Significant Litigation by our Lawyers

Complex Business Disputes

• Sheik Ahmed Abdul Rahman Saleh Ba Nafa v. Nasir Ashemimry and Ashetrust Investment Corp. - $22.4 million jury verdict, after trebling of civil theft damages, for client who had invested $6 million to be used in hotel investments. The jury found the defendant guilty of fraud, conversion, civil theft and breach of contract.
• Nobles and McHan Manufacturing Co. v. John Brown PLC. et al. - $8.2 million jury verdict for client who had purchased faulty robotics machinery for approximately $1 million. Case then settled for amount subject to confidentiality agreement.
• Hooters of America v. Ker's Winghouse - Successfully defended Ker's Winghouse in trade dress infringement action and obtained $1.2 million jury verdict on counter claim.
• Hayes e-Government Resources v. Florida House of Representatives - Obtained $3.9 million settlement for computer company suing State of Florida for breach of contract involving computer system used by State legislature.
• TSI v. Pearle Vision Corp. - Secured $3.6 million jury verdict for software company in lawsuit concerning breach of contract for data processing services.
• Mudano Associates v. Intergraph Corp. - Obtained $3.4 million jury verdict for client who paid approximately $125,000 for faulty computer aided drafting and design system.
• TSI v. BSHC - Achieved settlement of $2.4 million- for client suing HMO for theft of trade secrets in proprietary computer technology.
• Jumbo Sports - Secured over $2 million for client in litigation concerning breach of logistics and distribution services contract.
• Mulholland & Associates v. Prime Computer Corp. - Obtained $2 million on eve of trial in litigation over performance of computer system acquired by client for approximately $120,000.
• Wisbach v. Medical Manager Systems, Inc. - Obtained $2 million for client in litigation over breach of agreement to purchase all assets of a software company.
• Tucker Furniture Companies v. Tyler Business Systems - Obtained $2 million jury verdict for furniture retail client in litigation over performance of computer system.
• Florida Software Systems and Nevada Communications Corp. v. Columbia HCA - Successfully defended Columbia HCA in jury trial by plaintiff seeking $2 billion for lost profits allegedly resulting from Columbia's termination of exclusive contracts. After four weeks of trial, plaintiff dismissed all of its claims and agreed to pay money to Columbia.
• Stearman v. Intergraph Corp. - Obtained $1.6 million jury verdict for client who had paid $165,000 for a faulty computer aided drafting and design system.
• McCall & Lynch v. Intergraph Corp. - Obtained $.8 million jury verdict for client who had purchased faulty computer aided drafting and design system for roughly $125,000.
• Smalley Transportation Company v. Prime Computer - Obtained $.8 million payment in litigation over performance of computer system acquired by client trucking company.
• Tingley Systems. Inc. v. FHFA - Obtained full demand of $500 thousand in arbitration proceeding against an HMO concerning payment of fees for computer consulting services.
• CIS Technologies v. Computer Systems Excellence, Inc. - Case concerning software development contract for major developer of hospital information systems resulted in settlement on eve of trial with confidential settlement payment to our client.
• Loyola Federal Savings and Loan v. Kirchman Corporation - Obtained rescission of computer contract and refund of entire purchase price for our client in litigation concerning acquisition of large computer system in banking industry.
• NationsCredit Commercial Corp. v. Home Shopping Network, Inc. - Successfully defended Home Shopping Network in litigation by plaintiff seeking multiple millions for alleged breach of computer lease agreement. Case settled with dismissal and nominal payment to plaintiff.
• IBM v. Husco - Obtained judgment for full amount claimed by client IBM in litigation concerning performance of computer technology.
• Environmental Protection Commission of Hillsborough County v. Clear Channel Communications. In dispute with county over noise emanating from the Ford Amphitheatre, succeeded in having county noise ordinance declared unconstitutional; the parties reached a mutually agreeable settlement thereafter.
• Accordia Southest, Inc. v Sihle Insurance Group et al - Successfully defended insurance broker against claims that it tortiously interfered with insurance agents' relationships with their prior employer.

Copyright

• John Thornton v. TOC Productions et. al. - Obtained defense jury verdict for our client in copyright infringement case in which plaintiff sought millions of dollars in damages against successful writer/producer of the popular play, "Menopause the Musical". Jury found no infringement.
• Nautical Solutions Marketing, Inc. v. Boats.com - Obtained precedent setting declaratory judgment for client whose internet robot was alleged to have trespassed on competitors' website and to have infringed copyright. Also obtained jury verdict for damages to client.
• International Institute for Learning, Inc. v. J. Ross Publishing, Inc. et al. - Defeated motion brought by Microsoft's business partner to have court enter preliminary injunction against publisher client based on alleged copyright infringement and breach of contract, and to prohibit client from publishing software user's textbook. Case settled shortly after hearing with client to publish textbook.
• Clever Covers, Inc. v. Florida Storm Safe Panels, Inc. et al - Defended storm shutter manufacturer and distributor accused of copyright infringement, trademark infringement, and unfair competition; case settled on mutually agreeable terms.

