- Consumer Financial Services Law
- Corporate Law
- Intellectual Property
- Family Law
Dartmouth College, A.B., summa cum laude; Phi Beta Kappa; Rufus Choate Scholar, 1973; Dartmouth College, M.B.A., Edward Tuck Scholar, 1974
Fordham University, J.D., 1982
1982, Connecticut; 1983, New York; 2007, District of Columbia; U.S. District Court, District of Connecticut; U.S. District Court, Southern, Eastern and Northern Districts of New York; U.S. District Court, District of Colorado; U.S. District Court, Central District of Illinois; U.S. District Court, District of Columbia; U.S. Tax Court; U.S. Court of Appeals, First and Second Circuits; U.S. Supreme Court; England and Wales (authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority, SRA number 570262)
Connecticut Bar Association; New York County, New York State and American Bar Associations; District of Columbia Bar Association; Fairfield County Bar Association; National Transportation Safety Board Bar Association; Lawyer-Pilots Bar Association; Dartmouth Lawyers Association (Vice President); Payday Loan Bar Association (President); Consumer Credit Research Foundation (Director); Conference on Consumer Finance Law; American Law and Economics Association; The Law Society (UK).
Author: "Arbitration Protocols Affect Financial Institutions," Connecticut Law Tribune, March 9, 2015; "The Future of Tribal Lending Under the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau," Business Law Today, March 22, 2013; "Arbitration and Class Actions After JAMS' Flip-Flop," N.Y.L.J., May 4, 2005; "International Aircraft Registry Adds New Hurdles," Twin and Turbine, May 2006; "Appellate Review of FAA Emergency Certificate Actions," 67 J. Air Law & Comm. 841, Summer 2002; "Educational Support Orders in Connecticut," 13 Connecticut Lawyer 1, August-September 2002; "New York's No-Fault Divorce Law: The End of Forum-Shopping Trips to Connecticut?" 21 Connecticut Lawyer 3, October 2010; "Application of the Consumer Telephone Protection Act to Interstate Calls and Faxes," 52 Fed. Common. Law J. 668-686, May 2000; "Open Floodgates at the “Hoover” Dam - Air-21 Fails to Provide Meaningful Review of Emergency Certificate Actions," 22 Lawyer-Pilots Bar Assn. J. 22-32, Winter 2000-2001. Arbitrator, NASD Regulation and American Arbitration Association. Mediator, Special Master, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York. Arbitrator, New York City Civil Court. Hearing Officer, Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection. Airline Transport Pilot. Chartered Financial Analyst. Director: Amogerone Volunteer Fire Co.; Baltimore Symphony Orchestra; Maryland Humanities Council; Woolly Mammoth Theatre Company.
(Airline transport pilot; chartered financial analyst)
Francis v. Goodman, 91 F.3d 121 (1st Cir. 1996); Gregory v. American Guild of Musical Artists, 1993 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6971 (S.D.N.Y. 1993); Gill v. Monetary Management Corp., 1996 Ohio App. LEXIS 4088 (Ct. App. 1996); State v. Filipov, 2000 Conn. Super. LEXIS 266 (2000); Wirdzek v. Monetary Mgt. Corp. of California, Inc., 1999 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8455 (E.D. CA. 1999); Lewittes v. Lobis, 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16320 (S.D.N.Y. 2004), aff'd (mem.), 164 Fed. Appx. 97 (2d. Cir. 2005), cert. denied, 127 S. Ct. 110 (2006); Evans v. Direct Gen. Ins. Agency, Inc., 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4801 (E.D. Ark. 2005); Golden v. Mandel, 2007 Conn. Super. LEXIS 1326 (Ct. Super. 2007), aff'd., 110 Conn. App. 376 (2008); Matter of People of State of New York v. County Bank of Rehoboth Beach, Del., 45 A.D.3d 1136, 846 N.Y.S.2d 436 (3rd Dep't 2007); Lorelli v. Lorelli, 2009 U.S. Dist LEXIS 38505 (D. Conn. 2009); Generation Partners, LP v. Mandell, 2012 Conn. Super. LEXIS 2129 (Conn. 2012), aff'd., 148 Conn. App. 294, 85 A.3d 49 (2014).
Disclaimer: No representation is made that the quality of legal services to be performed is greater than the quality of legal services performed by other lawyers. The testimonial or endorsement does not constitute a guarantee, warranty, or prediction regarding the outcome of your legal matter. Any result that the endorsed lawyer or law firm may achieve on behalf of one client in one matter does not necessarily indicate that similar results can be obtained for other clients. Past success cannot be an assurance of future success because each case must be decided on its own merits. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Martindale-Hubbell® does not undertake to develop a Client Review Rating or Peer Review Rating for all firms and/or lawyers. Therefore, the fact that a firm or lawyer has not been reviewed should not be construed as unfavorable. Martindale-Hubbell accepts no responsibility for and will not be liable for the content and accuracy of the individual Reviews and the aggregated Reviews.
Documents by this lawyer on Martindale.com