Source: https://www.fellheimereichen.com/success-stories/
Timestamp: 2019-04-22 00:56:32+00:00

Document:
In case involving claims against a debt collector under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, F&E (1) secured favorable verdict in federal bench trial and obtained statutory damages for consumer clients and (2) successfully defended the appeal of that decision in a precedential opinion holding that businesses that purchase and collect defaulted debts are debt collectors subject to enforcement under that Act. Tepper v. Amos Financial LLC (US District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania, 2017 & US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, 2018).
In claims arising from client’s purchase of gas stations, F&E obtained $1.5 million judgment against the seller for breach of real estate sales contract and a $2.3 million settlement against negligent environmental consulting firm. Universal Enterprise Group, L.P. v. Duncan Petroleum Corporation (Delaware Chancery Court, 2013).
In dispute arising from sales commissions owed to a marketing firm, F&E obtained $400,000 trial court judgment against defendant contractors and defeated their counterclaim for $180,000 of overpayments. ADI Technologies, Inc. v. MILSPRAY, LLC and KTCB Enterprises, LLC (US District Court, Eastern District of Virginia, 2012).
F&E defeated portion of defendants’ summary judgment on behalf of clients alleging wrongful termination, New Jersey Dram Shop Act violations, statutory civil rights claims, and various intentional torts (including civil claims for sexual assault). District Court allowed most claims to proceed to trial. Amentler v. 69 Main Street, LLC (US District Court of New Jersey, 2012).
In connection with a franchise dispute, F&E defeated an appeal of the US District Court’s denial of the competitor’s claim for punitive damages exceeding $450,000 and its decision that the jury’s verdict including punitive damages violated Connecticut law. Edible Arrangements Intern., Inc. v. Chinsammy (US Court of Appeals for 2nd Circuit, 2011).
In representation of construction company client in dispute with condominium purchasers, F&E obtained judgment on pleadings for client, dismissal of the individual claim against the company’s principal, and dismissal of all tort claims. LaForte, et al. v. Spector Construction Co., et al. (Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, 2011).
In federal court case involving a commercial loan, F&E obtained for the lender summary judgment and a right to seek attorneys’ fees against the guarantors. Longview Fund, L.P. v. Costello, et al. (US District Court, Middle District of Pennsylvania, 2011).
In dispute between a borrower and a national bank, F&E obtained on behalf of the borrower: (1) a reversal of the trial court’s denial of a pendency of prior action defense; (2) opening of a confessed judgment; and (3) a remand of the case with direction to stay the proceedings pending disposition of the borrower’s previously filed suit against the bank and certain other defendants. PNC Bank, N.A. v. Bluestream Technology, Inc., 14 A.3d 831 (Pennsylvania Superior Court, 2010).
In AAA proceeding involving a construction dispute, F&E secured a favorable time payment plan for the project owner. J.J. DeLuca Co., Inc. v. Cardiovascular Medical Associates, P.C. (American Arbitration Association, 2010).
In connection with an employer’s bankruptcy case, F&E successfully convinced the court to modify the automatic stay to permit a former employee to proceed with an employment discrimination claim in US District Court. In re: Brooks Provisions, LLC (US Bankruptcy Court, Eastern District Pennsylvania, 2010).
In landlord-tenant dispute, F&E successfully vacated a $670,000 confessed judgment against the tenant by convincing court that the landlord elected possession of the property in lieu of the unpaid rent balance for the remaining lease term. Estate of Artinian v. Universal Delaware, Inc., (Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, 2010).
In a partnership dissolution case, F&E convinced the appellate court to deny the opponent’s appeal of the trial court’s decision to disqualify the opponent’s counsel. Limor v. Ratner (Pennsylvania Superior Court, 2009).
F&E obtained favorable settlement for a school district employee’s Family Medical Leave Act claim before the defendants had filed their answer to the amended complaint. Feinberg v. School District of Philadelphia, et al. (US District Court, Eastern District Pennsylvania, 2009).
In suit by a contractor against a real estate developer, F&E obtained a dismissal of the contractor’s claims on behalf of its developer client based on substantive arbitrability grounds, and simultaneously stayed contractor’s mechanic’s lien claim pending completion of a AAA arbitration proceeding. Allied Building Corp. v. 574 Main Street Development, L.P. (Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, 2008).
In case involving a franchise dispute, F&E defeated an appeal of the US District Court’s denial of the competitor’s claim for punitive damages exceeding $450,000 and its decision that the jury’s verdict including punitive damages violated Connecticut law. Edible Arrangements Intern., Inc. v. Chinsammy, 446 Fed. Appx. 332 (US Court of Appeals for 2nd Circuit, 2011).
In complex procedural fight in federal court, F&E vacated US District Court’s dismissal of client’s case based upon its failure to join indispensable parties and forum non conveniens grounds. US Court of Appeals remanded the case for reconsideration and careful evaluation of multiple issues raised by the dismissal motion. Synygy, Inc. v. ZS Associates, Inc. (US Court of Appeals for 3rd Circuit, 2009).
In claims arising from client’s purchase of gas stations, F&E obtained $2.3 million settlement against negligent environmental consulting firm. Universal Enterprise Group, L.P. v. Duncan Petroleum Corporation, 2013 WL 3353743 (Delaware Chancery Court, July 1, 2013).
F&E successfully defended and settled Lanham Act false advertising claim against food manufacturer.
In case involving a mortgage broker’s Lanham Act and unfair competition claims against his former employer, F&E negotiated an amicable settlement on the broker’s behalf.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.