David T.
Meglino

David T. Meglino is a member in the firm’s Construction and Litigation Departments.

Experience

David T. Meglino represents clients in complex commercial matters, with a focus on construction law and general commercial litigation. His construction law practice involves representing construction companies and developers in a wide range of matters, including:

• Non-payment disputes
• Mechanic’s liens (both public and private)
• Defective/non-conforming work
• Delay claims
• Change order disputes
• Lien Law 3-A/trust fund claims
• Obtaining and litigating WBE/MBE certification
• Insurance claims

David’s general commercial practice involves business governance disputes, commercial landlord/tenant disputes, legal malpractice claims and breaches of non-compete/non-solicitation agreements.

He appears regularly in state and federal court, representing clients through to trial and appeal (including both jury and bench trials) as well as arbitration hearings. When a conflict arises, David counsels clients at all stages of a case, with the goal of avoiding costly litigation when possible. In cases where litigation is necessary, he is a trusted advocate who aggressively prosecutes and defends claims in all facets of litigation. David also acts as counsel for a not-for-profit construction industry group, counseling them on internal governance and legal compliance.

Representative Matters

Some of David’s representative construction matters include:

• Obtained judgment for a major steel supplier at arbitration before the American Arbitration Association for amounts due on a NYC Department of Transportation project. David located a contractual provision entitling the client to an even higher award than was initially sought and obtained dismissal of all of the prime contractor’s counterclaims.
• Successfully revived claims brought by a scaffolding company for breach of an exclusive distribution agreement (after those initial claims were dismissed by the contractor’s prior attorneys). David successfully identified a new theory and legal strategy to revive the claims and avoid the prejudicial effect of the prior dismissal.
• Won a preliminary injunction in New York Supreme Court, directing a general contractor to return equipment it had wrongfully confiscated in violation of the subcontract.
• Successfully defeated a prime contractor’s motion to dismiss contractor’s multi-million-dollar contract and change orders claims on a LaGuardia Airport project, facilitating a quick and favorable settlement for the contractor.
• Obtained judgment for a general contractor following a bench trial relating to amounts owed from the developer under the construction contract.
• Defended a contractor in federal court against claims that the contractor failed to make required benefits contributions to its laborers’ union under ERISA, negotiating a favorable settlement.
• Obtained summary judgment against a contractor’s general liability insurance company requiring the insurance company to defend and indemnify the contractor in a multi-million-dollar personal injury lawsuit.

Representative general litigation matters include:

• Successfully represented a company in defense of wrongful termination and breach-of-partnership agreement claims brought by a former partner and employee. David represented the company through discovery, summary judgment and at trial, at which time we were able to facilitate a highly favorable settlement for the company.
• Successfully obtained a temporary restraining order in NY Supreme Court prohibiting former company employees from soliciting our client’s customers and clients.
• Routinely represents shareholders and LLC members in inter-company disputes, including over access to books and records, and challenges to corporation/company transactions.
• Successfully represented the partner of a seafood distributor business at trial, who alleged corporate malfeasance at the hands of his former partner.
• Prosecuting legal malpractice claims on behalf of a client who alleged that his prior attorneys did not provide adequate representation in an underlying business litigation dispute.

No aspect of this advertisement has been approved by the highest court in any state. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.

See Award Methodology.