Multi-Million Dollar Fraud Scheme in Miami Uncovered by Giller P.A
Giller P.A. is currently leading a high-stakes legal battle, shedding light on an elaborate fraud scheme targeting South Florida residents. Attorney Jason Giller represents an entrepreneur who was induced to prepay $650,000 for custom millwork that was never delivered.
As detailed in the Daily Business Review, the firm's investigation into this contract dispute quickly "uncovered almost $2 million of claims, judgments and tax issues" against the alleged perpetrators. This case is a strong example of the firm's aggressive litigation practice and its dedication to protecting clients from fraudulent business law practices.
Read the full article on Law.com (subscription may be required)
Victim in $650K+ Millwork Fraud Case Represented by Giller P.A
Following the arrests of a duo accused of bilking a Miami Beach homeowner out of over $650,000, attorney Jason Giller is representing the victim. The case involves a fraudulent contract dispute over Italian millwork that was never provided.
Giller told Local 10 News that this is likely not an isolated incident. “We’re pretty confident that there’s a lot of victims out there. Sometimes people are embarrassed, but the likelihood that this is isolated is virtually zero.”
Insurer-Friendly Ruling in PIP Dispute Draws Criticism from Giller
As an authority on insurance law, attorney Jason Giller was asked to analyze a recent State Farm PIP reimbursement case. He criticized the ruling, stating, "It’s further confirmation that insurers use confusing and illusory language to undermine the premise of insurance—to make insureds whole." Giller argued the decision ignores the good-faith obligations of insurers, showcasing the firm's commitment to policyholder rights and battling unfair insurance law practices.
Read the full article on Law.com (subscription may be required)
Jason Giller on Trustee Duties in $275M Estate Dispute
When asked to comment on the "Margaritaville Meltdown" estate dispute, Jason Giller provided expert analysis on trust law for the Daily Business Review. He detailed the core legal issues at play in such partnership disputes, explaining, "By operation of law, a trustee owes fiduciary duties to the beneficiaries, but those duties can be modified (up or down) under the terms of the trust itself." This commentary reinforces the firm's deep expertise in fiduciary responsibilities and complex trust litigation.
Read the full article on Law.com (subscription may be required)
Important Legislative Updates Pending In Tallahassee
As the law, especially in Florida is fluid, especially with respect to insurance laws, we are providing a brief synopsis of pending legislation before the Florida legislature. Thus far, none of these bills have been passed into law in the 2025 session, but given the importance that insurance plays in a wide array of businesses, it’s important to take note, prepare and plan accordingly. We have provided some background on the pending legislation and topics. However, if you believe that any of these proposed bills or issues will impact you, it is important to consult with counsel for further guidance.
For real-time updates refer to official legislative tracking sites like www.flsenate.gov or www.myfloridahouse.gov to see how the pending bills are tracking in the legislative process. This year, the Florida legislative session convened on March 4, 2025 and will be adjourned on May 2, 2025.
Pending Bills in the Florida Senate
Senate Bill 554 (Senator Don Gaetz)
SB 554, as proposed, aims to increase transparency in insurance operations by requiring detailed reports on executive compensation and financial ties between insurers and their affiliates. This bill comes on the heels of a long unknown partial study that surveyed insurance operations in Florida, and contrary to the narrative promoted in 2022 and 2023, found that many carriers were profitable, but profits were secreted to affiliates, parent companies, executives, and others resulting in superficially low economic markers reported by the Florida subsidiaries. Unpublished Florida study reveals property insurance secrets | Miami Herald; Florida Insurers Sent Billions to Affiliates While Claiming Losses: Report – Newsweek; Florida Insurance Scandal Has ‘Huge’ Impact for Homeowners – Newsweek.
If passed, SB 451 will likely force radical changes in the structuring of carriers, policies, claims procedures and provide for further implications were the intended transparency due to regulators is not honored. Impact to premiums are far from clear, but in the event of any further regulation, should SB 554 become law, it may impact premiums and policies in the state. Enhanced and more thorough reporting with a focus on stricter oversight should promote better claim processing and reduce the potential for claims that many believe are being improperly or fraudulently delayed or denied. The bill, as currently proposed, will also provide for prevailing party attorney fees for property insurance disputes. The legislation provides for a truncated recovery of legal fees based on certain factors including, without limitation, reasonableness of pre-suit demands, the amount recovered in comparison to the amount demanded prior to filing a suit, timeliness of a carrier’s response, and in instances of abuse or fraud. Unlike prior legislation governing property and other insurance claims, the award turns on who prevails, and is not a return to one-way fees where an insured succeeds on claims against an insurance company.
