Eric P. Magnuson

Complexity is the common denominator of Eric’s practice. He has litigated complicated construction disputes and cases involving allegations of unfair competition, tortious conduct, contractual breach (including contracts of insurance), infringement of constitutional rights, negligent product design, violations of export-import laws, infringement of intellectual property, and breaches of data privacy laws. Eric has also litigated several bankruptcy matters, and he has served as a Special Assistant Attorney General.

Eric’s skillset goes beyond the direct sphere of litigation. Clients regularly rely on Eric’s expertise when negotiating the “front end” of business deals, including mergers and acquisitions. Eric also spearheads internal investigations on behalf of company clients. As a member of Nutter’s Privacy and Data Security practice group, Eric helps clients respond to data breaches and network intrusions. 

Reading Co-operative Bank v. Suffolk Construction Company, Inc., 464 Mass. 543 (2013), serves as an illustrative matter. Eric served as trial and appellate counsel to a bank in that litigation pursuing claims arising under Article 9 of the UCC. Prevailing at trial and on appeal, the bank was awarded a nearly $8 million judgment. Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly named the decision one of the most important commercial decisions of the year.

Another representative matter is Formulatrix, Inc. v. Rigaku Automation, Inc., No. CV 15-12725-JGD, 2018 WL 5723149 (D. Mass. Nov. 1, 2018). The litigation arose out of a customer support agreement between the parties and involved complex contractual (and other) claims. Eric successfully represented the defendants/counterclaimants at the motion-to-dismiss stage (decided by Judge Wolf) and summary-judgment stage (decided by Judge Dein).

In OpenRisk, LLC v. Roston, 90 Mass. App. Ct. 1107 (2016), Eric represented defendants that were sued in Massachusetts for alleged misappropriation of trade secrets. Although the defendants had forum-related contacts, the defendants sought dismissal of the case based on lack of personal jurisdiction. The Superior Court (Kaplan, J.) dismissed the case, rejecting the theory that a defendant can be subject to personal jurisdiction based on the forum contacts of alleged co-conspirators. The Massachusetts Appeals Court affirmed.

Other representative matters include:

• Representing a developer seeking to recover millions of dollars in damages arising from an architectural firm’s errors and omissions in the design process.
• Defending a company sued for hundreds of millions of dollars arising from the alleged failure to disclose patent litigation to another party.
• Representing a company seeking to recover millions of dollars in damages arising from construction defects in a modular building.
• Defending one of the nation’s largest defense contractors against claims for alleged breaches of fiduciary duty and receipt of fraudulent transfers totaling tens of millions of dollars. 
• Defending insurer in putative class action from claims that the insurer failed to pay sales tax in connection with total-loss vehicles.
• Defending a company in federal litigation product-liability claims arising from the use of a SWAT vehicle.
• Defending a company facing class-action litigation for alleged violations of state statutes and regulations.
• Representing a putative class of insurance companies pursuing claims for hundreds of millions of dollars of premium underreporting in connection with workers’ compensation risk pools.
• Defending a bank against claims for alleged breaches of a data contract.
• Defending high-tech company in trademark matters, including actions pending before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board.
• Representing a financial institution in connection with internal investigation into matters relating to a portfolio of hundreds of millions of dollars in international loans.
• Defending companies in bankruptcy-preference litigations across the country.
• Representing directors and officers of defense contractor seeking coverage under D&O insurance.
• Representing a financial institution pursuing coverage claims under export-import insurance.
• Representing a company pursuing claims arising from a guarantor’s failure to pay millions of dollars on defaulted loans.

Eric is involved in numerous professional organizations, including the Boston of Inn of Court, the Boston Bar Association, the Federalist Society, the International Association of Privacy Professionals, and the Defense Research Institute.

Eric serves as the Senior Editor of the BLS Blog. Besides his posts published there, Eric’s published articles include “ATM Nuisance Suits Should Be Thrown Out of Court,” American Banker (link here); “Apple v. Samsung Electronics: The Perils of Email Auto Deletion,” Nutter Advisory (link here); and “Supreme Court Avoids Deciding Consumer Standing Issue,” Nutter Advisory (link here).

During law school, Eric served as Executive Note Editor of the Arizona Law Review.

Outside the office, you may find Eric lining up at a cycling event somewhere in the woods or on the roads of New England.