Morris Polich & Purdy LLP

 – Firm Profile

Morris Polich & Purdy LLP Law Firm Logo

Morris Polich & Purdy LLP 

Size of Organization: 94
Year Established: 1969
Web Site:

Telephone: 213-891-9100
Facsimile: 213-488-1178

Profile Visibility
#589 in weekly profile views out of 279,924 total law firms Overall

Icon for Featured Peer Review Rated LawyerIcon for Featured Peer Review Rated Lawyer at this firm

Morris Polich & Purdy LLP is a law firm that works with its clients on a national basis. We represent clients in every state, as well as many U.S. possessions. We also have a wealth of international affiliations.

Our dedication to clients, combined with extensive experience, both in the trial and appellate courts, are the qualities that distinguish us from other law firms. Our attorneys are known for their vast experience and success. We provide superior legal services in a manner consistent with our clients' best interests and goals. We are committed to expertise in all our areas of practice, knowing our clients' businesses and providing client service at its highest level.

Martindale-Hubbell has augmented a firm's provided information with third-party sourced data to present a more comprehensive overview of the firm's expertise:
U.S. Federal Litigation Activity
Source: U.S. Federal Civil District Court Databases. Powered by LexisNexis atVantage

Highest number of cases by Morris Polich & Purdy LLP:
Toxic Torts (62 cases in past two years)
Peer Review Ratings

Total number of Peer Review Rated lawyers of Morris Polich & Purdy LLP: 28

Documents by Morris Polich & Purdy LLP on

Subscribe to this feed

Sixth Circuit Clarifies That Settling PRPs Have Contribution, Not Cost Recovery Claims, That Must Be Brought Within Three Years of Entry of the Judgment
Sudhir Lay Burgaard, September 23, 2014
In Hobart Corp. v. Waste Management of Ohio, Inc. (Nos. 13-3273/3276, July 14, 2014), the Sixth Circuit held that a party settling any of its liability under CERCLA with the United States or a state has a contribution claim under Section 113 and not a cost recovery claim under Section 107....

ASARCO Decisions Offer Lessons for the Environmental Practitioner
Summer L. Nastich, September 17, 2014
In ASARCO v. Union Pacific Railroad Co. --- F.3d --- (10th Cir 2014) WL 2808249 and ASARCO v. Goodwin (2nd Cir. 2014) ---F.3d --- WL 2870117, two different Circuit Courts addressed the question of when the three-year statute of limitations on CERCLA contribution claims accrued when the plaintiff...

Absolute Pollution Exclusion Not a Bar to Coverage for Carbon Monoxide Poisoning in Nevada
Ryan C. McKim, September 17, 2014
In Century Surety Co. v. Casino West, Inc., 329 P.3d 614, 615 (Nev. 2014), the Supreme Court of Nevada addressed the issue of whether an absolute pollution exclusion in a motel’s general liability insurance policy barred coverage for carbon monoxide poisoning. Given the prevalence of the...


Complete a Client Review

Have you recently worked with this firm? Share your experience as a Client of this firm and complete a Client Review to help others make an informed choice when hiring legal counsel.

Compare this Firm

Compare this firm to other firms in your Favorites.

Add to Favorites

As a registered user of Connected, you can add law firms to your list of Favorites. You can securely add comments and compare the law firms in your Favorites.