SB 554 is still pending review in the Senate Banking and Insurance Committee as well as the Rules and Appropriations Committee on Agriculture, Environment, and General Government with no specific further hearing dates were noted. For more details, here is a link to the proposed legislation: Senate Bill 554 (2025) – The Florida Senate
Senate Bill 1256 (Senator Erin Grall and Senator Darryl Ervin Rouson)
SB 1256 takes aim at Florida’s no-fault (Personal Injury Protection) system and proposes to replace it with mandatory bodily injury (BI)(also referred to as personal injury (PI) or negligence) liability coverage. If passed into law, SB 1256 would shift medical cost responsibility from PIP to BI liability, which entails a prolonged process over current the PIP system where fault is irrelevant. If SB 1256 passed, drivers would need to carry BI coverage (with minimum coverage of $25,000 per person/$50,000 per accident) to register a vehicle in the State of Florida.
Proposed Effective Date: If passed into law without modification, the slated effective date of the law would be July 1, 2026.
Advocates of SB 1256 claim that the current PIP system is plagued by fraud and inefficiencies which, in turn, drive up costs and auto insurance premiums. Discussion on this topic is quite fierce because of the broad impact on consumers (and businesses) in the state. Those in favor of the repeal believe that Florida’s current law – requiring drivers to carry $10,000 in personal injury protection benefits, which provides coverage to anyone injured regardless of fault – is a major contributor to the high auto insurance premiums Floridians foot compared to national averages. Opponents of the repeal, which include the Florida Justice Reform Institute, believe that repeal is premature because there is insufficient data to determine whether the law (PIP) or repeal would impact drivers and consumers one way or another. In light of the sweeping reforms enacted in 2022 and 2023, which were universally seen as major victories for insurance carriers, opponents to SB 1256, noting the persisting high premiums, do not want the law repealed until the full data from the impacts of prior reforms (including, HB 837, SB 2A, SB 256) come to light.
Status: Introduced in March 2023 for the 2024 session but reintroduced for 2025 consideration. As of April 2025, it is pending review in the Senate Banking and Insurance Committee and Appropriations Committee on Agriculture, General Government and Rules. No final action has been reported. Senate Bill 1256 (2025) – The Florida Senate
For those businesses that currently rely upon PIP benefits as part of their business plan and regular operations, SB 1256 should be monitored closely because of the sweeping and material impact that it will have on consumers, drivers and medical service providers in Florida.
Senate Bill 1656 (Senator Jay Collins)
Impact: Requires insurers to disclose payments to affiliate companies and report how internal costs (e.g., litigation, reinsurance) impact consumer premiums. This could indirectly affect policy pricing and claims processing by exposing cost structures that influence insurance rates. On the other hand, increased transparency may pressure carriers and adjusters to streamline claims processes to justify costs, potentially benefiting policyholders.
Proposed Effective Date: If passed into law without modification, the slated effective date of the law would be July 1, 2025.
Status: On March 17, 2025, the Banking and Insurance Committee approved SB 1656 by 7-0. As of March 19, 2025, the bill went through its first reading in the Banking and Insurance Committee and was also under review by the Appropriations Committee on Agriculture, Environment and General Government. Senate Bill 1656 (2025) – The Florida Senate
Senate Bill 1740 (Senator Blaise Ingoglia and Senator Barbara Sharief)
Senate Bill 1740 seeks to increase required reserves for carriers that operate in the state. The bill proposed an additional $35 million in reserves and also provided language that would ban executives and attorneys from leading failed insurers for five years post-insolvency. Not only does the bill seek to hold those responsible for carrier failures accountable, but also seeks further market stabilization in the market and protect against financial and other harms that ensue following insolvencies. Proponents of the bill advocate that heightened reserves not only protect against insolvencies but should increase carriers’ abilities to pay out claims quicker.
Proposed Effective Date: If passed into law without modification, the slated effective date of the law would be July 1, 2025.
