R. Bradford Fawley

Director - Brattleboro
R. Bradford Fawley

Practice Areas


    University of Virginia School of Law (J.D., 1983)

    Old Dominion University
    (M.S. Oceanography, 1980)

    Marietta College
    (B.S. Biology, 1977)

Bar Admissions

    Connecticut (1983)

    U.S. District Court, District of Connecticut (1983)

    U.S. Court of Appeals, Second Circuit (1984)

    U.S. Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit (1990)

    Vermont (1992)

    U.S. District Court, District of Vermont (1993)

    U.S. Court of Appeals, First Circuit (2000)

    U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Michigan (2008)

    U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York (2009)

    U.S. Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit (2009)

    U.S. Supreme Court (2009)

    U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Texas (2010)


    Vermont Bar Association

    American Bar Association:
    Environmental and Natural Resources Law Section
    Litigation and Torts Section
    Insurance Practice Section

Practice Focus

Brad Fawley tries cases for and provides counseling advice to a wide range of clients ranging from Fortune 100 companies to individuals throughout New England regarding intellectual property, environmental and insurance coverage matters.

Brad is DRM’s senior intellectual property litigator and has handled significant trademark, patent and copyright litigation in state and federal courts throughout New England and in other states. As with his environmental practice, Brad pursues coverage for his IP clients who have been sued for infringement.

Brad’s environmental practice is largely focused on litigation relating to contaminated properties and toxic tort claims. He also defends clients in enforcement actions brought by environmental agencies and citizen groups. Brad was selected for inclusion in New England Super Lawyers in the area of environmental law.

Brad has extensive experience representing policyholders in disputes against insurance companies regarding insurance coverage for environmental and other liabilities.

Brad prides himself in providing attentive, cost effective service that is always focused on achieving his client’s business objectives. With the client’s objectives in mind, he assembles the best team available to handle the client’s litigation and then directs the team’s efforts toward specific intermediate and long term objectives.

Brad’s twenty-seven years of experience in the litigation trenches in courts across the country enables him to quickly evaluate the proper tactical moves that will best position his clients – and frees him to apply innovative solutions to resolve thorny issues. Through experience and careful psychological insight, Brad tries to place himself in the mindset of the judge or jury to determine which presentation will motivate the decision maker to rule in his client’s favor.

Litigation matters often take years to resolve. During this process, Brad involves our clients in all significant strategic decisions to ensure that the client is a well informed and contributing member of the litigation team and is aware and approves of how its resources are being spent.

Significant Matters

Intellectual Property Litigation: Brad achieved a significant multi-million dollar victory for his client, Black Diamond Equipment, Ltd., by defeating a claim of trademark infringement on the basis of laches (failure to assert one’s rights in a timely manner.) The decision was affirmed on appeal. The litigation costs for the case were fully recovered because of Brad’s suit against Black Diamond’s insurer. Brad and DRM’s intellectual property team also sued one of the largest businesses in the world within a particular industry for trademark infringement and achieved a confidential settlement that resulted in a permanent injunction and recovery of most of the client’s legal fees. In another recent victory, Brad's patent litigation team won a significant Markman decision in another multi-million dollar case in the Eastern District of Michigan concerning cutting edge LED technology.

Environmental: Brad led a team of 15 DRM professionals in a $100 million Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) litigation for a Fortune 50 industrial manufacturer. The case required two substantial trials and two sets of appeals over a 10 year period before resolution. Besides numerous other environmental litigations, he also achieved a $7 million settlement and a $5 million verdict in two property damage toxic tort cases. Recently, he employed a novel use of the 13th and 14th Amendments to secure a permanent injunction against a polluter who was discharging on his client’s property.

Insurance: Brad has collected tens of millions of dollars from insurance companies that have refused to provide coverage to his clients on matters ranging from environmental liabilities to trademark infringement suits.

Professional Activities

Brad is recognized in Chambers USA 2012 and 2013, for his general commercial litigation practice. Chambers' rankings are based on in-depth interviews with clients and peers. Brad is also recognized, based on peer ratings, in the New England Super Lawyers® list, for his work in the areas of environmental and intellectual property litigation.

Community Involvement

Brad regularly represents and aids art organizations in his community on a pro bono basis.


Author, "Insurance Coverage for Intellectual Property Claims" (2005)

When he is able to free himself from a demanding litigation schedule, Brad provides free in-house seminars to clients and potential clients on the fundamentals of insurance so that they can be sure to secure the most benefit possible from the insurance they have purchased.

Reported Cases

Altair Engineering, Inc. v. LEDdynamics, Inc., No. 2:07-cv-13150, United States District Court, Eastern District Of Michigan (Steeh, J.) (favorable Markman ruling for defendant in patent infringement suit and grant of summary judgment).  On appeal to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, No. 2010-1118, the appellate court affirmed the Markman decision but reversed the summary judgment ruling and remanded the case.

Black Diamond Sportswear, Inc. v. Black Diamond Equipment, Ltd.,
No. 1:03-cv-278,(D.Vt. Aug. 26, 2005) (Murtha, J.) aff’d Black Diamond Sportswear, Inc. v. Black Diamond Equipment, Ltd., 2007 WL 2914452, 84 U.S.P.Q.2d 1758, C.A.2 (Vt.), October 05, 2007 (No. 06-3508-cv) (summary judgment dismissal of plaintiff’s $20 million trademark infringement claim against client using defense of laches)

State of Vermont v. Howe Cleaners, Inc. et al., Docket Number 27-1-04 Wncv, Superior Court, Washington County, Vermont (Teachout, J.) (summary judgment dismissal of State’s claim against TD Bank for environmental response costs) Affirmed on appeal to the Vermont Supreme Court, 2010 VT 70.

Cassina S.p.A. v. T. Copeland and Sons, Inc., 2006 WL 3421849, D.Vt., November 27, 2006 (No. 1:06-CV-136 (Murtha, J.) (dismissal of copyright infringement suit on forum non conveniens grounds)

Okemo Mountain, Inc. v. United States Sporting Clay’s Ass’n., 376 F.3d 102, 104 (2d. Cir. 2004) (reversal of district court, Murtha, J., on issue of release contract)

Conservation Law Foundation v. Hannaford Bros. Co., 327 F.Supp.2d 325, 2004 WL 1682969, D.Vt., May 14, 2004(No. 2:03-CV-121) (Sessions, J.) (dismissal of Clean Water Act citizens’ suit for lack of jurisdiction)

In re Stormwater NPDES Petition, 180 Vt. 261, 910 A.2d 824, 2006 WL 2457167, 2006 VT 91, Vt., August 25, 2006(No. 04-515) (reversal of agency decision regulating stormwater discharges)

MyWebGrocer, LLC v. Hometown Info, Inc., 375 F.3d 190 (2d Cir. 2004) (reversal of district court’s (Sessions, J.) denial of preliminary injunction seeking to bar continued copyright infringement of grocery store product descriptions)

Stephen Foote, Dana Foote, Tamara Foote and March Hill Corporation v. Fleet Financial Group, Fleet Bank – NH, Industrial Investment Corporation, Industrial Investment Corporation – NH, and Michael C. Demers, C.A. No: 99-6196, Superior Court, State of Rhode Island (Darrigan, J.) (obtained $10.2 million jury verdict for pollution damages, settled for confidential amount)

U.S. v. Davis, 261 F.3d 1, 53 ERC 1097, 32 Envtl. L. Rep. 20,048, 57 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 748, (1st Cir. 2001) (favorable culmination of 6 year $100 million CERCLA contribution litigation in District of Rhode Island [Torres, J.] on behalf of United Technologies Corporation)

Copyright ©2014 Downs Rachlin Martin PLLC      ‚óŹ     Disclaimer