Robinson Cole LLP
High Contrast Mode

Ian T. Clarke-Fisher is a business and employment litigator, who represents both plaintiffs and defendants on every aspect of a dispute, from pre-litigation strategies to taking matters on appeal. He represents clients in federal and state courts in New York and throughout the country, as well as in arbitration and before state agencies. 

His business cases involve contractual disputes, as well as breach of fiduciary duty, business torts, fraud, unfair trade practices, and intellectual property claims. His clients range from Fortune 500 companies to family businesses and start-ups in a broad variety of sectors, including routinely representing clients in the finance, technology, and the health care sectors.

Ian also regularly represents businesses in employment matters, including wage-and-hour collective and class actions and claims relating to discrimination and retaliation. Ian is particularly experienced in trade secret and non-compete claims, from handling pre-suit investigations to obtaining injunctions on behalf of employers, handling claims of breach of contract, unfair competition, trade secrets, and tortious interference.

Ian represented Robinson+Cole in a month-long secondment at a large British law firm to build and strengthen our international relationships with both lawyers and clients.     

  • University of Connecticut School of Law (Juris Doctor, with honors)
  • St. Lawrence University (Bachelors, cum laude)
    • B.A.

  • Commonwealth of Massachusetts
  • State of Connecticut
  • State of New York
  • U.S. Court of Appeals, 2nd Circuit
  • U.S. District Court, District of Connecticut
  • U.S. District Court, Eastern District of New York
  • U.S. District Court, Northern District of New York
  • U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York

Selected as a Rising Star to the New York Metro Super Lawyers list from 2017 to 2020

Selected by his peers for inclusion in The Best Lawyers in America© in the area of Litigation-Labor and Employment for 2026, 2025 and 2024

American Bar Association

New York State Bar Association

Claims and Litigation Management Alliance 

Experience


Business Litigation: Fraudulent Wires

Defended financial institution against claims stemming from Article 4-A of the UCC brought by a commercial banking customer based on over $8.5 million in allegedly fraudulent wires. Won summary judgment dismissing the matter in its entirety.

Read More

Business Litigation: Picasso Sculpture Sale

Defended family in fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, and related claims brought by a New York City-based art dealer stemming from the purchase and subsequent sale of a Picasso sculpture for over $20 million. Won pre-answer motion to dismiss prior to engaging in discovery.

Read More

Business Litigation: Breach of Contract Action

Obtained $50,000,000 judgment on behalf of a global technology company against one of its competitors within seven months of filing the breach of contract action. Oversaw the enforcement of the judgment with a judicial stock sale and enforcement actions in various states and countries, including the United Kingdom and the Netherlands.

Read More


Publications


Legal Update: Court Halts Enforcement of FTC Non-Compete Final Rule teaser
August 23, 2024

Legal Update: Court Halts Enforcement of FTC Non-Compete Final Rule

Legal Update: Court Enjoins FTC Noncompete Rule Limited to Named Parties teaser
July 22, 2024

Legal Update: Court Enjoins FTC Noncompete Rule Limited to Named Parties

Legal Update: FTC Votes to Finalize Rule Banning Non-Compete Agreements Nationwide teaser
April 25, 2024

Legal Update: FTC Votes to Finalize Rule Banning Non-Compete Agreements Nationwide

Legal Update: Court Halts Enforcement of FTC Non-Compete Final Rule teaser
August 23, 2024

Legal Update: Court Halts Enforcement of FTC Non-Compete Final Rule

Legal Update: Court Enjoins FTC Noncompete Rule Limited to Named Parties teaser
July 22, 2024

Legal Update: Court Enjoins FTC Noncompete Rule Limited to Named Parties

Legal Update: FTC Votes to Finalize Rule Banning Non-Compete Agreements Nationwide teaser
April 25, 2024

Legal Update: FTC Votes to Finalize Rule Banning Non-Compete Agreements Nationwide

Legal Update: New York Proposed Ban on Non-Compete Agreements Vetoed; FTC and NLRB Proposed Nationwide Bans Remain Pending teaser
January 9, 2024

Legal Update: New York Proposed Ban on Non-Compete Agreements Vetoed; FTC and NLRB Proposed Nationwide Bans Remain Pending