Status: As of March 17, 2025, the bill passed the Banking and Insurance Committee by 7-0, and on March 19, 2025 was given its first reading and sent for further review by the Appropriations Committee on Agriculture, Environment and General Government. No further action was reported. Senate Bill 1740 (2025) – The Florida Senate
Pending Bills in the Florida House of Representatives
House Bill 1181 (Representative Danny Alvarez, Rep. Meg Weinberger and Rep. Susan Valdes)
HB 1181 is a companion bill to SB 1256. Like SB 1256, HB 1181 seeks to repeal Florida’s no-fault (PIP) system and replace it with mandatory BI liability coverage. The justification touted by its sponsors and proponents claim that eliminating Florida’s no-fault system will reduce auto insurance premiums by shifting medical cost responsibility and addressing PIP-related fraud. Like SB 1256, HB 1181 requires BI coverage for vehicle registration in Florida. If passed, this bill will wholly reshape auto policy claims and refocus financial liability to those found to be liable rather than a neutral policy designed to ensure prompt treatment regardless of fault.
HB 1181 would also eliminate Florida’s current tort liability limits which exist under the current PIP system absent certain carveouts. Like SB 1256, mandatory minimum coverage will be increased to $25,000 per person and $50,000 per incident, but will not increase the minimum property damage coverage from $10,000.00. Proponents tout that the new proposed limits are more in line with the costs of medical care today, rather than the $10,000 limit which has been in place since the 1970s when no-fault laws were enacted. On the other hand, groups and advocates that oppose HB 1181 and are against the repeal of no-fault laws, argue that the increased premiums (imposed from increased policy limits) will lead to more uninsured motorists, resulting in protracted litigation, delayed medical treatment, and imposing up-front out of pocket costs on those that are injured rather than the carrier(s). If passed, HB 1181 is slated to cause material disruption to medical providers that rely upon no-fault (PIP) coverage for reimbursement of treatments and supplies rendered to accident victims. Groups including the Florida Consumer Action Network have noted that policies that turn on liability are likely to reduce available medical services for those injured in accidents because of coverage, especially in multi-vehicle accidents where fault can be difficult to apportion. The sentiment is generally shared by medical associations and consumer groups which believe that the elimination of the no-fault system will disrupt available healthcare, increase financial risk and disproportionately have an adverse economic impact on those victims from low-income communities.
Proposed Effective Date: If passed into law without modification, the slated effective date of the law would be July 1, 2026.
Status: Introduced in March 2023 for the 2024 session and reintroduced for 2025. As of April 2025, HB 1181 has received favorable votes from the Civil Justice and Claims Subcommittee (13-2, March 27, 2025) and Insurance and Banking Subcommittee (18-1, April 3, 2025). HB 1181 is now before the Judiciary Committee. No additional votes or hearings were noted. HB 1181 (2025) – Motor Vehicle Insurance | Florida House of Representatives
Relevance to PIP: Directly targets PIP repeal, potentially reshaping auto insurance claims by emphasizing liability over no-fault coverage.
House Bill 1429 (Representative Tom Fabricio)
HB 1429 is similar to SB 1656 but has some notable distinctions. Like SB 1656, HB 1429 requires insurers to disclose payments made to affiliates and report how internal costs affect premiums. While the correlation to premiums is inherently uncertain, increased oversight may, on the one hand have an impact on policy pricing, but also promote streamlined claims handling by requiring heightened transparency and accountability. While SB 1656 targets broader insurance oversight across the industry, HB 1429 is more focused on reciprocal insures and continuing care communities (CCRCs) with stated goals of providing policyholders and residents with more transparent insight into their carrier’s financial operations and claim handling.
Proposed Effective Date: If passed into law without modification, the slated effective date of the law would be July 1, 2025.
Status: Like SB 1656, HB 1429 remains in early stages of review with no floor votes having been held yet. The bill remains in the House Insurance & Banking Subcommittee with no further specific progress reported as of yet. HB 1429 (2025) – Insurance Regulations | Florida House of Representatives
House Bill 451 (Representative Alex Andrade)
HB 451 is largely likened as a companion bill to SB 554. HB 451 includes provisions which would provide for prevailing party legal fees and costs if they successfully sue an insurer under a property insurance policy. 2022 and 2023 reforms repealed provisions which allowed an insured to recover against an insurance company, so HB 451 would provide similar, but not the same relief that existed prior to the sweeping reforms for property claims. While passage of HB 451could increase litigation against insurers, potentially raising premiums, it provides property policyholders with additional rights which militate towards a more economic balance between stakeholders instead of the staggering imbalance that exists without prevailing party fees.
Proposed Effective Date: If passed into law without modification, the slated effective date of the law would be July 1, 2025.
