Legal Services & Lawyers

Sean J. Cleary is a trial (courtroom) lawyer who works for people who have suffered serious personal injuries. Serious personal injuries can occur as the result of a wide range of conduct, such as the carelessness (negligence) of others, which might include not paying attention while driving or medical malpractice. Serious personal injuries can also occur due to a defective product, such as a medical device, a dietary supplement or a prescribed medication. I also represent the family members of those making wrongful death claims and others who cannot represent themselves, such as children and incompetent people. Other areas of my practice include business disputes and criminal defense.

There are many ways a person can be harmed by the carelessness (negligence) of another person or by a defective product. For example I represent people who have been hurt or injured in: automobile accidents, car accidents, SUV (sport utility vehicle) accidents, truck accidents, bicycle accidents, motorcycle accidents, bus accidents, street sweeper accidents, people who were traveling as passengers, and people who were walking (pedestrians); people who may have been bitten or attacked by a dog; people injured by doctors, surgeons, psychiatrists, pharmacists, nurses, and other medical providers (medical negligence or malpractice); people injured at construction sites; and people injured by defective products (product liability or strict liability), including defective medical equipment, or recreational equipment, (such as swimming pools), automobiles, and prescription medications.

My practice also includes the representation of defendants in criminal cases, including those charged with: Operating Under the Influence of Alcohol or Drugs, Minor in Possession of Alcohol, Assault and Battery, Assault and Battery with a Dangerous Weapon, Violation of Probation, Drug cases, including Possession of Class A, Class B, Class C and Class D, and Possession with Intent to Distribute. (I accept Mastercard and Visa in criminal cases).

I also handle civil (non-criminal) cases arising out of business-to-business disputes (contract, breach of contract, failure to pay for goods or services, interference with customers or suppliers), and business-to-consumer disputes (negligence design and/or construction) including claims by homeowners against contractors.

I am a graduate of Amherst Regional High School, Amherst, Massachusetts. I received a Bachelor of Science degree in Health Sciences, Summa cum Laude, from the University of Massachusetts at Amherst. I received a Juris Doctor, cum Laude, from Suffolk University Law School, Boston, Massachusetts. While at Suffolk University Law School I was a member of the Transnational Law Review. I am the President of the Hampshire County Bar Association (President Elect 2007-08). I am also a member of the Massachusetts Academy of Trial Attorneys, the American Association for Justice (formerly known as the Association of Trial Lawyers of America), and the Massachusetts Bar Association. I am a Fellow of the Massachusetts Bar Foundation (Fellowship is limited to 5 percent of the practicing bar in Massachusetts). I am licensed to practice law in both state and federal courts in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and the State of Connecticut.

• I have successfully argued in North Carolina Mecklenburg District Court that a plaintiff who has threatened their undocumented spouse with "telling the immigration authorities" about their status is evidence of domestic violence. This was the first case in the United States to rule on this point.

• I have adjusted the status for an applicant who was denied a green card because he once lied about his social security number. The applicant was granted a green card and today is a taxpaying resident.

• I have obtained legal status and work permits for a child who was a victim of human trafficking.

• I have obtained freedom for a legal permanent resident who was picked up by Immigration and Custom Enforcement (ICE) raid without lawful justification.

• I have helped clients avoid deportation/removal marks against their records.

• I have helped clients obtain U.S. Citizenship.

• I helped a client obtain his green card after being denied by USCIS because he was brought to the United States when he was young child by his parents who were undocumented at the time.

• I have helped clients adjust their German E Treaty employment status to obtain a green card for themselves and their family.

Philosophy

What is your opinion regarding clients educating themselves on legal issues?

While education about legal issues is helpful, clients should not assume that this gives them the training to appear before courts or argue legal issues, let alone navigate, the complex landscape of United States Immigration authorities.

Are you willing to review documents prepared by clients?
I will only review documents pursuant to a consultation or documents required as evidence to help a client who has retained our firm. I do not review documents prepared by clients who seek to present such documents to U.S. Immigration authorities in a pro se context.

Are you willing to coach clients who want to represent themselves?

This is not a policy of our firm.

Why did you decide to be a lawyer?

