Daniel H. Erskine

Daniel H. Erskine

Daniel H. Erskine, Attorney & Solicitor
  • Business Law, Communications & Internet Law, Intellectual Property...
  • Connecticut, England and Wales, New York
Badges
Claimed Lawyer ProfileBlawgsearch
Summary

Daniel H. Erskine, a New York and Connecticut admitted attorney and solicitor of England and Wales, represents U.S. individuals, companies, joint ventures, foreign businesses, and foreign nationals on complex legal matters under U.S. and U.K. law. Prior to entering private practice, Mr. Erskine served as a shareholder and counsel to a business involved in relocating large scale production facilities from either US or foreign locations. Mr. Erskine also completed a judicial clerkship at the Superior Court of the District of Columbia in Washington, DC. He now operates a solo practice focused on international business transactions, advising on US and English law, representing foreign and domestic small and medium sized companies (SME), specialty subcontractors, high technology enterprises, and senior executives. The transactional side of Mr. Erskine’s practice involves composing bespoke cloud (SaaS, IaaS, PaaS, DaaS, DPaaS, BaaS, EULA, ASP, maintenance, support, reseller, distribution), traditional software licenses, storage, services, data protection/security, hosting, consulting, back-up/recovery, and marketing agreements under English and US law for foreign and domestic SMEs manufacturing bespoke software. On the advocacy side of his practice, he represents foreign and domestic parties in defense and prosecution of their civil claims in New York and Connecticut state courts as well as in appeals at the state level. Mr. Erskine previously served as an appointed appellate advocate in Connecticut to prosecute appeals about abused and neglected children. Additionally, Mr. Erskine is the author of seven published law review articles (three as the lead article) on diverse areas relating to international legal topics, including WTO issues related to the European Community Customs Code, foreign legal procedural devices, and comparative constitutional analysis of fundamental rights.
ATTORNEY ADVERTISING
ADVERTISING MATERIAL

Education
The George Washington University Law School
LL.M. (2006) | International and Comparative Law
Honors: Attorney Erskine's thesis entitled, Reforming Federal Personal Injury Litigation by Incorporation of the Procedural Innovations of Scotland and Ireland: An Analysis and Proposal, presented a new method for litigating personal injury cases in United States federal courts. The Cardozo Journal of International and Comparative Law published Attorney Erskine's thesis as the Lead Article in the Winter 2007 edition of the Journal. Reforming Federal Personal Injury Litigation by Incorporation of the Procedural Innovations of Scotland and Ireland: An Analysis and Proposal, 15 CARDOZO J. INT'L & COMP. L. 1 (2007) (Lead Article) (LL.M. Thesis).
Suffolk University Law School
J.D. (2003) | Law
Honors: Content Editor, Journal of High Technology Law Harold B. Goodwin, Jr. Legal Advocacy Scholarship and Best Trial Advocate Award
Activities: Attorney Erskine's student note entitled Satellite Digital Audio Radio Searching for Novel Theories of Action, 1 J. HIGH TECH. L. 135 (2002), and his book review entitled, A Review of Raymond R. Coletta's Biotechnology and the Creation of Ethics, 1 J. HIGH TECH. L. 1 (2002).
Boston College
B.A. (2000) | Politicial Science & Philosophy
Honors: Granted Advanced Standing and Advanced Placement, Golden Key National Honor Society, PHI SIGMA TAU (philosophy honor society), Athletic Director's Awards for Academic Achievement as a Varsity Athlete (Men's Foil Squad, Division 1 Fencing)
Professional Experience
Principal
Daniel H. Erskine, Attorney & Solicitor
Current
Individuals and companies require advice and representation in a variety of situations. From employment issues to resolving tort claims, a lawyer and solicitor assists clients in effectively resolving disputes. Whether requiring a zealous advocate in the courtroom or seeking to memorialize important points of agreement, Attorney Erskine engages in the practice of both representative and transactional law. Admitted to the practice of law in New York & Connecticut as an attorney as well as England and Wales as a solicitor, Attorney Erskine represents clients in New York, Connecticut, & in various foreign countries. ATTORNEY ADVERTISING; ADVERTISING MATERIAL
Outside Counsel, Shareholder
Commercial Plant Relocators, Inc.
Immediately upon graduation from law school, Attorney Erskine served as the Compliance Manager for a small business involved in the domestic and international relocation of industrial facilities. After Attorney Erskine was admitted to the bar, he assumed the role of outside counsel for the company.
Judicial Clerkship
Superior Court of the District of Columbia
While completing his graduate legal education in Washington, D.C., Attorney Erskine was selected for a judicial clerkship at the Superior Court of the District of Columbia.
Awards
Harold Goodwin, Jr. Legal Advocacy Scholarship and Best Advocate Award
Suffolk University Law School
Jurisdictions Admitted to Practice
Connecticut
England and Wales
New York
U.S. Supreme Court
Fees
  • Credit Cards Accepted
Practice Areas
  • Business Law
  • Communications & Internet Law
  • Intellectual Property
  • International Law
  • Gov & Administrative Law
  • Appeals & Appellate
  • Arbitration & Mediation
Additional Practice Areas
  • Software, Cloud Computing, SaaS Law
  • Civil Litigation
Languages
  • English: Spoken, Written
Social Media
Websites & Blogs
Website
Practice Website
Blog
Small Business Lawyer (International & Domestic)
Videos
Daniel H Erskine Lawyer Impeachment

