Notable Victories
For over a century, Egan, Flanagan and Cohen has secured precedent-setting decisions and significant results for our clients before the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, the Massachusetts Appeals Court, the U.S. Supreme Court, and the federal courts. A selection of those matters is summarized below.
Hazen Paper Co. v. Biggins
U.S. Supreme Court
Egan, Flanagan and Cohen represented the respondent in this landmark employment matter before the United States Supreme Court, a distinction achieved by a select group of practitioners nationally. The case addressed the standards governing liability and liquidated damages under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) after the client, the longtime technical director of Hazen Paper Company, was terminated at age 62, shortly before his pension benefits were set to vest. The client prevailed before a jury and the First Circuit Court of Appeals on claims under both the ADEA and the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) before the matter proceeded to the Supreme Court.
Maurice M. Cahillane argued the case before the Court. The resulting unanimous decision clarified the governing legal standards for disparate-treatment and liquidated-damages claims under the ADEA and remains a foundational authority in employment law.
Firm attorneys: Maurice M. Cahillane, John J. Egan.
Dubuque v. Cumberland Farms, Inc.
Massachusetts Appeals Court
Egan, Flanagan and Cohen obtained one of the largest wrongful death verdicts in the history of the Commonwealth on behalf of the estate and family of a woman killed by a vehicle that struck a Cumberland Farms convenience store. Trial evidence established that the defendant was aware of 485 similar collisions at its locations nationwide over a ten-year period and had not implemented available safety measures.
John J. Egan served as lead trial counsel, securing a jury verdict of $32,369,024.30, the largest award in Massachusetts history for a wrongful death involving an instantaneous fatality. On appeal, Egan defended the trial court’s evidentiary rulings regarding the defendant’s history of prior incidents, and the Massachusetts Appeals Court affirmed the judgment in full.
Firm attorneys: John J. Egan, Kevin D. Withers, Lauren F. Olanoff, and Michael G. McDonough.
H1 Lincoln, Inc. v. South Washington Street, LLC
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Egan, Flanagan and Cohen represented a commercial car dealership in a protracted dispute arising from the wrongful termination of a long-term ground lease. The Firm established at trial that the landlord had engaged in “commercial extortion” and fraudulent misrepresentation in violation of the Commonwealth’s unfair business practices statute, G.L. c. 93A, resulting in multiple damages exceeding $10 million.
On appeal, the defendant argued that a limitation-of-liability clause in the lease should have barred recovery of the c. 93A damages. The Supreme Judicial Court rejected that argument, holding that a limitation-of-liability provision cannot be enforced to shield a party that willfully or knowingly engages in unfair or deceptive conduct. The decision is now a leading authority on commercial extortion and the enforceability of liability waivers under c. 93A.
Firm attorneys: John J. Egan and Michael G. McDonough.
City Electric Supply Co. v. Arch Insurance Co.
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Egan, Flanagan and Cohen secured a precedent-setting ruling from the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court on behalf of a client seeking to enforce a mechanic’s lien bond. After a Superior Court judge granted summary judgment for the defendant surety on procedural grounds, the Firm petitioned for and obtained direct appellate review.
Thomas E. Day drafted the successful Application for Direct Appellate Review, briefed the matter, and argued before the Supreme Judicial Court. The Court agreed with the Firm’s position, holding that the mechanic’s lien statute, G.L. c. 254, § 14, imposes no requirement that a claimant record an attested copy of its complaint in the registry of deeds. The decision vacated the lower court’s ruling and is now the controlling authority on lien-bond enforcement in Massachusetts.
Firm attorney: Thomas E. Day.
Melnychenko v. 84 Lumber Co.
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
In a case of first impression, Egan, Flanagan and Cohen represented employees asserting claims of same-sex sexual harassment at a time when Massachusetts courts had not yet addressed whether such claims were cognizable under the Commonwealth’s anti-discrimination statute.
Timothy J. Ryan obtained a favorable result at trial. On the employer’s appeal, the Supreme Judicial Court affirmed, establishing that same-sex sexual harassment is actionable under G.L. c. 151B.
Firm attorney: Timothy J. Ryan.
Krumsiek v. Collins Electric Company, Inc.