To promote fairness and justice by testing charges and evidence presented by the government against an individual. In the immigration arena being the son of Greek Immigrant parents instilled the empathy and respect I have for the positive contributions that immigrants have and continue to make to our society.

What work experience and education helps you be a better lawyer?

Having lived in many countries, having received my education in Europe, and having represented hundreds of clients in criminal and family court in the United States, has given me the experience to represent immigration clients. I have had outstanding results for virtually all of my immigration clients.

Why did you decide on your primary area of practice?

Immigrants represent one of the best assets for our society, and unlike most other countries in the world, the United States has one of the best track records for accepting and assimilating new immigrants. Our system is not perfect, but compared to what I have witnessed in other countries, the United States still provides a relatively superior option for new immigrants who are willing to work and contribute to our society. Having said this, our system is not perfect, and I believe that through education in our schools, government and the media, more people will come to understand the tremendous contributions that new immigrants can and do make to our society.

What do you like best about your career?

Helping clients achieve freedom and realize their potential through devoted and zealous advocacy on behalf of their legal rights.

Tell us about your law firm:

As a solo attorney, all of my client's will work directly with me. I also have experienced legal staff with over 25 years of litigation and research skills. My team of assistants also speak Spanish and German.

What are your strengths and style?

I care about my client's matters by listening to their needs. I am honest and serious about my client goals and whether those goals can be realistically achieved. Clients will receive honest and frank assessments from me regarding their matters based on the information supplied to me.

CLICK ON RIGHT TO SEE WEBSITE

The Law Office of Daniel Karpman, established in 1992, is a full service law firm with offices in Springfield, Massachusetts and Northampton, Massachusetts. We offer personal and cost-effective legal solutions to individuals and businesses.

Attorney Karpman received his law degree from Western New England College School of Law, and has an M.B.A. in Management and Finance from New York University Graduate School of Business.

You can expect the highest quality in legal counsel through personal, responsive, and individualized service. We strive to develop and sustain long-term relationships with our clients by earning their trust and through our steadfast commitment to meeting our clients' legal needs.

Our goal is to practice law with integrity, good judgment, and common sense, while zealously advocating for our clients.

Please visit our website at www.dkarpman.com.

I have been providing legal services for your personal, family and professional needs in the metropolitan Springfield area and beyond for over 25 years concentrating in estate planning, elder law, estates and probate, divorce and family law and real estate. For many years I volunteered as board member and counsel for the local area agency on aging and received their distinguished service award. I continue to volunteer my time for consultations to needy elders at local senior centers and speak frequently at senior centers and other community organizations and non profit groups on elder law, estate planning and family law issues. Some of my services specifically include wills, trusts, powers of attorney, living wills, living trusts, estate planning for minimization of estate taxes and avoidance of probate, asset preservation, long term care planning, estate administration and probate, will contests and probate litigation, estate and gift tax returns, fiduciary income tax returns, divorces, modifications, separation agreements, limited assistance representation, prenuptial agreements, real estate sales and intra family transfers.

I graduated from Washington University in 1985 and obtained my J.D. degree from Northeastern University School of Law in 1988. I clerked for the justices of the Massachusetts Superior Court from 1988-1989 and in 1989 began practicing as an attorney with Burres Fidnick and Booth. I became a partner at what then became Burres Fidnick Booth and Kaufman in 1996. In 2004, after 15 years of working with my law partners I decided to start a solo practice. Since 1989 my practice has concentrated in the area of domestic relations. This includes divorces, paternities, divorce modifications, work with non-traditional families, guardianships.

In 1994, I founded Amherst Mediation Services. My decision to offer mediation as an alternative to the traditional litigation system stemmed from my years of experience in the Probate and Family Court and in particular my concern that in many ways the court system was not the most efficient and best equipped system for handling family crisis such as divorce. Mediation offers participants more control over their own destiny and works to increase rather than discourage communication. Mediation is also far cheaper and often far quicker than traditional litigation. However, mediation is not appropriate in every situation. I continue to provide my clients with legal services. In my capacity as an attorney I provide services which are professional, courteous and sensitive to my clients' financial needs, emotional needs and family situation.

I am a trial lawyer and handle civil cases throughout Massachusetts. I have tried over over 100 cases to a jury verdict. I am experienced in the defense handling of insurance claims in Massachusetts state and federal courts, as well as administrative agencies and appeals.