Status: As of April 2025, the House is supporting changes to increase damages in personal injury/wrongful death cases and reinstate attorney fees, but the specific bill number was not identified. It is in the early stages, with limited House action reported. HB 451 (2025) – Court Judgment Interest Rates and Insurance Reports and Practices | Florida House of Representatives
House Bill 1551 (Representative Hilary Cassel and Rep. Paula Stark)
HB 1551 is aptly summarized by its sponsor, Representative Hilary Cassel:
House Bill 1551 was filed to strike a balanced approach to Florida’s insurance litigation landscape by ensuring both consumer protection and the reduction of frivolous lawsuits. This legislation aims to provide policyholders with a fair pathway to recover attorney fees when they prevail in certain disputes against insurers, thus discouraging wrongful claim denials. At the same time, it establishes clear guidelines for determining prevailing parties, ensuring that insurers are not unfairly burdened with excessive litigation costs when legitimate settlement offers are made in good faith. By fostering accountability on both sides, HB 1551 enhances the stability of Florida’s insurance market while safeguarding consumers’ rights.
While there has not been any floor votes, HB 1551 has passed the House Civil Justice and Claims Subcommittee (16-1, March 13, 2025), and the Insurance and Banking Subcommittee (15-1, March 20, 2025). It must pass at least one more hurdle, the House Judiciary Committee, to reach the House floor for a full vote. However, so far, support from the Florida Senate is uncertain, and it is generally expected to mixed views from state Senators who are generally not in favor of reversing the major aspects of the 2022 and 2023 reforms. HB 1551 (2025) – Attorney Fee Awards in Insurance Actions | Florida House of Representatives
House Bill 1437 (Representative John Snyder)
Similar to other efforts during this legislative session, HB 1437 seeks to restore economic parity between insured and insurance companies. In conjunction with SB 1840 (Senator Jonathan Martin), the bill, as proposed would largely, but not fully, restore pre-2023 reform attorney fee awards. The language provides for a strict prevailing party fee award between any “provider who rendered [] service or care [in connection with Florida’s PIP statute]” and the carrier where a lawsuit is filed, and a prevailing party determined following “judgment or decree at the trial or appellate court” inclusive of court costs. The bill seemingly responds to the impacts following HB 837 which abolished the mechanism for fees under Florida’s insurance laws, and while not as robust as the law that existed prior to the 2023 reform, protects medical providers who treat auto accident victims under Florida’s no-fault system but are improperly denied or underpaid benefits under that system. Unlike HB 1181, HB 1437 does not propose to repeal or materially modify Florida’s PIP statutes, rather, it strengthens it by virtue of reducing financial barriers (cost of legal representation) so that insureds, including treating medical providers, can enforce their rights.
Proposed Effective Date: If passed into law without modification, the slated effective date of the law would be July 1, 2025.
HB 1437 received favorable action by the House Civil Justice & Claims Subcommittee (17-1, March 20, 2025) but is still pending review by the House Insurance and Banking Subcommittee and the Judiciary Committee. It is unclear if HB 1437 will be presented to the floor for a vote during the 2025 legislative session, but should be monitored closely for those that are experiencing difficulties with carriers over reimbursement through PIP policies. HB 1437 (2025) – Attorney Fees and Costs for Motor Vehicle Personal Injury Protection Benefits | Florida House of Representatives
Disclaimer: The information provided here is for general informational purposes only and is intended to summarize recent legal developments in Florida, such as House Bill 1437. The information provided above is intended to be informative, but neither comprehensive nor applicable to any particular case or scenario. The content provided above is based upon information available as of the date of drafting, and like any other legal topic, is subject to change, whether through the legislative, executive or judicial systems, or by the passage of time. It does not constitute legal advice, nor is it a substitute for professional legal counsel. No attorney-client relationship is created by reading or relying on this information. Laws and regulations go through rigorous legislative and executive review and democratic processes, hence are subject to change, and their application depends on specific facts and circumstances. For advice tailored to your situation, or for more information about the topics identified or discussed above, please consult a licensed Florida attorney.
Update on Recent Corporate Transparency Act Changes
On February 18, 2025, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) extended the deadline for beneficial ownership information (BOI) filings for all non-exempt domestic and foreign reporting entities to March 21, 2025. Additionally, FinCEN indicated it would be revising the CTA’s BOI reporting rules.
Then, on March 2, 2025, the U.S. Department of the Treasury (FinCEN’s parent agency) announced on X (formerly Twitter) that it would not enforce penalties for BOI reporting under the current deadlines. A follow-up press release clarified that this non-enforcement applied to U.S. citizens, domestic reporting companies, and their beneficial owners. However, the March 21 deadline remained unchanged. Treasury also shared plans to propose a new rule that would limit BOI reporting obligations to foreign reporting companies.
