Not Fake News

Executive exits do not always require litigation to create meaningful severance packages. When Brooklyn Mirage terminated a former Director of Premium Sales and withheld his earned commissions, we immediately engaged with venue’s General Counsel. In 12 days, we secured a $45,000 settlement for the client without needing to file suit.

Companies often settle frivolous lawsuits for five-figure “nuisance” amounts simply to avoid legal fees. In defending our client Easyship Inc. against CIPA claims carrying potential nine-figure statutory exposure, we challenged plaintiff’s trap-and-trace theory and refused to entertain their settlement invitations. After we signaled a preparedness to litigate, they voluntary discontinued the action. No settlement paid nor appearances entered.

In litigation involving an Applebee’s location, we developed landlord-interference and pandemic-related counterclaims that defeated the landlord’s attempt to obtain summary judgment and pendente lite rent, preserving Applebee’s affirmative claims and preventing the landlord from converting disputed obligations into immediate payment leverage.

Representing a private equity associate terminated for “performance” reasons, we negotiated a 228% increase in severance compensation despite a “performance” related termination shifting a $43,000 initial position into a $141,000 severance package.

Corporate defendants routinely use the entity shield to stall or evade contractual obligations. In Yean v. Tulip Health, we established a landmark first-impression precedent in the New York Supreme Court, securing a ruling that corporate officers can be held individually liable as “hiring parties” under the Freelance Isn't Free Act. By piercing the corporate barrier as a matter of law, we converted institutional posturing into direct personal exposure, permanently altering counterparty risk.

Plaintiffs counsel pursued a California Invasion of Privacy Act action carrying significant aggregate statutory exposure. Rather than enter the default early-settlement posture the plaintiffs' economics depended on, we maintained litigation-ready positioning and challenged the firm's assumptions about settlement viability. Despite plaintiff's repeated inquiries on settlement posture, we held firm and advised 'File if you must.' They quietly discontinued without notice months later.

An AI start up CEO attempted to claw back a senior engineer’s equity based on backdated agreements and false narratives of purportedly terminating the employee. Although our client was on the defensive, we went on the offensive.

We systematically reframed the dispute around their largest vulnerabilities—faulty cap table, doctored agreements, merger exposure—threatening the closure of their $10M merger pending in the background. The matter was entirely resolved in 7 days, forcing a 489% pivot from their opening position without disturbing the underlying deal.

An accountant suspected of unlicensed practice ignored our client for 18 months regarding a $20,000 loan they used for mortgage payments related to commercial real estate investments in MIA. Our intervention revealed a long queue of competing creditors—and we were last in line.

We discovered he had routed the loan proceeds directly into a $3.6M commercial real estate portfolio—and that his unrecorded outside indebtedness directly violated material covenants holding his underlying mortgage stack together. A breach in one covenant triggers breaches in all.

We filed a verified complaint detailing the unlicensed CPA practice, and the loan default, which structurally threatened to trigger systemic cross-defaults and accelerate his entire mortgage debt. Legally required to answer each allegation under penalty of perjury, the debtor prioritized our client ahead of all other creditors to protect his asset base. He satisfied a 125% recovery premium in under four weeks, secured by a 250% Confession of Judgment.

Plaintiffs frequently open commercial disputes with inflated six-figure numbers designed to anchor discussions. When Irth Capital, an investment firm cofounded by Sheikh Mohammad from the Qatari Royal family, received a pre-litigation $300K demand from an Am Law 200 firm, we were retained to intervene. Facing escalating demands from plaintiff’s counsel—first for $120,000, then $300,000—our client was positioned for an expensive, multi-front war of attrition. We entered at a critical moment to prevent a poorly framed response from establishing a $120,000 recovery floor. Through negotiations, we highlighted plaintiff’s rocky road to recovery and previewed the legal infirmities in its position. The momentum behind plaintiff’s escalating threats disappeared. Two months later, plaintiff filed suit for just $60,000, asserting only a breach-of-contract claim and omitting the account-stated claim it had successfully pursued in other cases.