Wesson v. Leone Enterprises, Inc., 437 Mass. 708 (2002).

Important revision to commercial law whereby Gilman, McLaughlin & Hanrahan, LLP's client, a commercial tenant, was relieved of continued rent obligations in a work space plagued by leaks. In this decision Massachusetts eliminated the "independent covenant rule" which previously held that such a breach by landlord did not relieve tenant of legal obligation to still pay rent.

Chelsea Industries v. Gaffrey, 389 Mass. 1 (1983).

Gilman, McLaughlin & Hanrahan, LLP represented plaintiff in an important decision establishing the duty of loyalty owed by company executives to their corporation. We recovered damages for the company from officers planning to launch competitor while still employed.

Kelley v. Airborne Freight Company, 140 F.3d. 335 (1st Cir. 1998).

Gilman, McLaughlin & Hanrahan, LLP represented a long term employee fired from his job. We obtained the largest age discrimination judgment in state history.

Villages Development Co., Inc. v. Secretary of the Executive Office of Environmental Affairs, 410 Mass. 100 (1991).

Gilman, McLaughlin & Hanrahan, LLP represented the developer of a major Cape Cod condominium and golf course project. Opponents of the project had convinced the regulators to demand a massive and far reaching Environmental Impact Report. Litigation established the right of a property developer to challenge the government's determination of the required breath and scope of such a report and reduced the scope in this instance to traffic effects created by one intersection.

Parks v. FDIC, 65 F.3d 207 (1st Cir. 1995).

Gilman, McLaughlin & Hanrahan LLP represented a former director of a failed savings bank under FDIC receivership. The FDIC sent a comprehensive subpoena to the bank director seeking her personal financial records and those of her family members. Gilman, McLaughlin & Hanrahan LLP challenged the subpoena on the grounds that it constituted an illegal search in violation of the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution. The United States Court of Appeals became the only circuit in the United States to hold that the FDIC subpoena constituted an illegal search and refused to order the bank director to comply.

Somerset Savings Bank v. Chicago Title Insurance Company, 420 Mass. 422 (1995).

Gilman, McLaughlin & Hanrahan, LLP represented the bank and obtained the reversal of a Superior Court decision relieving the title insurer of any obligations to compensate a loss. The Supreme Judicial Court ruled that conduct and advertising by an insurance company may result in a duty to search title and report insured and uninsured defects despite limiting language in the policy.

Boston Edison Co. v. Board of Assessors of Boston, 402 Mass. 1 (1988).

Gilman, McLaughlin & Hanrahan, LLP represented the City of Boston in a case which threatened its fiscal solvency in this successful property tax defense. The appealing utility had sought over $300 million in tax abatements from city taxpayers.

Milton Commons Associates v. Board of Appeals of Milton, 14 Mass. App. Ct. 111 (1982).

Gilman, McLaughlin & Hanrahan, LLP represented the developer in this successful suit to obtain a court order granting a comprehensive permit for a multifamily housing development. We were able to avoid lengthy Housing Appeals Committee hearings by proving entitlement to the permit based upon procedural failings by the Board of Appeals.

Tregor v. Board of Assessors of Boston, 377 Mass. 602 (1979).
Kenniston v. Board of Assessors of Boston, 380 Mass. 888 (1980).

Gilman, McLaughlin & Hanrahan, LLP also represented the City of Boston in this high stakes pair of cases dealing with equalization of property tax valuations. The outcome resulted in substantial changes in state law and property assessment practices.

Commonwealth v. Haas, 373 Mass. 545 (1977).

Gilman, McLaughlin & Hanrahan, LLP represented the defendant and obtained the reversal of a murder conviction as a result of failure to give Miranda warnings and improper closing argument.

Kansallis Finance Ltd. v. Fern, Anderson et al., 421 Mass. 659 (1996).

Gilman, McLaughlin & Hanrahan LLP represented a lender in a suit against the apparent law partners of an attorney who signed a fraudulent opinion letter causing the lender to advance significant funds. In answer to a question of first impression certified to it by the First Circuit Court of Appeals, the Supreme Judicial Court held for the first time that innocent partners were liable for even fraudulent acts of a co-partner.

Levenson v. Archdiocese of Boston (Suffolk Superior Court)

Gilman, McLaughlin & Hanrahan LLP took on the Archdiocese of Boston on behalf of a long time client who was squeezed out of a valuable development opportunity because of misplaced trust in the defendant. We overcame significant legal, factual and cultural barriers to obtain a successful settlement.