Legal Judg(e)ments

In the final episode of Season 1, Bob talks with Scott Sinrich about his pro bono work in Stearns v. Montiero and how, despite popular belief, lawyering remains a noble profession.

In discussing Cunningham v. Lyft, Bob and New England Legal Foundation's Ben Robbins address recent judicial interpretations of the Federal Arbitration Act, how they impact the business and legal world and whether countermeasures employed by the plaintiffs' bar will make big business think twice about arbitration in the future.

In discussing Avila v. Boston Public Health Commission, Bob and Jordana Greenman talk about whether Boston's eviction moratorium violates “due process of law” and how campaign rhetoric may have led to the implementation of this law. 

Bob and Dan Dain talk about the role of the judiciary in land use litigation and how the concept of “injury”, as interpreted by the court in Murchison v. Zoning Board of Appeals of Sherborn, saved real estate development in Massachusetts, particularly in “down zoning” jurisdictions like Boston. Dan also explains how zoning regulations constitute the single greatest contributor to the obesity crisis in America. A must listen for all land use lawyers, town planners, and real estate developers.

In part II of Sullivan v. Gagliardi, Peter McGlynn and Bob Stetson discuss how the oldest continuous court in the Western Hemisphere rejected the moral principles of St. Thomas Aquinas in the home sale context and what the legislature can do to rectify the decision.

The first in a two-part episode about Sullivan v. Gagliardi.  Peter McGlynn talks to Bob about what happens when your client's home turns into a nightmare.  This is a must-listen for all home owners and real estate attorneys.

Attorney Joe Downes tells Bob about his legal strategies in Bass River Tennis Corp. v. Barros; a battle for control over a popular tennis club that led to five different lawsuits and eleven separate appeals.

Bob sits down with Jennifer LaManna to talk about her forceful and successful defense of the First Amendment in Shak v. Shak. This episode is a must-listen for all divorce practitioners.

Bob "Zooms” with Andy Caplan about his case Curtatone v. Barstool Sports, Inc. including how the historical fight against organized crime and modern “virtue signaling” set the stage for a fight between a well-known and popular media personality and the mayor of a city just outside of Boston.

Bob talks with the author of a popular legal treatise, Jordan Shapiro,  about his case Haddad v. Haddad and how the trusts and estates bar can virtually eliminate will contests by using modern technology. As a bonus, Jordan also discusses an important homestead law development. 

Bob is joined by Andrea Martin to discuss her groundbreaking case of UMNV 205 – 207 Newbury LLC v. Caffe Nero Americas, Inc. They also discuss how swimming led to this momentous application of the doctrine of frustration of purpose in the middle of a pandemic.

Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. said, “The life of the law has not been logic; it has been experience.” But, that famous statement misses a key ingredient in the law: the lawyers. Legal judgments often depend on the judgements of lawyers just as much as logic or societal experience. Boston trial lawyer Bob Stetson examines the litigation strategies and arguments that move the law through the prism of important civil cases.