Legal Services Optimized.
Spruce Law’s litigation and dispute resolution team provides big-firm quality, highly responsive representation delivered with individualized service and unmatched value. We are seasoned legal professionals and industry experts, with pedigrees equal to those found at traditional law firms, but our highly innovative law firm structure enables us to serve your needs with maximum efficiency.
Litigation Services That Fit You.
Your legal expenditures must be strategic and add value. Our experience working with businesses ranging from start-ups to established global enterprises informs our approach to your particular business needs. Our litigation and dispute resolution group provides you and your business with strategic planning, risk-avoidance counsel, and aggressive courtroom advocacy when necessary. Above all, our goals are to further your business interests and protect your bottom-line. We will help you predict, and control, both hard and soft costs of litigation.
Efficient, Common Sense, Results-Driven Model.
Each client, and each case, presents a unique set of challenges. Your particular business goals are the most important aspects of any litigation. Somehow the legal profession has lost track of this. We have not.
Law firms traditionally bill business litigation at an hourly rate. But this model does not work with every business litigation challenge. Some cases are best served by a flat-fee or hybrid-fee arrangement. Alternative-fee arrangements may allow you to pursue claims that would otherwise be cost-prohibitive.
Hiring our experienced litigation and dispute resolution team means you will never be paying for on-the-job training for new associates. We strategically build our litigation and dispute resolution teams to match the needs of each case, and we will never double-bill or overstaff your case.
Minimizing Litigation Disruptions, Maximizing Litigation Benefits.
Our team becomes your trusted partner in minimizing the disruptive impact that litigation can have on your business when you are forced to defend against a lawsuit or choose to litigate to resolve a dispute.
Litigation is not always the best answer to a problem. We will customize an ongoing plan to assure that when you are involved in litigation, we further your business interests, and whenever possible, avoid costly litigation in the first place.
Represented large construction company in multi-party arbitration.
Represented staffing company in defense of multi-party litigation related to claims of breach of contract.
Represented multi-national oil companies on variety of environmental-related litigation issues.
Mediated and provided unbiased ruling on over 300 arbitration cases.
Developed risk and litigation avoidance strategies for companies across several industries.
Successfully represented large family owned business in commercial arbitration relating to shareholder dispute.
Successfully represented international company in dispute relating to Breach of contract and non-competition issues involving former senior executive.
Successfully obtained an injunction preventing software company from shutting down large Blue Sky compliance clearinghouse.
Represented high net-worth condo owners in case brought under Pennsylvania’s Uniform Condominium Act.
Defended commercial construction company against Miller Act claims.
Defended copyright claims against book publisher.
Defended professional licensure actions.
Defended national bank against claims of breach of ERISA duties when acting as corporate fiduciary.
Defended hospital systems against claims of corporate negligence.
Prosecuted claim against large local printing company related to theft of trade secrets.
Represented large New Jersey condominium association in EIFS construction defect claims.
Represented waste hauler in municipal bid complaint.
Represented environmental remediation company in SuperFund claims.
Represented group of CAFO operators challenging local zoning ordinance that violated state constitutional and statutory law.
Obtained a favorable award in AAA arbitration for music distribution and licensing company against distributor for failing to pay copyright and licensing fees in the face of a $10 million claim of tortiuous interference with the distributor’s customers.