Significant cases I have defended include:

PRODUCTS LIABILITY. Burgos v. Danly Machine, U.S. District Ct., D.Mass., 17 Verdicts, Settlement and Tactics 361-362, 1997 WL 33345564, Natl. Jury Verdict Rptr. 10:15. Defense verdict for manufacturer of 50 ton power press sued by injured worker struck by metal blanks. Roberge v. Roberge, U.S. District Ct., D.Mass., 1999 WL 33488789, 15 New England Jury Verdict Rptr. 7:C8. Verdict of no defect in defendant's bicycle operated by boy whose jaw was fractured in accident. In DaConceicao v. Tru-Grit, U.S. Dist. Ct., D.Mass. 4/02), a jury returned a verdict of no liability for breach of warranty or negligence against the supplier of a knife-making machine. Summary judgment was granted for the manufacturer in Witte v. Thermold (Worc. Dist. Ct. 7/07) for an injury caused when a shower handle broke.

WRONGFUL TERMINATION. Tuper v. North Adams Ambulance Service, Inc., 428 Mass. 132 (1998). After summary judgment on defamation and tortious interference claims, defense verdict was returned in wrongful termination case. On appeal Mass. Supreme Judicial Court upheld trial ruling that unemployment hearing decision finding employee was discharged without just cause was inadmissible and not binding in later breach of contract suit. Weissman v. Altra Marine Products (U.S. District Court, D.Mass), 1995 WL 1933839, 10 New England Jury Verdict Rptr. 12:6. Favorable verdict against manufacturer sued by representative for breach of agreement, fraud, tortious interference with advantageous relations with customer.

DEFENSE VERDICTS IN REAR-END COLLISIONS. In Rouvellat v. Guarco, 187 F.3d 622 (1st Cir. 1999), a federal jury found a defendant motorist not negligent where plaintiff claimed over $100,000 in medical and wage losses, following refusal of a generous settlement offer at mediation. In Martin v. McKenna, 2005 WL 4397793 (Hampden Super. Ct.), a jury found no negligence despite the admission in evidence that the case was previously tried to a judge who awarded $30,000 and that award was Aprima facie@ evidence in favor of the plaintiff. Similarly, in Mulvey v. Roy, 2006 WL 4654733 (Hampden Super. Ct.), the jury found no negligence on the part of a motorist who rear-ended another vehicle starting a four-car chain collision.

DEFENSE VERDICTS FOR INSURANCE AGENTS/ERRORS & OMISSIONS. In Capozza v. Johnson, 6 Western Mass. Law Trib. 4, 1 (April 2005), 2005 WL 115548 (Hampden Super. Ct.), a jury found the agency did not err in obtaining insurance coverage on a Mercedes, there was a $1.5 million verdict against the co-defendant motorist. Similarly in Greaves v. K-D Agency, 2006 WL 4654729 (Worc. Dist. Ct. 7/06), a jury returned a verdict of no negligence where an insured had reduced his coverages below his mortagage balance and was underinsured for a fire. In Chenevert v. Remillard, 1999 WL 3348883, following an uninsured theft claim a jury found no negligence, deceit or contract breach in the procurement of a homeowners policy. In Miller v. Moulton, (Palmer Dist. Ct. 3/98), a judge entered judgment for the defendant agency following trial on a claim an agent was responsible for an insured being uninsured for a restaurant fire. In Harder v. Cebula, (Palmer Dist Ct. 3/93), a defense finding was entered after trial exonerating an agent for uninsured damages for a boiler loss.

SUMMARY JUDGMENT FOR AGENTS/E&O. In both Leger v. INA, 38 Mass. App. Ct. 1102 (1995), and Grey v. Finn, (Franklin Super. Ct. 11/1/00), an agent was granted summary judgment following an uninsured fire loss. In Lata v. Remillard (Norfolk Super. Ct. 10/29/04), summary judgment was granted on a claim an agent failed to procure sufficient underinsured motorist limits. In Sacadura v. Ideal (Springfield Dist. Ct. 7/04), a directed verdict was granted at trial where a homeowner sued his agent to cover an uninsured dog bite loss.

