Trials and Appeals

Hill Rivkins is unsurpassed in the art of litigation—the bedrock of our practice. The firm’s litigators are respected and highly sought after for the strategic and attentive, client-first manner in which they resolve each case. Hill Rivkins prides itself on delivering unrivaled representation, yet always in an efficient and cost-effective fashion. Our skilled practitioners continue to enjoy the success of their dedicated labors in all levels of state and federal courts.

Hill Rivkins’ regular litigation clients range from multi-national corporations involved in complex trading or international transportation, to individuals seeking relief from devastating injuries. All of the firm’s clients receive the same personal, cost effective and attentive service that the super-sized firms cannot compete with.

Hill Rivkins’ litigators are masterfully experienced in both trials and appellate work, and regularly bring the successful resolution of our client’s cases in courts across the U.S. Additionally, Hill Rivkins frequently represents foreign clients, and our litigators have the requisite experience to handle legal proceedings outside worldwide.

Representative matters include:

  • In re M/V DG Harmony, 394 F. Supp. 2d 649 (S.D.N.Y. 2005): One of the most substantial vessel fire cases litigated in the U.S., involving the handling of dangerous cargoes and the shipper’s (PPG) liability for the same.
  • Mannesman Demag Corp. v. M/V Concert Express, 225 F.3d 587 (5th Cir. 2000): The first ruling by a Circuit Court of the United States that the Harter Act did not compulsorily apply to inland transportation after cargo leaves the confines of a port. The Fifth Circuit reversed the lower court’s judgment limiting the ocean carrier’s liability to $1,000.00. Hill Rivkins subsequently obtained and collected a judgment for its client in excess of 150 times that amount.
  • Celadon Trucking Serv., Inc. v. Titan Textile Co., 130 S.W.3d 301 (Tex. App. – Houston [14th Dist.] 2004, pet. denied): A significant ruling that, pursuant to the Carmack Amendment, a United States trucker transporting cargo from the United States to Mexico under a through bill of lading could not disclaim liability for cargo loss or damage in Mexico. Hill Rivkins obtained and collected a judgment for the full amount of its client’s loss.
  • International Multifoods Corp. v. Commercial Union Ins. Co., 309 F.3d 76 (2d Cir. 2002): Hill Rivkins successfully represented underwriters in a marine insurance coverage dispute involving application of the “free of capture and seizure exclusion” in connection with detainment of the ship’s entire cargo of frozen chicken in Russia.
  • In re Crysen/Montenay Energy Co., 902 F.2d 1098 (2d Cir. 1990): Hill Rivkins successfully resolved complex bankruptcy proceeding issues related to title to sue, automatic stay, and sanctions, in favor of our client.