William Boesch's Email & Phone

Education: J.D., Northeastern University School of Law, 1991 B.A., Dartmouth College, 1985 Phillips Exeter Academy, 1981 Practice Areas: Business Litigation Insurance and Reinsurance Intellectual Property Litigation (Co-Chair) Professional Liability (Co-Chair) Just published: The latest installment in David Barry and William Boesch's leading series of articles on Massachusetts legal malpractice law. William's litigation practice concentrates on commercial, intellectual property, insurance coverage and professional liability disputes. He joined SRBC in 1992 following a one-year term as a staff attorney with the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, in New York City. William is a member of the firm's executive committee, and chairs its technology committee. He is a member of the federal and state bars in Massachusetts and New Hampshire. Some of William's recent successes: Defense through jury trial and appeal of a Fortune 500 technology company in a trademark dispute with a Massachusetts software maker A jury verdict in favor of two patent lawyers in a federal-court legal malpractice case arising from a dispute over a biotech patent, with a judgment for the client law firm on its counterclaim for unpaid fees (read the Case Report here) A jury verdict in favor of the owners of an international chain of Irish pubs in a trademark infringement dispute against a hotel-industry giant, with a judgment requiring the opponent to cease using the disputed mark. One of Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly's biggest defense wins? of the year (read the Case Report, with a link to the winning summary judgment brief on foreign trademarks and geographic-market priority, here) A jury verdict in favor of clients Sears, Roebuck and Co. and Emerson Electric Co. in a long-running product-liability suit involving the design of a table saw, a win featured on the front page of Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly and in the Defense Research Institute newsletter The Voice (more) With SRBC partner Regina Roman, acting as general outside coverage counsel for a major professional liability insurer of lawyers Arbitration victory for a tax accountant sued for malpractice by his former clients, a prominent pair of authors and lecturers, who claimed he had failed to file tax returns and mishandled an IRS audit Pre-trial dismissal of a defective-design product liability lawsuit brought by a quadriplegic plaintiff against a nationally known furniture manufacturer, based on the much-litigated standards for admissibility of expert testimony. Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly named this one of the biggest defense wins? of the year (read the Case Report here) Substantial settlement on behalf of the family of an HVAC worker who suffocated inside a walk-in freezer where dry ice was being used to chill food while the freezer was being repaired (read the case report here) Frequent work with clients and colleagues on decision-tree modeling of litigation risks and potential recoveries Summary judgment in favor of a large national retail client charged with violation of the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act Favorable resolution on behalf of an inventor of a dispute with a medical-device company over alleged breach of a disclosure agreement Dismissal of a suit against a large international aluminum-can manufacturer alleged to have violated an equipment lease A jury verdict for a bank's general counsel accused in a malpractice case of withholding information about a pending loan application Summary judgment for a law firm charged with malpractice for improper drafting of a release in a tort case Two terms as an appointed hearing-committee officer on lawyer-discipline matters for the Massachusetts Board of Bar Overseers Successful jury-trial defense of a liquid-propane valve manufacturer against product liability claims by a tank-truck operator severely injured in an explosion (read the Case Report here) Jury-trial win on behalf of a ferry passenger who fell down a flight of stairs and suffered a debilitating knee injury (read the Case Report here) Disputes involving defective-design products claims addressed to stationary power woodworking tools, heating-system controls, large appliances, conveyor systems, construction cranes, and pneumatic tire-changing machines William and his wife live in Hamilton, Massachusetts with their two young sons. William recently completed a term as the chair of the town's Personnel Board. He is a cyclist and devout music fan. He also volunteers as a case conferencer for the Boston Municipal Court. Links William was consulted for a local newspaper story on IP issues arising from a Boston mayoral candidate's use in his advertising of images of Apple's iPhone and iPod. Recognition Massachusetts Super Lawyers (Business Litigation), Boston magazine, 2005-2007, 2009-2010; Top 100 Lawyers in Massachusetts, 2010 Rated AV® Preeminent? by Martindale-Hubbell. More on this here. Memberships Boston Bar Association Defense Research Institute Admissions: Massachusetts New Hampshire U.S. District Court for the Districts of Massachusetts and New Hampshire U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit Related News: November 10, 2010 - Summary Judgment for Insurer in Scammed-Lawyer Case SRBC partners Regina Roman and William Boesch have assisted a professional liability insurer-client in obtaining summary judgment in a coverage lawsuit brought by a South Carolina law firm that fell victim to a familiar e-mail scam. The law firm responded to an e-mail purportedly sent on behalf of a Hong Kong client seeking local assistance in handling collection matters. The "client" signed an engagement agreement, and then informed the law firm that a debtor would soon be delivering a bank check for a payment due to the client. The check arrived, and the law firm deposited it in its client-funds account. The next day, the law firm contacted its bank, and was told that funds in the amount of the check had been "posted" to the firm's account. At the client's request, the firm then issued wire-transfer requests to the bank for a total of some $360,000, and the funds were sent to two Japanese bank accounts. Only when it was too late to recover the wires did the firm and the bank learn that the check delivered to the firm was a forgery. The bank sought to make itself whole by taking other funds of the firm it held, and sued the firm for the rest. The firm sought coverage under its malpractice policy. The coverage dispute centered on whether the case involved "professional services" of the firm within the meaning of the policy, whether