SUMMARY JUDGMENT IN LEGAL MALPRACTICE CLAIM. In Bratcher v. Moriarty, Donoghue & Leja, P.C., 54 Mass. 111 (2002), the court found no duty existed between the lawyer for the widow in a wrongful death action and the co-administrator of the decedent=s estate.

FAVORABLE VERDICTS FOR AT-FAULT TRUCKING COMPANIES. In Fernandez v. May Trucking Co., 1993 WL 1466090, and Bird v. Lott Trucking, 2001 WL 1041973, jury verdicts were obtained in a nominal amount well below the last offer of settlement. In Digiovanni v. Borden and McCormick v. Borden (U.S. Dist. Ct. 10/92), a jury awarded nominal damages to a mother and daughter claiming injury from a rear-end collision. Similarly, in Gendron v. Waste Management, 2002 Mass. Super. LEXIS 32057895, a jury rejected a claim of permanent disability and awarded only special damages to a plaintiff.

DEFENSE VERDCTS WHERE MOTORIST STRUCK BICYCLIST/PEDESTRIAN. In Evans v. Devereaux Foundation, 1992 WL 1352918, a jury found a motorist who struck a pedestrian in a cross-walk not negligent. In Boyle v. Silluzio, 2005 WL 2148520, the jury found a negligent motorist who struck a bicyclist at an intersection cross-walk was not causally responsible for plaintiff=s damages. In Delmolino v. Doyle (34 Mass. Lawyers Weekly 593, Nov. 7, 2005), a pedestrian struck by a backing motorist in a parking lot was found not negligent.

SUMMARY JUDGMENT FOR NURSING HOME IN WRONGFUL DEATH ACTION. In Fentross v. Geriatric Authority of Holyoke, 2002 Mass. Super. LEXIS 533, a dismissal was obtained for failure to make presentment under torts claims act.

PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT ENFORCING DAMAGES CAP IN BRAIN INJURY CLAIM.In Reynolds v. Williston Northampton School, 2006 Mass. Super. LEXIS 46, court allowed motion for summary judgment enforcing charitable cap on claim of brain injury allegedly suffered by spectator due to premises defect at private school's hockey facility rented to outside group.

DIRECTED VERDICTS. In Roman v. Pulaski Club (Hampden Super. Ct. 10/92), a judge dismissed a negligent security claim against a private club where one patron assaulted another. In Ditto v. Town of Palmer, 1995 WL 1722613, a road defect claim alleged to have caused a motorcycle accident was dismissed at the close of the plaintiff=s evidence.

PREMISES DEFECT CLAIMS. In Lash v. Apollo, 1995 WL 1768599, 10 Nat'l. Jury Verdict Rptr. 7:26, a jury rendered a verdict of no negligence where a deliveryman was claiming $150,000 in special damages and permanent impairment from a fall at allegedly unsafe premises.

DEFENSE VERDICTS OF MOTOR VEHICLE ACCIDENTS. In Glabicki v. Sarad, 1991 WL 1063382, no negligence was found on the part of a truck driver for a broadside accident where plaintiff had significant special damages and permanency. In Antuna v. Bergollo, 2004 Mass. Super. LEXIS 2216614, a jury found no negligence on the part of a motorist who took a right on red and whose vehicle was then struck. In Reyes v. Florence Casket (Springfield Dist. Ct. 5/04), a jury found no negligence on the part of delivery truck alleged to have sideswiped a vehicle backing into a parking spot. In Meadows v. Travel Time, 7 New England Jury Verdict Rptr. 2:16, a bus company was found not negligent by a jury for a disc injury allegedly caused when the bus went over a speed bump at an inappropriate speed.

APPEALS COURT REVERSAL OF PLAINTIFF'S VERDICT. In Gibbons v. Nichols [Tenneco], 1994 Mass. App. Div. 28, the Appellate Court vacated a finding for the plaintiff in an intersection accident and granted a new trial due to judicial error against the defendant.

NEW TRIAL GRANTED IN $1.5M VERDICT. In CIGNA Fire Underwriters Ins. Co. v. MacDonald & Johnson, Inc., 86 F.3d 1260 (1996), a federal judge allowed judgment notwithstanding the verdict of $750,000 on tortious interference counterclaim against insurer, and new trial on breach of contract claim verdict of $500,000, which was reduced to $250,000 on re-trial.