Hiscock & Barclay Expands New York Office
Attorneys Laurence J. Rabinovich (Partner) and Philip A. Bramson (Senior Associate) join Hiscock & Barclay’s New York office to continue their practice in the areas of insurance coverage and transportation law. They were formerly with Schindel, Farman, Lipsius, Gardner & Rabinovich, LLP. The addition brings the Firm’s New York office, located at Seven Times Square, to 14 lawyers.
According to John Langan, the Firm’s Managing Partner who helped establish the New York office in 2008, “The addition of Larry and Phil advances our strategy of locating and growing offices in major markets along the U.S. Eastern Corridor while strengthening the Firm’s existing Insurance Coverage and Regulatory practice with their impressive track record.”
“Larry and Phil have built a national reputation in complex insurance coverage disputes and motor carrier law and have litigated many cases in these areas in both federal and state courts around the country,” said Hiscock & Barclay’s Insurance Coverage and Regulation Practice Area Chair Tony Piazza. “These seasoned attorneys will increase the depth of our coverage group’s expertise and our appellate practice.”
Rabinovich is a graduate of New York University (J.D., 1985) and Yeshiva University (B.A., 1982). Bramson is a graduate of Rutgers School of Law (J.D., 1989) and Colgate University (B.A., 1975).
Hiscock & Barclay, LLP, listed as a “Top 250 Firm” by The National Law Journal, is a full-service, 200-attorney law firm, with offices throughout the major cities of New York State, as well as in Boston, Washington, D.C. and Toronto, providing comprehensive legal and business counsel to a diverse client base in 30 practice areas.
- The Supreme Court Finally Weighs In On The Boundaries Of Copyrightability For Useful Articles
- U.S. District Court In Hawaii Issues TRO to Block Second Travel Ban the Day Before it is Set to Take Effect
- No Apportionment of Fault Where the State Occupies the “Empty Chair”
- New York Appellate Court Holds that Assault Did Not Relieve Insurer of Duty to Defend under Homeowners’ Policy