Legal Update: New York Inches Closer to Banning Non-Compete Agreements teaser
June 23, 2023

Legal Update: New York Inches Closer to Banning Non-Compete Agreements

Legal Update: FTC Proposes Rule Prohibiting Employee Noncompete Agreements and Broadly-Worded Non-Disclosure Agreements teaser
January 6, 2023

Legal Update: FTC Proposes Rule Prohibiting Employee Noncompete Agreements and Broadly-Worded Non-Disclosure Agreements

July 12, 2022

Robinson & Cole discuss Website Accessibility and Compliance with the Americans With Disabilities Act

ADVOC Gazette

The first part of a series on the Americans with Disabilities Act and website accessibility. The authors write that “more than 10,000 lawsuits were filed and almost a quarter million demand letters were sent to companies over the past two years.” Those suits and letters allege that the companies’ consumer-facing public websites failed to provide adequate accessibility to the visually or hearing impaired, “a violation of Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 12181-12189, or similar state laws, or both.” View the article.

Legal Update: The Ever-Changing Landscape of Non-Compete Agreements – Recent Developments teaser
September 27, 2021

Legal Update: The Ever-Changing Landscape of Non-Compete Agreements – Recent Developments

Legal Update: Recent Amendments to Home Care Worker Wage Parity Law teaser
April 10, 2020

Legal Update: Recent Amendments to Home Care Worker Wage Parity Law



Legal Update: New York Proposed Ban on Non-Compete Agreements Vetoed; FTC and NLRB Proposed Nationwide Bans Remain Pending teaser
January 9, 2024

Legal Update: New York Proposed Ban on Non-Compete Agreements Vetoed; FTC and NLRB Proposed Nationwide Bans Remain Pending

Legal Update: New York Inches Closer to Banning Non-Compete Agreements teaser
June 23, 2023

Legal Update: New York Inches Closer to Banning Non-Compete Agreements

Legal Update: FTC Proposes Rule Prohibiting Employee Noncompete Agreements and Broadly-Worded Non-Disclosure Agreements teaser
January 6, 2023

Legal Update: FTC Proposes Rule Prohibiting Employee Noncompete Agreements and Broadly-Worded Non-Disclosure Agreements

July 12, 2022

Robinson & Cole discuss Website Accessibility and Compliance with the Americans With Disabilities Act

ADVOC Gazette

The first part of a series on the Americans with Disabilities Act and website accessibility. The authors write that “more than 10,000 lawsuits were filed and almost a quarter million demand letters were sent to companies over the past two years.” Those suits and letters allege that the companies’ consumer-facing public websites failed to provide adequate accessibility to the visually or hearing impaired, “a violation of Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 12181-12189, or similar state laws, or both.” View the article.

Legal Update: The Ever-Changing Landscape of Non-Compete Agreements – Recent Developments teaser
September 27, 2021

Legal Update: The Ever-Changing Landscape of Non-Compete Agreements – Recent Developments

Legal Update: Recent Amendments to Home Care Worker Wage Parity Law teaser
April 10, 2020

