We promise your relationship with us will be unique. First, we welcome any discussion about our fees and the cost of litigating a certain matter. We want you to know that when your matter is concluded, you have received great value for your investment in us. With that in mind, we often offer a value-based service that includes a price for our services for a particular matter. We will meet with you, determine your goals and values in connection with the specific reason you have contacted us, and develop a legal strategy to achieve those goals, and a corresponding price. We want you to be pleased with us, come back to us, and recommend us to your colleagues.
We recognize that many businesses have different goals. Some are more concerned about reputational risks in litigation, others are more concerned about financial risks, others want to win at any cost. All are concerned about fees. We want to have our finger on your pulse, so that the choices we make and the strategy we propose have the best chance of getting you where you want to be.
You will benefit from our size and efficiency. Technology allows us to compete with much larger firms and provide legal service that will keep you informed of your matter, answer questions promptly, and pursue the litigation strategy that is best suited to your goals and objectives.
Our family has been manufacturing and selling trucks in Connecticut since 1947 based on quality service and reputation. Tony has been our attorney since 2000 for the same reasons.
Wow Twitter blocked as sensitive content my tweet about a bill the CT legislature is debating on employment law and wages. I think its a bad bill, but not that bad twitter...
Read MoreCT Gen. Assembly discussing a bill that requires ERs to disclose wage range for a position (could be what you have budgeted) when you offer a job and once a year. I am pretty moderate, and this strikes me as overlegislating. And I am understating. https://t.co/Sxrz4zJcFl
Read More
Bloggers beware. In this case, be thankful. Yesterday the DC district court of appeals reversed denial of SLAPP special motion to dismiss where blogger published alleged defamatory statements uttered by someone else.
Read MoreSCOTUS ruled yesterday Muslims can sue FBI for placing them on no-fly list as retaliation for refusing to cooperate with counterterrorism investigations. Interesting balance on religion and governmental immunity.
Read MoreKind of the way a lawyer should prepare his/her client.
Read MoreThe rush from the cities (NYC mostly) to rural Connecticut and upstate New York is bringing back that lovely old equitable remedy SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE!! Oh I love contracts. And specific performance even more.
Read MoreWith jobless claims so high, more small businesses are fighting unemployment. "Refusing suitable employment," is the biggest issue per DOL. Employers should be prepared with proof of PPE compliance if they want to defeat a claim because they offered the employee their job back. https://t.co/L5kM4L6qCF
Read More
With jobless claims so high, more small businesses are fighting unemployment. "Refusing suitable employment," is the biggest issue per DOL. Employers should be prepared with proof of PPE compliance if they want to defeat a claim because they offered the employee their job back. https://t.co/xoBslJOgLc
Read More
DE Sup. Court, epicenter for biz litigation, answered yesterday a certified question from 9th Circuit.LP must prove reliance and causation when suing GP for failure to disclose material info in one-time request for capital contribution. LP does not get benefit of per se rule.
Read MoreWow. Maybe this isn't that much of a big deal. What was the underlying evidence? With the "but for" standard under federal law this surprises me a bit.
Read More
© 2020 Minchella & Associates, LLC
Disclaimer & Privacy Policy
