Legal Judg(e)ments

Bob and nationally renowned appellate attorney, MC Sungaila discuss In re Grand Jury – the closely-watched attorney-client privilege case that made its way up to the Supreme Court – and how the scope of the attorney-client privilege can have significant, real-world impacts on the practice of lawyering for businesses and corporations.  

Bob and Sammy Nabulsi discuss the sprawling legal battle over the reconstruction of a bridge in Boston Harbor at the center of City of Boston v. Conservation Commission of Quincy .

Bob and class action defense lawyer Mark Aronsson discuss Cabrera v. Auto Max Preowned, Inc. and how a judge's interpretation of a procedural rule can lead to bet-the-company litigation.

Bob and Frank Saccoccio discuss how the Supreme Court’s originalist interpretation of the Second Amendment led a court to invalidate Rhode Island’s stun gun ban in O’Neil v. Nerohna .

Bob and Greg Pagnini discuss how monks brewing beer led to federal litigation involving the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act in Shrine of St. Nicholas v. Marblehead .

Bob and New England Legal Foundation's Ben Robbins discuss  Tracer Lane II Realty, LLC v. City of Waltham  and how the unintended consequences of a 1946 zoning bylaw could include the development of large-scale solar systems in residential neighborhoods.

Bob talks with legal titan Wayne Dennison to discuss his high-profile representation of international movie star Johnny Depp in what's been dubbed the first "trial by Tik Tok": Depp v. Heard .

Bob and Robert Galvin discuss Tenczar v. Indian Pond Country Club, Inc. and what happens when a home ostensibly becomes a part of a golf course.

Bob and Liberty Counsel’s Roger Gannam talk about  Shurtleff v. City of Boston ; the United States Supreme Court’s landmark First Amendment case involving the City’s flag-raising program.

We’re back with another season of Legal Judg(e)ments! Catch-up on Season 1 now and subscribe wherever you get your podcasts. The new season begins on October 17th.

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 o...

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 i...