Massachusetts Appeals Court
Egan, Flanagan and Cohen represented Collins Electric Company, a Springfield electrical contracting corporation founded in 1906, in an appeal from a $2.16 million adverse judgment concerning the interpretation of a dividend provision in the company’s shareholder-redemption agreement.
Egan, Flanagan and Cohen argued that the trial court had applied the wrong legal standard in excluding evidence of how the parties to the agreement had construed the same contract language in two earlier stock redemptions. The Massachusetts Appeals Court agreed, holding that the trial court had misapplied Massachusetts law governing course-of-performance evidence and abused its discretion in excluding it. The Court vacated the judgment and remanded the matter for a new trial.
Firm attorneys: John J. Egan and Lauren F. Olanoff.
Powers v. H.B. Smith Co.
Massachusetts Appeals Court
Egan, Flanagan and Cohen represented a corporate co-defendant named in an age discrimination lawsuit brought by a former quality control inspector against his employer. Prior to trial, the Firm moved for summary judgment on their client’s behalf, arguing that the plaintiff’s claim was barred because he had not first exhausted his administrative remedies. The Superior Court agreed and dismissed our client from the case.
On appeal, the plaintiff argued that summary judgment had been improper. The Massachusetts Appeals Court disagreed and affirmed, holding that resort to the courts on a discrimination claim is unavailable against a party never named in the underlying MCAD complaint.
Firm attorney: Timothy J. Ryan
Serrazina v. Springfield Public Schools
Massachusetts Appeals Court, affirmed by Supreme Judicial Court
Egan, Flanagan and Cohen represented a public school teacher terminated by Springfield Public Schools in connection with arbitration and subsequent litigation over her reinstatement. An arbitrator determined that the client was entitled to return to her position, and the ensuing court proceedings resulted in a favorable outcome that included an award of back pay.
Firm attorney: Timothy J. Ryan.
Pecoy v. Hanson
Massachusetts Appeals Court
Egan, Flanagan and Cohen represented the plaintiff in a consolidated business dispute arising from the collapse of a real estate investment partnership formed to acquire and redevelop a large residential complex in Hoover, Alabama. Following a jury trial on claims for breach of contract, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and tortious interference with an advantageous relationship, the Superior Court entered judgment in favor of the Firm’s client and co-plaintiff UC Riverchase, LLC, and awarded damages and attorney’s fees.
The defendants appealed, challenging the denial of their motion for a directed verdict, the denial of their motion for a new trial on damages, an evidentiary ruling, and the attorney’s fee awards. The Massachusetts Appeals Court affirmed the underlying judgments in full, holding that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury’s verdict and that the damages award was neither excessive nor a miscarriage of justice.
Firm attorneys: John J. Egan and Lauren F. Olanoff
Chuduk v. Avraamov
Massachusetts Appeals Court
Egan, Flanagan and Cohen represented a co-defendant in a business dispute. The plaintiff brought negligence claims alleging that this co-defendant should have investigated or inquired into possible misappropriation of funds passing through its accounts. The Superior Court granted summary judgment in favor of our client.
On appeal, the Massachusetts Appeals Court affirmed, holding that our client owed no duty of care to the plaintiff to investigate or inquire into possible misappropriation of funds. While the Court reversed portions of the judgment involving other parties on unrelated grounds, the summary judgment obtained by Egan, Flanagan and Cohen on behalf of our client was affirmed in full.
Firm attorney: Lauren F. Olanoff
Commonwealth v. Rosado
Massachusetts Appeals Court
Egan, Flanagan and Cohen represented a defendant in an interlocutory appeal from the denial of her motion to suppress evidence recovered during a motor vehicle stop.
The Firm argued that an anonymous tip lacked sufficient indicia of reliability to establish the reasonable suspicion required to justify the stop under Article 14 of the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights. The Massachusetts Appeals Court agreed, holding that the Commonwealth had failed to establish the tip’s veracity and that police corroboration of only innocent, observable details did not cure that deficiency. The Court reversed the denial of the motion to suppress and ordered that a new order enter allowing it, resulting in the suppression of the evidence against the client and dismissal of the case against her.
Firm attorney: Lauren F. Olanoff
Case results depend on the specific facts of each case, and prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes.