March 21, 2013
Attorney Andre D. Bouffard of the northern New England law firm Downs Rachlin Martin today argued an appeal before the United States Supreme Court. The court will decide whether federal law deregulating the trucking industry preempts claims based on state laws regulating the sale and disposal of a towed vehicle.
December 19, 2012
December 19, 2012 (St. Johnsbury) With support from DRM colleagues in Vermont and New Hampshire, Attorney…
September 21, 2012
Eleven DRM attorneys are included in the litigation section of the 2012 Super Lawyers Business Edition.
June 7, 2011
Standing issues in federal court can be confusing and difficult without the additional complications introduced by a claim based on a securitized debt. The same is true in those states that have followed the federal Article III model for resolving standing questions. Recent higher scrutiny of mortgage-foreclosure filings and bankruptcy court filings made by holders of securitized debt require that greater care be put into identifying the correct holder of the claims and the documents establishing right of the holder to enforce the debt, prior to litigation being instituted. In the meantime, for the many pending cases where these issues are presently being litigated, absent prejudice to the defendant, real-party-in-interest deficiencies in these types of actions should be subject to cure by amendment of the pleadings. Courts and litigants can work through these disputes effectively and efficiently by applying the real-party-in-interest requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 17 or the equivalent state procedural rules.
August 20, 2010
(Burlington, Vt.) Nineteen attorneys representing 17 practices at Downs Rachlin Martin PLLC have been selected for inclusion in the 2011 edition of The Best Lawyers in America®. Selections are based on the organization’s annual peer-review survey.
December 11, 2008
An article written by Andre D. Bouffard, a director at Downs Rachlin Martin PLLC, was cited extensively by the Bankruptcy Court for the District of Vermont in its October 2008 decision interpreting Vermont’s foreclosure law, as amended in 2006. The article, “Heavy Traffic at the Intersection of Mortgage Foreclosure and Bankruptcy Law,” was published in the Spring 2006 issue of the Vermont Bar Journal. The Court found the article to be persuasive authority regarding the intention of the Legislature when it amended the law in 2006.
May 24, 2006
Effective May 5, 2006, the Legislature substantially amended Vermont’s strict foreclosure law to restrict its application to only a limited category of cases. The Legislature took this action in response to a series of 2005 decisions by the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District in Vermont