No further updates were provided until the afternoon of March 21, 2025, when FinCEN issued an interim final rule that officially removes BOI reporting requirements for U.S. entities and individuals. Under this updated rule:
Only non-exempt foreign reporting companies and their beneficial owners must submit BOI reports.
Existing foreign entities must file within 30 days of the rule’s publication in the Federal Register.
Newly registered foreign entities must file within 30 days of their registration effective date.
A foreign reporting company is defined as an entity that:
Is a corporation, LLC, or similar entity
Formed under foreign laws
Registers to do business in the U.S. through a state or tribal authority filing
For full details, we encourage you to review FinCEN’s official press release.
If you have any questions about the CTA or how these changes may impact you, please reach out to us at 305-999-1906.
Client Update: U.S. Treasury Announcement On Corporate Transparency Act Compliance
Summary
On March 2, 2025, the U.S. Treasury Department issued a key update concerning the enforcement of the Corporate Transparency Act’s (CTA) beneficial ownership information reporting rule. This development holds significant implications for U.S. citizens, domestic reporting companies, and their beneficial owners.
Key Highlights
Suspension of Penalties and Fines: The Treasury announced it will not impose penalties or fines for non-compliance with the current beneficial ownership information reporting rule, both under existing deadlines and after upcoming rule changes are implemented.
Proposed Rule Change: The Treasury plans to propose regulatory adjustments that would limit the scope of the reporting rule to foreign reporting companies only. This approach aims to support U.S. taxpayers and small businesses by ensuring that regulations are aligned with public interests.
What This Means for Clients
Reduced Immediate Compliance Pressure: U.S. citizens and domestic reporting companies can feel reassured, as they will not be penalized for non-compliance with current reporting requirements. This suspension offers immediate relief from the urgency to meet existing deadlines.
Be Prepared for Future Changes: While penalties are currently on hold, clients should stay alert to potential regulatory shifts. The focus on foreign entities suggests that future compliance requirements may change for certain companies.
Recommended Next Steps
Stay Updated: Regularly monitor announcements from the Treasury Department regarding the proposed rule changes and any updates related to the Corporate Transparency Act.
Giller P.A. Manages Trust in $14.8M Fisher Island Sale
Continuing his work on a complex international estate matter, attorney Jason Giller managed the Villa Martina trust in the $14.8 million sale of a Fisher Island home. This significant real estate transaction demonstrates the firm's trusted role in managing and liquidating substantial assets involved in complex estates and business law disputes.
Expert Commentary: The Perils of Online Defamation
Attorney Jason Giller provided expert legal commentary to the Daily Business Review on a high-profile case involving Florida's "long-arm statute." He emphasized the modern-day risks of online statements, noting, "The takeaway here is, be careful what you publish online, as the pen, in this day and age, can still carry the same consequences as the sword." This insight reflects the firm's grasp of evolving business law issues, including defamation and jurisdictional challenges in the digital age.
Read the full article on Law.com (subscription may be required)
Giller Analyzes “Multimillion-Dollar Blunder” in $82M Verdict Appeal
Drawing on his own experience in plaintiff litigation, Jason Giller analyzed a complex appeal court decision involving an $82M verdict. He pointed out the critical importance of framing damages in litigation: "I think the key takeaway is to remind the litigants that framing the proper damage model can be a multimillion-dollar windfall or blunder and something that should be firmly ironed out long before it is submitted to the trier of fact."
Read the full article on Law.com (subscription may be required)
Why a Court Reversed an Attorney Fee Award: Giller Explains Critical Procedure
When a court reversed an attorney fee award, Jason Giller was asked to explain the procedural error. He provided clear analysis on the non-negotiable rules: "If a party passes away, a suggestion of death must be filed." He noted the original lawyer "just never complied, probably never even read the rule." This commentary highlights the firm's commitment to procedural precision in plaintiff litigation and deep knowledge of Florida litigation rules.
Read the full article on Law.com (subscription may be required)
Florida’s ‘Complicated Times:’ Giller on the Rising Costs of the Insurance Market
The volatile Florida insurance law landscape continues to create immense economic pressure on developers, a topic attorney Jason Giller recently discussed with the Daily Business Review. As a full-service boutique firm for high-net-worth clients, Giller P.A. has a frontline view of these challenges.
