|
|
Address
184 Atlantic Street
Stamford, Connecticut 06901 (Fairfield Co.)
Average Client Review Rating
Rating not available
Average Peer Review Rating
4.4
out of 5
(Main Office) Statement of PracticeBusiness Litigation, Trials and Appeals in all State and Federal Courts, Family Law, Divorce, Commercial Arbitration, Commercial Litigation, Commercial Torts. Firm Size: 2
Address184 Atlantic Street
Stamford, CT 06901, (Fairfield Co.)
PhonePhone: 203-348-4000
Fax: 203-406-0587
Call Firm Now 
Website
http://www.wallmanlaw.com
Firm/Affiliate OfficesAffiliate Office: Studio Legale Penta Ed Associati, via G. Puccini, 2, 1-20121, Milan, Italy. Telephone: +39-02-72020070. White Plains, New York Office: 81 Main Street, Suite 415, 10601. Telephone: 914-948-9200.
David M. Wallman (Member) born Concord, Massachusetts, September 26, 1945; admitted to bar, 1970, Connecticut; 1972, U.S. District Court, District of Connecticut; 1975, U.S. Court of Appeals, 2nd Circuit. Education: University of Pennsylvania (B.A., 1967); University of Connecticut (J.D., 1970). Law Clerk to Honorable Jay E. Rubinow, Judge of the Connecticut Superior Court and Probate Court Administrator, 1970-1971. Pretrial Special Master, Connecticut Superior Court, 1995. Member: Stamford and Connecticut Bar Associations; Connecticut Trial Lawyers Association; American Trial Lawyers Association. Reported Cases: Karp v. Urban Redevelopment Commission of the City of Stamford, 162 Conn. 525, 294 A.2d 633 (1972) (Eminent Domain); Allen v. Nissley, 176 Conn. 88, 405 A.2d 231 (1981) (Contract; Specific Performance); Phares v. Phares, 1 Conn. App. 172, 469 A.2d 791 (1984) (Domestic Relations); Garwood & Sons Construction Company, Inc. v. Centos Associates Limited Partnership, 8 Conn. App. 185, 511 A.2d 377 (1986) (Construction; Unjust Enrichment); DeSalle v. A.G. Edwards & Sons, Inc., 804 F.Supp. 436 (1992) (Securities Fraud); CMG Realty of Connecticut, Inc. v. Colonnade One At Old Greenwich Ltd. Partnership 36 Conn. App. 653, 653 A.2d 207 (1994) (Contracts; Preincorporation Obligations); DeSalle v. Appelberg, 44 Conn. App. 323, 688 A.2d 1356 (1997) (Contracts; Civil Procedure); DeSalle v. Appelberg, 60 Conn. App. 386, 759 A.2d 537 (2000) (Construction of Contracts); Springfield Oil Services, Inc. v. Conlon, 77 Conn.App. 289, 823 A.2d 345 (2003) (Burden of Proof by Fiduciary; Assignment of Negotiable Instrument; Oil and Gas Venture); Chila v. Stuart 81 Conn.App. 458, 840, A.2d 1176 (2004) (Preincorporation Contracts, Standing); Western Boot and Clothing Co., Inc. v. L'Enfance Magique, Inc. 81 Conn.App. 486, 840 A.2d 574 (2004). (Commercial Eviction, Commercial Sublease); Merrick v. Cummin, 100 Conn. App. 664, 919 A. 2d 495 (2007) (Public Policy; Arbitration Award; Limited Partnership); Vissa v. Pagano, 100 Conn. App. 609, 919 A. 2d 488 (2007) (Direct and Derivative Action Distinguished); Halo Tech Holdings, Inc. v. Cooper, Slip Copy, 2008 WL 877156, D. Conn. (2008) (Long Arm Jurisdiction; Unfair Trade Practices; Venue; Aiding and Abetting Breach of Fiduciary Duty). Practice Areas: Business Litigation; Trials and Appeals in all State and Federal Courts; Family Law; Divorce; Commercial Arbitration; Commercial Litigation; Commercial Torts.Email: David M. Wallman
OF COUNSELSally J. Boynton (Of Counsel) born Bethel, Maine, November 19, 1951; admitted to bar, 1984, New York; 1985, Connecticut. Education: Eisenhower College (B.A., 1973); Yeshiva University (J.D., 1983). Member: New York State Bar Association and New York County Lawyers Association; Connecticut Bar Association. Practice Areas: Matrimonial Law; Estate Planning; Estate Administration; Real Estate.Email: Sally J. Boynton
Ratings Methodology
The following firm members have been rated by their peersDisclaimer: No representation is made that the quality of legal services to be performed is greater than the quality of legal services performed by other lawyers. The testimonial or endorsement does not constitute a guarantee, warranty, or prediction regarding the outcome of your legal matter. Any result that the endorsed lawyer or law firm may achieve on behalf of one client in one matter does not necessarily indicate that similar results can be obtained for other clients. Past success cannot be an assurance of future success because each case must be decided on its own merits. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Martindale-Hubbell® does not undertake to develop a Client Review Rating or Peer Review Rating for all firms and/or lawyers. Therefore, the fact that a firm or lawyer has not been reviewed should not be construed as unfavorable. Martindale-Hubbell accepts no responsibility for and will not be liable for the content and accuracy of the individual Reviews and the aggregated Reviews.
|