After taking over the defense of a case from other counsel following adverse rulings permitting the addition of punitive damage claims, Raymond and his team successfully defended a major law firm and one of its former lawyers against claims for conspiracy, negligent misrepresentation, aiding and abetting fraud, breach of contract, and civil theft in a two-week jury trial. After obtaining directed verdicts as to the individual plaintiff’s claims and on the claims for civil theft and punitive damages against the law firm, the team obtained a defense jury verdict as to all of the remaining claims.

Represented a prominent attorney and his law firm in obtaining summary final judgment on behalf of their clients. The attorney and his firm were sued for legal malpractice after their clients lost an appeal handled by the attorney. The final judgment against the attorney’s clients, which was the subject of the appeal, was grounded on two separate and independent legal theories. The appellate court issued a per curiam affirmance (PCA) without opinion, upholding the final judgment against the clients. One of the legal theories upon which the final judgment was based was the subject of an unrelated appeal in the Florida Supreme Court pending at the time the intermediate appellate court issued its decision. After the intermediate appellate court issued the PCA, the Supreme Court changed the law as it existed at the time of the PCA. The plaintiffs claimed that the defendant attorney was negligent by not advising the clients to seek to have the appellate court revisit the issue. Raymond and the team representing the defendant attorney and his law firm filed a motion for summary judgment arguing that the Supreme Court’s decision had no effect because the PCA was based on two separate and independent grounds, and no subsequent court or jury could decide that the remaining basis alone was insufficient to support the PCA. The court granted the motion and entered final judgment for the defendants.

Represented a businessman who borrowed $1.5 million from his business partner and signed a promissory note. He made interest payments on the note for a year and then stopped. The lender waited quite some time and then sued to recover the balance on the loan along with interest at the note rate of 10 percent. By the time the jury trial started, no payment had been made for 10 years. The lender was seeking in excess of $3 million. Based on the defenses raised by Raymond, the jury was persuaded to allow the borrower over $1.5 million in offsets so they awarded the lender only $1.414 million, an amount less than half of what he was seeking.

Represented Ottawa-based public company Nordion Inc. and its affiliates (Nordion) in a lawsuit seeking damages in excess of $90 million brought by BioAxone BioSciences Inc. (BioAxone) alleging that Nordion was negligent in preparing a master cell bank used by BioAxone in connection with the development of BioAxone’s new spinal cord injury drug. After filing the motion for summary judgment on behalf of Nordion, the case was quickly settled for what Nordion described in a press release as “a nominal amount … expected to have a non-material impact on Nordion’s financial position.” The case was the subject of a front-page report in the Daily Business Review on October 8, 2013, titled, “Drug Companies Settle Mad Cow Contamination Claim.”

Represented a national printing company in a breach of contract action against a customer for failure to make payment for work done. The customer filed counterclaims. The court granted final summary judgment for the client on all claims.

Represented a large produce marketing company in an appeal to the District Court under the Perishable Agricultural Commodities Act of 1930, § 1 et seq., 7 U.S.C.A. § 499a et seq. (PACA) filed by a customer that failed to pay for produce delivered. The customer lost administrative proceeding before the Secretary of Agriculture. After a settlement that the client found favorable, the customer dismissed the appeal.

Involved in defending law firm and attorneys in a $25 million 28 USC § 1983 suit brought in federal district court against a firm and attorneys for allegedly improper action taken during execution of judgment. The case was dismissed with prejudice for lack of jurisdiction based on the Rooker-Feldman doctrine.

Represented a corporation in a shareholder’s derivative action against a shareholder for injunction, breach of contract, and breach of fiduciary duty after the shareholder embezzled funds from the corporation. The court entered a preliminary injunction requiring the shareholder to return the funds and had the defendant incarcerated for contempt until he returned funds. The team obtained a settlement that the client found favorable.

Represented the corporate owners of skilled nursing facilities in cases filed throughout Florida against operators. The team obtained summary judgment, dismissal, or settlements that the clients found favorable.

Represented a corporate tenant in breach of a real estate lease brought by the landlord. Obtained judgment in favor of the corporate tenant after two-day trial.

Represented a large developer in an action brought by an employee claiming to have been excluded from participating in a leveraged buyout offered to executives. The team filed a counterclaim for breach of fiduciary duty based on the employee’s self-dealing and obtained a verdict in favor of the developer after a two-week jury trial on the employee’s claim and judgment against the employee, plus punitive damages on the counterclaim.