpractice.


Bond’s toxic tort and environmental litigation practice has successfully represented clients in all facets of environmental litigation including:

  • Civil cases in state and federal courts brought by governmental and private parties seeking civil damages, response costs, fines and other penalties
  • State and federal administrative proceedings involving regulatory issues
  • State and federal criminal prosecutions for alleged violations of environmental laws
  • By way of example, Bond attorneys have represented clients in cases arising from:
  • Contaminated environmental media (air, water, soil, groundwater)
  • Exposures from consumer products (carbonless copy paper and hair care products)
  • Occupational exposures
  • Pesticides
  • Drugs
  • Sick buildings
  • Asbestos
  • Lead paint

Our attorneys have the knowledge to address such environmental issues as:

  • CERCLA cost recovery, natural resource damages, and contribution actions
  • State Superfund administrative proceedings
  • RCRA and Clean Water Act Citizen suits
  • Navigation Law Section 181 actions (petroleum discharges)
  • Criminal prosecution of environmental statutes and regulations
  • Common law claims for personal injury damages, medical monitoring and property damage
  • Asbestos removal and handling violations
  • State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) challenges
  • Insurance coverage for environmental claims


Our attorneys have represented clients in a wide variety of industries that include:

  • Chemicals
  • Pharmaceuticals
  • Pulp and Paper
  • Electrical Components
  • Hair Care and Cosmetics
  • Defense Industry
  • Agricultural and Dairy Products
  • Energy
  • Health Care

Representative Matters:

  • Defended dozens of cases involving allegations of adult impairment arising from childhood residential lead paint exposure.
    • Obtained summary judgment for defendant based on lack of actual or constructive prior notice of hazardous lead paint conditions at the property. Kimball v. Normandeau, 132 AD3d 1340 (4th Dept. 2015).
  • Defended company against indemnification and contribution claims for petroleum contamination.  Bero Family Partnership v. Elardo, 122 AD3d 1279 (4th Dept. 2014).
  • Defended company’s disposal of waste containing trichloroethylene in unlined earth evaporation pits, resulting in drinking water well contamination. Baity v. General Electric Co., 86 AD3d 948 (4th Dept. 2011).
  • Obtained summary judgment, dismissing plaintiff’s claims of joint and several cost recovery incurred in the remediation of various contaminants from an industrial site under CERCLA and New York State law. Chitayat v. Vanderbilt Assocs., 702 F. Supp. 69 (EDNY 2010).
  • Obtained dismissal of Comprehensive Environmental Responsive, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) claim, and affirmed by the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. W. R. Grace & Co. v. Zotos Int’l, 559 F3d 85 (2d Cir 2009).

All too often, companies react to trade secret theft and competitive threats due to employee departures, rather than position for it. Under these circumstances, they are faced with no choice but to engage in costly litigation.

Our Trade Secret Protection Audit assists companies in identifying critical intangible assets and guides the development of procedures, contract language, employment and non-disclosure agreements designed to protect them. Undertaken periodically, audits are able to help companies anticipate possible threats and reduce the areas of risk most often encountered in the course of conducting business. In performing this due diligence, our attorneys may also call upon other professionals in connection with the evaluation and testing of protocols related to the protection of computer data.

See the link below for more information on the Trade Secret Protection Audit.

In addition to the audit, our capabilities include:

  • Cease & Desist Letters
  • Computer & Information Use Policies
  • Confidentiality Agreements
  • Departure/Exit Protocols
  • Employment Agreements
  • Fraud & Security Audits
  • Invention Assignment Agreements
  • Non-compete Agreements
  • Non-disclosure Agreements
  • Restrictive Covenant Agreements
  • Technology Use Agreements
  • Trade Secret Theft Claims
  • Trade Secret Litigation

Click here to view Bond's Trade Secret Protection Audit brochure.

Representative Matters:

  • Obtained jury verdict for trade secret misappropriation, unfair competition and breach of contract and an award of compensatory and punitive damages in the amount of $2.65 million.
  • Defended and prosecuted multiple claims of unfair competition, breach of contract and other claims resulting from alleged misconduct in connection with trade secrets.
  • Successfully won a verdict in favor of defendant Waste Harmonics on all claims alleging trade secret misappropriation and economic interference after bench trial; decision upheld on appeal (published decision). National Waste Associates v. Waste Harmonics, 194 A.3d 1, 183 Conn.App. 734 (2018). 
  • Successfully defended solution coating and printing machine manufacturer from claims of trade secret misappropriation, unfair competition and breach of non-compete agreements. DS Parent, Inc.; and Davis-Standard, LLC v. Teich and SAM North America, LLC, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16116 (N.D.N.Y. 2014).

The death or impairment of a loved one can create a host of legal issues. The need to appoint a guardian and determine living arrangements for the incapacitated; to assemble and account for the assets of the deceased; and the proper administration of a trust or estate are common examples of the issues that arise under already difficult circumstances.

Unfortunately, these situations often give rise to mistrust, misconduct, conflict and discord. Far too often, individuals charged with a fiduciary duty to implement the last wishes of the deceased or safeguard the needs of the impaired act instead to benefit themselves. In such situations, there is a need for an advocate to ensure that the true wishes of the impaired or deceased are protected and implemented.

Bond’s trust, estate and fiduciary litigation practice specializes in handling the difficult legal disputes that arise in these situations. The attorneys in the practice group are trusted advocates, with years of practice in Surrogates’ Court and all other state and federal courts that resolve trust and estate disputes. Whether the dispute centers on the validity of a will, the need to account for missing assets, the need for a legal guardian or related issues, our attorneys will lead our clients through the process and advocate for our client's interest and the interest of the client's loved ones.