Trademark/Trade Dress

• Hooters of America v. Ker's Winghouse - Successfully defended Ker's Winghouse in trade dress infringement action and obtained $1.2 million jury verdict on counter claim.
• Cash Plus v. Cash Plus, et al. - Defended local check cashing facility against allegations of trademark infringement and reached mutually agreeable settlement where our client continued to use the mark at issue.
• Rolex v. Dunkin's Diamonds, Inc, et al. - Defended jeweler selling second hand watches and reached successful settlement.
• NASCAR v. Mainstream Media - Defended auto racing magazine that was accused of infringing NASCAR trademarks. Negotiated settlement on mutually agreeable terms.
• Clever Covers, Inc. v. Florida Storm Safe Panels, Inc. et al - Defended storm shutter manufacturer and distributor accused of copyright infringement, trademark infringement, and unfair competition; case settled on mutually agreeable terms.
• Genesis Healthcare Corp. v. McHugh Fuller Law Group - Defended efforts brought by national nursing home against law firm client seeking to have court enter preliminary injunction that would prohibit client from using website to solicit business where website domain name included nursing home's federally registered trademark and website content discussed nursing home. Case settled shortly after hearing with client retaining domain name.
• Holcomb Facial Plastic Surgery v. SignatureWeb Medical Inc. et al, - Lead counsel for surgeon in arbitration case against Internet advertising company in case alleging cybersquatting, trademark infringement and breach of contract, in which advertising company registered client's trademark as domain name used to solicit customers for surgeon's competitors. Case settled with company recovering domain name and other relief.
• Anodyne Therapy, LLC v. Bertwell, - Defended agent of patent licensor accused of cybersquatting based on licensor having registered domain name containing licensee's corporate name, with case settling on mutually agreeable terms.
• Education Experiences Inc. v. Pattison - Defended domain name registrant accused of cybersquatting Uniform Dispute Resolution Proceedings (UDRP) arbitration, with case settling on mutually agreeable terms.
• Cav-Air, LLC v. Edwards and Associates, Inc. - Defended helicopter service company in suit alleging trademark infringement and breach of contract, with case settling on mutually agreeable terms.
• CIT Group, Inc. v. Logiology, Inc. - Defended trademark Applicant in administrative proceeding pending before the United States Patent Office’s Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) concerning Applicant’s pending trademark application, with case settling on mutually agreeable terms.
• Planet Fitness v. You Fit - Defended client in case asserting infringement of multiple registered and common law trademarks, copyrights, misappropriation of trade secrets, and breach of contract.  Case settled on mutually agreeable terms.
• Adoption Miracles, LLC v. Miracle Adoption - Counsel for adoption agency in case asserting common law trademark infringement.  Case settled after filing complaint on mutually agreeable terms, including entry of agreed to order of injuction.
• All Romance Ebooks, LLC v. One Romance Ebooks - Counsel for ebook seller in case asserting common law trademark infringement.  Case settled after filing complaint on mutually agreeable terms.

Trade Secrets

• Express Dental, LLC v. DentalMed, Inc. et al. - Counsel for Plaintiff in case alleging trade secret misappropriation and breach of non-compete agreements. 
• TSI v. BSHC - Achieved settlement of $2.4 million for client suing HMO for theft of trade secrets in proprietary computer technology.
• Proxix v. RMS - Litigated trade secrets concerning proprietary wild fire hazard modeling used to evaluate and underwrite property insurance risks and reached successful settlement.
• New Lenox Industries v. Fenton et al. - Litigated trade secret rights in proprietary air bag technology.
• Service Experts, Inc. v Northside Air Conditioning and Electrical, Inc. - Successfully defended employer against allegations that its employees had misappropriated trade secrets and tortiously interfered with business relationships. 

Patent

• eCom Systems, Inc. v. Shared Marketing Services, Inc. - Counsel for patent owner alleging infringement of patents by competitor and former customer.
• Starrs v. Check Savers, LLC - Counsel for patent owner in suit seeking declaration of client's rights.  Obtained judgment declaring client's ownership of patents.
• Glover v. Gilbarco - Counsel for Defendant in case alleging patent infringment.  Case settled on mutually agreeable terms after Markman ruling.
• Herbert v. Global Energy Group, In., et al - Counsel for Plaintiff in case against conditional assignee of multiple patents for breach of contract, patent infringement, and fraudulent inducement.  Case settled on mutually agreeable terms after filing Complaint.
• Terrabrook of Apollo Beach, L.P. v. Carry Over, Inc. et al. - Lead counsel for Plaintiff in suit seeking to declare Defendant's patents invalid, unenforceable and not infringed by client. Case settled after filing Complaint on mutually agreeable terms.
• Pump & Brush Finland Oy v. Philips Oral Healthcare et. al - Lead counsel for patent owner in suit to enforce patent. Case settled after filing Complaint on mutually agreeable terms.
• Hurr-Bolt, Inc. v Simpson Strong-Tie Company, Inc. - Filed suit against competitor for infringement of client’s patent relating to mechanical device used in building construction and related method and obtained a mutually agreeable settlement.

back to top