Gregory Baldwin, Eduardo Ramos and Ilene Pabian, Holland & Knight.Holland & Knight Defeats Default Judgment, Then Avoids Liability for Dominican Republic
Most Effective Lawyers: International litigation — The legal team successfully voided a $50 million default judgment and avoided liability in trial.
December 10, 2018 at 05:00 AM
3 minute read
Gregory Baldwin, Eduardo Ramos and Ilene Pabian
Holland & Knight
A Holland & Knight team succeeded in getting a $50 million default judgment reversed for the Dominican Republic and then carved the government out of the case.
Partners Gregory Baldwin and Eduardo Ramos persuaded a Miami federal judge to reject most of the breach-of-contract claims filed by two Miami construction companies against the Dominican Republic and its water resource agency, Instituto Nacional de Recursos Hidraulicos, or INDRHI.
The case flowed from a $51.8 million irrigation construction contract awarded in 2001 to Sun Land & RGITC LLC and Architectural Ingenieria Siglo XXI LLC (AIS). Construction began in March 2004 but ran into several delays.
Nearly five years later, INDRHI terminated the contract, claiming force majeure because of difficulties financing the project. Sun Land and AIS sued INDRHI and the Dominican Republic in 2013, seeking breach-of-contract damages of more than $50 million.
When the Dominican Republic and INDRHI failed to respond to the suit, the contractors were awarded the default judgment. That's when the Dominican Republic and INDRHI hired Holland & Knight.
The first step was to overturn the judgment. The Holland & Knight attorneys maintained service was mishandled of service and the default judgment was excusable neglect, claiming no government officials in a managerial capacity knew about the case. Ilene Pabian argued the case, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit agreed.
At trial in 2017, the dispute focused on who breached the contract. The contractors blamed delays and costly changes on the Dominican Republic and INDRHI.
Baldwin and Ramos argued against a government breach. They also maintained the government did not control INDRHI and was not responsible for claims against the agency.
U.S. District Judge K. Michael Moore ruled the Dominican Republic and INDRHI were separate legal entities and decided only INDRHI owed damages to AIS. The government was cleared of liability with a finding that it didn't terminate the contract.
The $576,000 judgment against the agency was far less than the $30 million claimed against the defendants.
The contractors followed up with a motion to amend the court's findings of fact and conclusions of law, which could have reversed the judgment. Moore denied the motion in August with one procedural exception.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All
Brazil Is Quickly Becoming a Vital LatAm Market for Greenberg Traurig, Other US Law Firms
5 minute read
'Would've Been Snoring Without Ya': Fort Lauderdale Jury Awards $4.5 Million in Condo Investment Spat
4 minute read
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250