Giller commented on the cascading effects: "If you're a developer, the cost of your insurance premiums is at an all time high, your worker compensation premiums are higher, the cost of financing is higher now." His analysis that "we're in for some complicated times ahead" underscores the firm's holistic understanding of the interconnected risks in real estate and business law.
Read the full article on Law.com (subscription may be required)
The Business of Law: Jason Giller Analyzes the Economics of Firm Spinoffs
Jason Giller offered his experience in running a law firm to comment on a recent 10-lawyer spinoff from a large firm. He pointed to the likely driver: "If I had to guess, the motivating reason for leaving is economics. They have a big enough footprint to open a new firm with better economics and provide better service to the clients."
Read the full article on Law.com (subscription may be required)
NY High-Stakes Real Estate Fraud: Giller on Why the Remedies Are “Much Larger”
Providing expert analysis on a case involving alleged real estate fraud, Jason Giller explained the significant danger such claims pose over simple contract issues.
"It's one thing to fight over a $7 million deposit," he stated. "Fraud claims have a much larger panoply of remedies than a breach-of-contract claim. So that's a dangerous claim."
Read the full article on Law.com (subscription may be required)
“A Tough Road:” Jason Giller on Rising Costs in Florida’s Real Estate Market
The Daily Business Review tapped Jason Giller for his expertise on the pressures facing Florida’s real estate market. He warned that new developers face a tough road, advising, "If they don't already have the experience, they're going to need the relationships with the contractors, with the insurance brokers, with the lenders." This analysis highlights Giller P.A.'s holistic understanding of the law and financial risks impacting South Florida real estate development.
Read the full article on Law.com (subscription may be required)
The ‘Art of Litigation:’ Jason Giller on Why Knowing Your Audience Wins the Case
When a "strong-arm" defense in a personal injury case backfired, the Daily Business Review sought Jason Giller's expert commentary on the art of trial advocacy. As an experienced Miami trial lawyer, Giller discussed the critical, fine line that attorneys must walk in the courtroom.
"There is a delicate balance between an attorney's mandate to be a zealous advocate and excess which can teeter beyond the bounds of acceptable 'fair game,'" he stated.
His analysis focused on the human element of litigation, reinforcing the firm's belief that effective strategy goes beyond just the facts.
"A good lawyer needs to understand the client, know the law, and also know their audience," Giller said. "Judges and juries are people, and the advocates' number one job is to figure out how to communicate their client's case to that audience."
Read the full article on Law.com (subscription may be required)
New Florida Property Law Explained: Jason Giller on ‘Common-Sense’ Bill
As a recognized voice in Florida real estate law, attorney Jason Giller was recently asked by the Daily Business Review to provide expert analysis on new state legislation. Giller commented on a "common-sense bill" that requires courts to award attorney fees to prevailing defendants in certain property rights cases.
He noted the law's dual benefits: "Number one, it protects the property owner. Secondly, I think it acts as a deterrent against people from bringing litigation that probably shouldn't be brought in the first place." His analysis reinforces the firm's deep understanding of the South Florida legal landscape and its impact on clients.
Read the full article on Law.com (subscription may be required)
Giller P.A. Navigates Complex International Estate Dispute
Demonstrating its capability in complex international disputes, Giller P.A. is representing family members in a high-value estate feud following the mysterious death of a former Russian billionaire. The case, profiled in Forbes, involves significant assets and legal proceedings in Cyprus.
Founder and Managing Partner Jason Giller, who represents the decedent's son and his mother, commented on the challenges often seen in such cases, noting that "predatory behavior targeting valuable assets is often employed" in these situations. The case highlights the firm's experience in navigating sensitive, high-stakes partnership disputes and protecting clients' interests across jurisdictions.
Firm Wins $10M Judgment in Libel and Abuse of Process Case
In a significant victory, attorney Jason Giller won a $10 million judgment for his client against financier David Sugarman. The case involved serious charges of libel and abuse of the legal process. The win underscores the firm's capability in aggressive litigation and our commitment to protecting clients from malicious legal tactics. "There is no greater example of a bully than Mr. Sugarman," Giller stated, highlighting the nature of the legal battle.
Giller P.A. Represents Client in High-Stakes Real Estate Litigation
Giller P.A. is representing Ugo Colombo and his company in a complex real estate dispute between major industry figures. The case, which the Third District Court of Appeal ruled should be heard in New York, demonstrates the firm’s experience in handling jurisdictional challenges and sophisticated partnership disputes that cross state lines.
Read the full article on Law.com (subscription may be required)