Slides from a presentation from lawyer Daniel Erskine at an academic conference in Washington, DC about the trial of the English Queen Caroline and the impeachment of American President Bill Clinton. ATTORNEY ADVERTISING; ADVERTISING MATERIAL Daniel Erskine, a lawyer, wrote a law review article describing these two events about then applicable law on this subject available at https://bit.ly/2IGZqTQ. The video is not intended to be a source of advertising, solicitation, or legal advice. The information contained in this video is only provided for general informational purposes. The video is not intended as, and should not be construed as, legal advice on any subject matter. You should not rely on the video and articles provided on this Site as legal advice on any subject matter for any purpose. Although this video may provide information concerning legal issues, such information is not intended to constitute or be a substitute for legal advice from qualified counsel; the information contained in the video may be out of date. You should always seek the legal advice of competent counsel in your jurisdiction. You agree that Daniel H. Erskine is not engaged in rendering legal services or advice by providing the information and materials on this video, and that your use of the video does not create any attorney-client relationship between Daniel H. Erskine and you. Abstract of law review: This article explores the calculated use of legal mechanisms to impact national politics and the effect such utilization had on accomplishing deliberate political reform. In answering why political actors use legal procedures as political weapons and whether such use is effective, this paper analyzes two historical examples to illustrate that law as political weapon is extremely successful in accomplishing political change. In the early 1800’s, England’s King sought to defrock his politically radical heroine Queen Caroline through the parliamentary mechanism of a Bill of Pains and Penalties, which caused a flourish of public criticism and call for political revolution. Public reaction to the legal mechanisms utilized by King resulted in accomplishing the King’s goal of quelling revolutionary zeal as well as subsequently radically reforming English parliamentary politics. In a similar vein, the U.S. Congress in 1998 utilized the legal mechanisms of impeachment to unseat President William Jefferson Clinton. Impeachment of President Clinton served the Republican Congress’ political interests and resulted in the Republicans obtaining great electoral success. Ultimately, discussion of these two historical epochs advocates future use of legal procedures as political weapons in only certain limited circumstances. Author Daniel H Erskine lawyer and solicitor Daniel H Erskine Office Locations 11 W Prospect Street, Mount Vernon, NY 10550 900 Chapel Street, Suite 620, New Haven, CT 06510 Telephone 866-951-4443

Daniel Erskine Lawyer At-Will Doctrine

Slides from a presentation from Daniel H Erskine, lawyer, at an academic conference in Las Vegas Nevada about comparative employment doctrines focused on the American at-will, UK notice, and Irish employment schemes. ATTORNEY ADVERTISING; ADVERTISING MATERIAL The video is not intended to be a source of advertising, solicitation, or legal advice. The information contained in this video is only provided for general informational purposes. The video is not intended as, and should not be construed as, legal advice on any subject matter. You should not rely on the video and articles provided on this Site as legal advice on any subject matter for any purpose. Although this video may provide information concerning legal issues, such information is not intended to constitute or be a substitute for legal advice from qualified counsel; the information contained in the video may be out of date. You should always seek the legal advice of competent counsel in your jurisdiction. You agree that Daniel H Erskine is not engaged in rendering legal services or advice by providing the information and materials on this video, and that your use of the video does not create any attorney-client relationship between Daniel H. Erskine and you. Title of Presentation: Reexamining The At-Will Doctrine Of Employment Through Comparison With Statutory Protections Afforded To Employees In Ireland and England. Presenter Daniel H Erskine lawyer and solicitor Daniel H Erskine Office Locations 11 W Prospect Street, Mount Vernon, NY 10550 900 Chapel Street, Suite 620, New Haven, CT 06510 Telephone 866-951-4443

Daniel Erskine Lawyer Conflicting Fundamental Rights

Slides from a presentation from lawyer Daniel H Erskine at an academic conference in Ghent, Belgium about Fundamental Rights. ATTORNEY ADVERTISING; ADVERTISING MATERIAL Daniel H Erskine, a lawyer, wrote a law review article on the subject available at https://bit.ly/2CqltOd. The video is not intended to be a source of advertising, solicitation, or legal advice. The information contained in this video is only provided for general informational purposes. The video is not intended as, and should not be construed as, legal advice on any subject matter. You should not rely on the video and articles provided on this Site as legal advice on any subject matter for any purpose. Although this video may provide information concerning legal issues, such information is not intended to constitute or be a substitute for legal advice from qualified counsel; the information contained in the video may be out of date. You should always seek the legal advice of competent counsel in your jurisdiction. You agree that Daniel H Erskine is not engaged in rendering legal services or advice by providing the information and materials on this video, and that your use of the video does not create any attorney-client relationship between Daniel H. Erskine and you. Abstract of law review article: This article describes the methods utilized by the United States Supreme Court to resolve specific cases involving conflicts between federal constitutional rights, a federal constitutional right and a state constitutional or statutory right, and an international treaty right and a federal constitutional right. Consideration of particular decisions representative of the manner the Court resolves conflicts between rights in the three typologies described above, illustrates how the Court views such conflicts and the rationales employed to resolve apparent conflicting rights. The rationales used by the United States Supreme Court are compared to the South African Constitutional Court’s decisions in the Soobramoney, Grootboom, and South African Broadcasting Corp. Ltd. cases. By comparing the reasoning utilized by both courts, this article illustrates distinct judicial methods applied to rationally resolve conflicts between significant individual rights. The comparison serves to permit presentation of a universal method to resolve conflicting fundamental rights for judicial authorities to use across the broad array of legal situations in which conflicts between significant rights occurs. Author Daniel H Erskine lawyer and solicitor Daniel H Erskine Office Locations 11 W Prospect Street, Mount Vernon, NY 10550 900 Chapel Street, Suite 620, New Haven, CT 06510 Telephone 866-951-4443

Contact & Map
New York Office
11 West Prospect Avenue
Mount Vernon, NY 10550
USA
Telephone: (866) 951-4443
Connecticut Office
900 Chapel Street
Suite 620
New Haven, CT 06510
USA
Toll-Free: (866) 951-4443