• Massachusetts Clean Energy Technology Center
  • Series A Preferred Stock Investment in 7AC Technologies, Inc.
  • The Viridian
  • 200-residential unit development, Boston, MA
  • Boston Celtics
  • Develpment of new practice facility, Boston, MA

Business Litigation


Posternak attorneys regularly and successfully try cases for our business clients in courts, in arbitrations, and before administrative tribunals.  Our business litigation clients range from international corporations to sole proprietors.  We litigate disputes relating to contracts, intellectual property rights, real estate and environmental issues, unfair business practices, non-competition covenants, employment relationships, securities transactions, regulatory and non-regulatory health care matters, bankruptcy proceedings, and many other commercial concerns.  We are skilled both in prosecuting claims when our clients’ rights have been violated and in defending our clients when they have been accused of violating another business’s rights.

We also understand how important and demanding any litigation is to our business clients and their key personnel.  Our clients value regular, clear communication about goals and progress toward goals.  We seek at all times to exceed those expectations.

While we enjoy trying cases, we recognize that a trial often is not the outcome that our business clients prefer.  Posternak attorneys therefore are skilled in negotiating settlements, including advocating for our clients at mediations, when an alternative to a trial promises a prompt, favorable, and inexpensive solution to a dispute.

Our attorneys include experienced arbitrators, who often are asked to decide the rights of parties in business cases.

Representative cases 

  • Prosecuted, in the federal court in Los Angeles, claims on behalf of the nation’s largest distributor of satellite television services involving the most critical aspects of the client’s distribution agreement.
  • Defended the sellers of a business that manufactures storage containers for spent nuclear fuel in a multi-million dollar arbitration brought by the buyers of the business, alleging that the clients had committed fraud and that the financial statements of the business did not conform to GAAP.
  • Represented a major consumer products manufacturer in an arbitration, in Chicago, challenging the client’s warranty responsibilities for millions of dollars of product.
  • Defended a well-known local entrepreneur against a securities fraud class action claim.
  • Defended one of the founders of a local biotech firm against a claim that he owed a substantial “finder’s fee,” arising out of the firm’s initial venture capital financing.
  • Represented a former high-level employee of a consumer products manufacturer, in a claim that he had been deprived of his sizeable percentage of the proceeds of the sale of the company.
  • Enjoined competitor of a client, after a trial, from competing after the competitor had hired away a key employee of client.
  • Defeated a claim against another client, again after trial, alleging that our client should be enjoined from competing with the plaintiff after hiring a key employee of the plaintiff.
  • Defended a health care client in a case, tried in the Miami federal court, alleging damages arising from the client’s decision not to close on the purchase of a “turn-key” skilled nursing facility.
  • Represented a sports agency firm in an arbitration commenced by one of its former sports agents.
  • Defeated an appeal by an abutter, a supermarket chain, from a decision in favor of our developer client allowing it to build a shopping center on Cape Cod with a rival supermarket as the anchor tenant.
  • Defended a real estate firm in an environmental case arising out of its construction of a sizeable residential development.
  • Represented the corporate owner of dozens of gasoline stations in pollution claims filed by the Department of Environmental Protection and abutters.
  • Defended a private equity fund in litigation involving a multi-million dollar investment in a portfolio company.

Related Services Areas


Steven Broadley

Partner617.973.6136 fax

Jon Cowen

Partner617.973.6238 fax

Joseph Crimmins

Partner617.973.6273 fax

Dustin Hecker

Partner617.973.6131 fax

Justin Kesselman

Associate617.973.6102 fax

Andrew Levin

Partner617.973.6143 fax 617.722.4994

Adam Littman

Associate617.973.6195 fax

Erik Lund

Senior Counsel617.973.6129 fax

Nicholas Nesgos

Partner617.973.6168 fax

Catherine Savoie

Partner617.973.6274 fax

Gary Smith

Partner617.973.6277 fax

Paul White

Partner617.973.6135 fax 617.722.4932


Breaking Down AT&T Vs. DOJ Ruling

NECN Business, Dustin Hecker, June 13, 2018

AT&T/Time Warner Merger

Bloomberg Radio, Dustin Hecker, June 12, 2018

Why One Litigator Believes AT&T-Time Warner Should Win DOJ’s Challenge

Broadcasting & Cable, Dustin Hecker, June 11, 2018

Supreme Court Opens Door for Legalized Sports Betting

NECN Business, Dustin Hecker, May 14, 2018

What You Need to Know About the AT&T Antitrust Trial

NECN Business, Dustin Hecker, March 19, 2018

Driverless Cars Are On Their Way

Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly, December 12, 2016

Experts: Time Good, but Rumored Fantasy Deal Challenging

Associated Press, Dustin Hecker, June 15, 2016

Collateral Attack On Debt Buyer Allowed To Proceed

Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly, Steven Broadley, November 19, 2015

Security Agreement Can Be Modified By ‘Course Of Conduct’

Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly, Nicholas Nesgos, July 1, 2014

BroadSide: Crosby Limits Role in Casino Decision

NECN BroadSide, Michael Rubin, May 8, 2014

Law Firm not Liable for Failing to Control Client

Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly, Nicholas Nesgos, April 28, 2014

Strip Club Wins Appeal After Seattle Denies Business Permit, Dustin Hecker, July 1, 2013

Marijuana Legalization ‘Inevitable’: But How & When Will Weed Become Hassle-Free?

International Business Times, Dustin Hecker, April 22, 2013

Labor strife racks NFL, NHL

NECN, Dustin Hecker, September 24, 2012

Thank you for your interest in our firm. Before sending us an email, we ask that you please confirm your understanding of the following information. Our Web site,, is intended for general use and is not legal advice. Your email is not intended to create, and our receipt of it does not create or constitute, an attorney-client relationship. Any information that you provide to anyone at our firm cannot be considered confidential or privileged unless we agree to represent you. By sending this email, you confirm that you have read and understand this notice.

Processing email...