Senior Counsel
Goldman & Pease, LLC
160 Gould Street, Suite 320
Needham, MA 02494

Tel.: 781-292-1080 ext. 225

——————————————————————————

Attorney Liam Floyd Liam Floyd focuses his practice on civil litigation, small business formation and counseling, probating estates and real estate. He was admitted to practice in Massachusetts in 1991. He has represented clients in all levels of courts in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts over his 35 year career.

He has represented landowners and condominium associations in property disputes, condominium lien actions, adverse possession claims, and eminent domain claims. In addition, he represents commercial and residential landlords in landlord-tenant disputes and evictions. He has extensive experience in real estate conveyancing for both commercial and residential properties, and he represents clients before local Zoning Boards for permitting and other building issues.

Mr. Floyd has conducted dozens of trials in the Superior Court, Land Court, and District Court on both commercial disputes and personal injury claims. He has handled numerous cases in Probate Court involving disputes over wills and asset distribution. He has represented clients in front of numerous administrative boards, including the MCAD, Department of Unemployment Assistance, and the U.S. Department of Labor.

Mr. Floyd has given several presentations at business groups and local chambers of commerce concerning business formation and acquisition, succession planning, and employment issues. Mr. Floyd was a member of the Board of Directors of the Stoughton and Randolph Chamber of Commerce.

Mr. Floyd is a graduate of Boston College Law School and Boston College. In addition to the Massachusetts Bar, he is admitted to practice in the U.S. District Court, the U.S. Bankruptcy Court, and the U.S. Court of Appeals, First Circuit.

When he is not arguing cases, Mr. Floyd can be found off the beaten path, hiking in the Blue Hills of Massachusetts and is working his way through New Hampshire’s Four Thousand Footers.

Attorney also has extensive experience in appellate advocacy, having successfully argued appeals in the Massachusetts Appeals Court, the Massachusetts Appellate Division, and the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. A list of his reported cases is below:

• Pabla v. Singh, 21-10646-DPW United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts

After prevailing in a trial in Bankruptcy Court in which the Debtor’s Petition was denied for failing to disclose his assets, drafted successful opposition brief on appeal to the United States District Court.

• Bradley v. Jedrzynski, No. 15-P-951, Massachusetts Appeals Court

Overturned Superior Court’s Judgment based on Lower Court’s erroneous exclusion of expert testimony in a personal injury action.

• Via Restaurants, LLC v. The Occupancy Corporation No. 14-P-437, Massachusetts Appeals Court

After obtaining a jury verdict against defendant for breach of contract and tortious interference with advantageous business relationship, successfully opposed defendant’s appeal of the verdict and prevailed on cross-appeal overturning Judge’s erroneous dismissal of plaintiff’s underlying Chapter 93A claim.

• Den Herder v. Director of Division of Unemployment Assistance, 82 Mass. App. Ct. 701 (2012)

Appealed decision of Boston Municipal Court denying client’s unemployment compensation on the basis that he was an owner of the underlying corporate employer.

• Padro v. Chao, Secretary of Labor, 452 F.3d 31 (2006)

Successfully overturned summary judgment decision against client before the First Circuit Court of Appeals in an employment dispute.

• Zotos v. Armstrong, 63 Mass. App. Ct. 654 (2005)

Successfully reversed a Massachusetts Land Court decision granting the plaintiff an easement by implication.

• Arrow International, Inc. v. Bay State Bingo, Inc. 1999 Mass. App. Div. 285 (1999)

Successfully reversed judgment against individual owner of Corporation by demonstrating revival of corporation was retroactive to date of contractual obligations.