it involved a misappropriation of client funds within the meaning of an exclusion in the policy, and whether the bank sought "damages" as that term was used in the policy. On the professional-services issue, the firm argued that it subjectively believed it had been retained by a client and asked to perform legal work on its behalf. A South Carolina federal court agreed with SRBC and its client that this was not enough: the evidence undisputedly showed that if a putative "client" ever existed, he clearly sought to "engage" the law firm only for purposes of carrying out the fra October 20, 2010 - SRBC Partners Named "Super Lawyers" Sixteen of SRBC's partners have been recognized as Massachusetts Super Lawyers in the 2010 edition of the annual peer-review survey that seeks to identify the top five percent of lawyers in the state. Many of the partners were also ranked among the very top lawyers in Massachusetts and New England. The complete list is as follows: Michael S. Appel, Plaintiff's Medical Malpractice David A. Barry, Product Liability, Top 100 Lawyers in Massachusetts and New England Edward J. Barshak, Business Litigation, Top 100 Lawyers in Massachusetts and New England William L. Boesch, Business Litigation, Top 100 Lawyers in Massachusetts Anthony M. Doniger, Business Litigation, Top 10 Lawyers in Massachusetts, Top 100 Lawyers in New England Samuel M. Furgang, Insurance Coverage, Top 100 Lawyers in Massachusetts and New England Alan S. Geismer, Family Law Lisa C. Goodheart, Environmental Law, Top 100 Lawyers in Massachusetts and New England, Top 50 Female Lawyers in Massachusetts and New England Susan A. Hartnett, Insurance Coverage Natasha C. Lisman, Business Litigation, Top 50 Female Lawyers in Massachusetts and New England Jean A. Musiker, Employment Law, Top 100 Lawyers in Massachusetts and New England, Top 50 Female Lawyers in Massachusetts and New England Christine M. Netski, Business Litigation John G. O'Neill, Business Litigation Regina E. Roman, Insurance Coverage, Top 50 Female Lawyers in Massachusetts and New England Jeffrey S. Stern, Alternative Dispute Resolution Paul E. White, Business Litigation January 18, 2010 - Victory for Sears, Emerson in Long-Running Products Case SRBC partners David Barry and William Boesch won a federal-court jury verdict on January 15 in favor of clients Sears, Roebuck and Co. and Emerson Electric Co., in a long-running product-liability case involving a Craftsman table saw. The case, Gillespie v. Sears and Emerson, had previously been tried in 2003, with a jury awarding over $1 million to the plaintiffs. SRBC appealed on behalf of Sears and Emerson, and in 2004 the First Circuit reversed the award (386 F.3d 21), returning the case for a new trial. After a long administrative delay, the retrial took place over two weeks in January, in federal court in Boston. The jury found in favor of Sears and Emerson on both aspects of plaintiff's challenges to the design of the table saw. Follow the first link below to read SRBC's full report on the case. The win was featured in an article on the front page of Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly, and in the Defense Research Institute newsletter The Voice (second link below). August 09, 2009 - Massachusetts High Court: Patent Lawyer Has Lien Against Client's Patent Massachusetts has an attorney's-lien statute providing that protects a lawyer who appears for a client? in a court action or any proceeding before any state or federal department, board or commission. The lawyer obtains an automatic lien for his reasonable fees and expenses? a lien upon the client's claim, upon a judgment, decree or other order? entered in favor of the client, and upon the proceeds therefrom. In a case recently decided by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (Ropes & Gray LLP v. Jalbert, July 28, 2009), a law firm handled patent-prosecution matters for a corporate client. When the client went bankrupt, the firm sought to enforce a lien for unpaid fees against the proceeds of sales by the client, both before and after the bankruptcy, of its patents and patent applications. A representative of the client opposed the firm's effort, arguing that the lien statute should be read to permit recovery only against the proceeds of a judgment, decree or other order,? and that issuance of a patent fell within none of these categories. But the Court read the statute more broadly. A patent application is a claim? within the meaning of the statute, in the Court's view, even though the application process is typically non-adversarial. And whether or not an issued patent constitutes a judgment, decree, or other order,? the Court held, a lawyer is entitled to a lien against any proceeds obtained by the client from the sale of a property right in either a pending application or an issued patent. The Court was unmoved by the client-representative's suggestion that attorneys would now use the Court's broad reading to assert liens against such things as copyrights, taxicab medallions, nursing home licenses, zoning variances, building permits, liquor licenses, environmental permits, and the like. The Court suggested that such uses would indeed seem to be consistent with the legislat July 10, 2009 - Has The Appeals Court Shifted Course on Legal Malpractice Statute of Limitations? A continuing source of uncertainty in legal malpractice cases has been application of the "discovery rule" in deciding when the statute of limitations for a client's malpractice claim begins to run. As SRBC's William Boesch writes in a new Law Alert, this uncertainty is unlikely to diminish after a recent decision of the Massachusetts Appeals Court, which upheld the dismissal of a malpractice complaint on limitations grounds despite contrary results in recent similar cases before the same court and the First Circuit. The case is Frankston v. Denniston (Mass.App.Ct. Jun 5, 2009). Related Publications: January 2011 - Massachusetts Legal Malpractice Cases 2000-2009 Massachusetts Law Review has published the latest in a leading series of articles by SRBC partners David Barry and William Boesch surveying developments in Massachusetts legal malpractice law. June 23, 2009 - Do Legal Malpractice Claims Against IP Lawyers Belong in Federal Court? In an article in Andrews's Professional Liability Litigation Reporter, SRBC's William Boesch writes about three recent federal appellate decisions addressing whether legal malpractice claims against intellectual property lawyers necessarily implicate matters of federal IP law, and therefore may be brought in (or removed to) federal court. The decisions may be critical to strategic control over choice of forum in such malpractice cases.