Below are examples of cases that Attorney Sullivan has worked on. He has been involved in many other cases which are not specifically referenced herein but he will remain amenable to discussing further with interested parties.

Breach of Contract

C. Max, Inc. v. Cresta Construction et. al., 72 Mass.App.Ct. 1112, 891 N.E.2d 718 (Table), 2008 WL 3286507 (Mass.App.Ct.) (Unpublished Decision).



Prosecuted claims on behalf of a subcontractor per M.G.L. c. 149, §29 to Judgment and a full recovery of the subcontractor’s contract balance as well as an award for legal fees. Successfully defended delay claims brought by the general contractor. Matter was fully affirmed on appeal.
> See Decision

J.K. Glass, Inc. v. Jan Five Corp. d/b/a Alexandra Construction et al., Suffolk Superior, C.A. No. 01-0850-BLS (Business Litigation Session) 



Prosecuted breach of contract, bond and mechanic’s lien claims on behalf of a subcontractor on a private project to Judgment obtaining recovery of substantially all of the subcontractor’s contract balance. Successfully defended alleged delay, extra work and incomplete work back-charges valued in excess of $1 Million brought by the general contractor.
> See Decision

Bad Faith of the Commonwealth

TLT Construction Corp. v. Commonwealth (D.C.P.O.), Suffolk Superior, C.A. No. 92-6572F
Chapter 149, §29

R.W. Granger & Sons, Inc. v. J&S Insulation, Worcester Superior Court, C.A. No. 92-1388 (affr’d 435 Mass. 66 (2001)).

After recovery on behalf of the subcontractor of some $410,245.83 in funds due on a public construction project (including interest and attorney’s fees per M.G.L. c. 149, §29 and defeat of $500,000.00 in backcharges), a finding was entered for the subcontractor against the general contractor’s surety for double damages and attorney’s fees pursuant to M.G.L. c. 93A, §11 in the sum of $966,284.94, based on unfair and deceptive claim settlement practices.

Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts affirmed the decision of the Worcester Superior Court in 2001, allowing the subcontractor’s recovery, including multiple damages and legal fees, against the general contractor’s surety for the C. 93A violations.
> See Decision