Steven Haber serves his clients both as a tenacious litigator and as a sage business counselor. His practice encompasses many areas of law such as business litigation, construction disputes, telecommunications law, products liability, intellectual property, class actions, securities litigation and property escheatment.
Mr. Haber represents a diverse client base including manufacturers of automobiles, printed circuit boards, architectural windows and doors, pharmaceutical products, and computer printers. Additionally, he represents real estate owners and developers, financial services companies, professional corporations, utilities and telecommunications companies.
Throughout Mr. Haber's career he has helped clients understand their business problems in a legal context so they could achieve their objectives. For example, Mr. Haber has counseled multi-disciplinary task forces investigating potential product safety issues and spearheaded voluntary recall programs in cooperation with the US Consumer Product Safety Commission.
Some of his recent achievements include obtaining a:
•$7.9 million recovery against a major law firm on behalf of a computer security company that invented a fiber optic security system, in an intellectual property legal malpractice case involving the negligent drafting and prosecution of a patent application.
•$2.5 million recovery against a major law firm on behalf of two physician- inventors of a mechanical ventilator for critically ill patients, in an intellectual property legal malpractice case involving negligent drafting and prosecution of a patent application.
•$2.2 million verdict in favor of a purchaser of multiple shopping centers against a seller for fraudulently inducing purchaser to pay more for the portfolio of shopping centers than it would have if defendants had accurately disclosed the financial performance of the assets.
•Multi-million jury verdict on behalf of the owners of a major shopping center in compensation for soil and ground water contamination caused by leaking underground storage tanks once buried beneath two gas stations. The verdict was one of the first in Pennsylvania under the state's Storage Tank Spill Prevention Act.
•Dismissal on federal preemption grounds of a putative class action that sought to hold the wireless communications industry liable for state law claims for injuries allegedly arising from radio frequency emissions.
•Dismissal for his client, a major automobile manufacturer, of four putative class action complaints brought against the automobile industry alleging violations of the New Jersey Antitrust Act and the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act. The complaint alleged that automobile manufacturers conspired to prohibit the export of automobiles originally sold in Canada to the United States. Plaintiffs alleged that vehicles sold in Canada were on average 10-30% less expensive than the same vehicles sold in the United States.
•Dismissal of personal injury and wrongful death actions filed by injured workers and decedents arising out of casino hotel garage collapse. He successfully defeated plaintiffs' attempts to have their claims heard in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas, as that court lacked personal jurisdiction over the casino hotel's owner.
•Favorable property damage settlement on behalf of the owner of three commercial properties in Fort Washington, Pennsylvania that were damaged as a result of catastrophic flooding. Prior to the litigation, FEMA had denied any payment to the insured for the property damage.
•Summary judgment for liability on behalf of a property owner who accelerated $13 million in rent against a commercial tenant where the tenant abandoned the premises with 10 years left on the lease after the property suffered flood damage.
•Defense decision in favor of his clients, telecommunications providers, in preference litigation seeking to avoid and recover approximately $5 million which plaintiff alleged arose out of a reselling agreement. During the course of the litigation, defendants established that plaintiffs' business was a fraudulent Ponzi scheme perpetrated by insiders of the debtor.
•Summary judgment in favor of his client, an architectural window and door manufacturer, based upon application of the economic loss doctrine, on a claim that it supplied defective product for the renovation of a 200+ unit beachfront property.
•Settlement of a patent infringement case brought against the provider of job locator software and its customers for a de minimus amount. The terms of the settlement included a perpetual software license for the client and its customers.
•Significant settlement on behalf of a widow and children of decedent against various manufacturers, component providers, HVAC contractors, etc., for causing the death of the decedent by electrocution while he was servicing a defective heating system in a public school.
•Dismissal of electronic component manufacturer client from a products liability case seeking compensation for property damage in excess of $500,000. His client was released with $0 contribution to the settlement.
•Injunction enforcing continuous operation requirement of commercial lease and enjoining defendants from closing a retail outlet in the mall in violation of their lease.
Obermayer has been Mr. Haber's professional home for most of his career. He is a partner in the firm's Litigation Department and the Intellectual Property Litigation Group. (Also at Cherry Hill, NJ Office)