Etan Mark

Case No.172

MM&H is counsel to a homeowners’ association of another high-end condominium building located on South Beach. The association claims significant damages against the general contractor and several of the subcontractors for this prominent development to the structure as a result of structural deficiencies.

By |2023-08-17T22:29:01+00:00August 16th, 2023|Comments Off on Case No.172

Case No.138

MM&H found itself in the center of a high-profile cross-border dispute brought by David Boies and the law firm of Boies Schiller on behalf of a US Trust that was supposedly assigned the interests of PDVSA, the Venezuelan government-owned oil company, in an alleged multi-billion kickback scheme. After a two-day evidentiary hearing, the PDVSA Trust [...]

By |2023-08-17T22:34:29+00:00August 16th, 2023|Comments Off on Case No.138

Case No.103

Enforcement actions in Canada and Antigua seeking to recover in excess of $44 million and conspiracy action in Canada is seeking amounts well in excess of the Antiguan government judgment. MM&H acted in coordination with lead counsel to prosecute Section 1782 actions to seek discovery in aid of the foreign legal proceedings.

By |2023-08-15T19:41:43+00:00August 15th, 2023|Comments Off on Case No.103

Case No.93

MM&H obtained summary judgment in favor of its client, the widow of a 50% shareholder in the Florida's largest property insurer. Defeated all claims (seeking damages in excess of $30 million) brought against her by AmLaw 100 firm and favorably postured the case for a successful resolution.

By |2023-08-15T19:30:39+00:00August 15th, 2023|Comments Off on Case No.93

Case No.63

MM&H represents CISAM, a limited liability company which owns approximately 18 apartment buildings in New York, with a (contested) valuation of between $50MM and $125MM. MM&H also represents two of three members of CISAM. All the members of CISAM are siblings. It was formed in 1996 by the siblings’ late father to hold interests in [...]

By |2023-08-17T22:36:27+00:00August 15th, 2023|Comments Off on Case No.63

Case No.8

Counsel to real estate developers in connection with allegations of fraud, breach of fiduciary duty and tortious interference relating to the purchase and potential sale of tracts of land in Broward County.

By |2023-08-16T16:36:23+00:00August 15th, 2023|Comments Off on Case No.8

Case No.5

Counsel to a potential class exceeding 75,000 members, adverse to international mega-corporation Herbalife, leading to a 10-figure settlement on favorable terms. Counsel to a potential class exceeding 75,000 members, adverse to international mega-corporation Herbalife, seeking more than $1 billion in damages. At the time of writing, claims are pending against Herbalife in federal courts in [...]

By |2023-08-15T18:55:38+00:00August 15th, 2023|Comments Off on Case No.5

Case No.4

Counsel to real estate developers in connection with allegations of fraud, breach of fiduciary duty and tortious interference relating to the purchase and potential sale of tracts of land in Broward County.

By |2023-08-15T18:52:18+00:00August 15th, 2023|Comments Off on Case No.4
Go to Top