Legal Update: Recent Amendments to Home Care Worker Wage Parity Law


News


August 26, 2025

78 Robinson+Cole Lawyers Listed in The Best Lawyers in America© 2026

The Best Lawyers in America© has named 78 Robinson+Cole lawyers across the firm’s practice groups and offices for inclusion in and recognition in its 2026 edition. The firm had 57 lawyers resident in its Connecticut offices named to the list and continues to have the highest number of recognized lawyers in the state. Robinson+Cole also has the highest number of listed lawyers in Connecticut in the areas of environmental law, health care law, and insurance law. Additionally, eight lawyers were named Best Lawyers® 2026 “Lawyer of the Year.” A Best Lawyers® “Lawyer of the Year” designation is awarded to one lawyer in each of various high-profile specialties in large legal communities. These lawyers received the highest ratings among their peers for their abilities, professionalism, and integrity. They include: Hartford, CT – Best Lawyers® 2026 “Lawyer of the Year” Christine E. Bromberg – Tax Law Emilee Mooney Scott – Environmental Law Gregory R. Faulkner – Construction Law Joey Lee Miranda – Energy Law John B. Lynch, Jr. – Corporate Law John H. Mutchler – Copyright Law Michael R. Enright – Bankruptcy and Creditor Debtor Rights / Insolvency and Reorganization Law Providence, RI – Best Lawyers® 2026 “Lawyer of the Year” Roger A. Peters, II – Real Estate Law The sixth edition of Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch® in America was also released, which includes 14 Robinson+Cole lawyers. The “Ones to Watch” recognition is given to lawyers early in their careers for their outstanding professional excellence in private practice in the United States. The firm has the highest number of lawyers to receive this designation in Hartford, Connecticut. Inclusion in The Best Lawyers in America® and Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch® in America is determined through a comprehensive peer-review survey. The 2026 awards were created by analyzing over 3.4 million evaluations, assessing over 130,000 vetted nominees. Additional information regarding the Best Lawyers selection methodology can be read here. Congratulations to the following Robinson+Cole lawyers: Hartford, CT – Best Lawyers® Wystan M. Ackerman – Litigation -Insurance Kenneth C. Baldwin – Energy Law Bruce B. Barth – Employee Benefits (ERISA) Law Garry C. Berman – Real Estate Law Patrick M. Birney – Bankruptcy and Creditor Debtor Rights / Insolvency and Reorganization Law Lisa M. Boyle – Health Care Law Dan A. Brody – Commercial Litigation; Criminal Defense: White-Collar Christine E. Bromberg – Nonprofit / Charities Law; Tax Law Dennis C. Cavanaugh – Construction Law; Litigation-Construction Stephen O. Clancy – Commercial Litigation; Litigation - Insurance Thomas P. Cody – Real Estate Law Britt-Marie K. Cole-Johnson – Employment Law - Individuals; Employment Law - Management John L. Cordani – Litigation - Intellectual Property; Trade Secrets Law; Trademark Law Kevin P. Daly – Commercial Litigation Raymond T. DeMeo – Insurance Law Natale V. DiNatale – Employment Law - Management; Labor Law - Management Conor O. Duffy – Health Care Law Michael R. Enright – Bankruptcy and Creditor Debtor Rights / Insolvency and Reorganization Law; Litigation - Bankruptcy Gregory R. Faulkner – Construction Law; Litigation - Construction Brian C. Freeman – Environmental Law; Litigation - Environmental Stephen E. Goldman – Insurance Law Matthew J. Guanci, Jr. – Corporate Law Edward J. Heath – Commercial Litigation Frederick E. Hedberg – Construction Law, Litigation - Construction Christopher J. Hug – Litigation - Construction Rachel V. Kushel – Employment Law - Management; Labor Law - Management John B. Lynch Jr. – Corporate Law; Mergers and Acquisitions Law Michael F. Maglio – Banking and Finance Law; Commercial Finance Law; Equipment Finance Law; Securitization and Structured Finance Law Virginia E. McGarrity – Employee Benefits (ERISA) Law Robert S. Melvin – Environmental Law; Litigation - Environmental Joey Lee Miranda – Energy Law; Energy Regulatory Law; Environmental Law Linda L. Morkan – Appellate Practice John H. Mutchler – Copyright Law; Patent Law; Trademark Law Megan R. Naughton – Immigration Law Martin A. Onorato – Construction Law; Litigation - Construction David M. Panico – Public Finance Law Earl W. Phillips, Jr. – Environmental Law James P. Ray – Environmental Law; Litigation - Environmental Edward J. Samorajczyk, Jr. – Corporate Law; Securities / Capital Markets Law Jacqueline Pennino Scheib – Copyright Law; Trademark Law Emilee Mooney Scott – Environmental Law Jonathan E. Small – Insurance Law Brian R. Smith – Land Use and Zoning Law Rhonda J. Tobin – Insurance Law Theodore J. Tucci – Health Care Law; Insurance Law Abby M. Warren – Employment Law - Management Jeffrey J. White – Commercial Litigation; Mass Tort Litigation / Class Actions - Defendants William S. Wilson II – Construction Law; Litigation - Construction Hartford, CT - Ones to Watch Christopher A. Costain – Personal Injury Litigation - Defendants Jason H. DePatie – Insurance Law Scott T. Garosshen – Appellate Practice Abigail L. Preissler – Banking and Finance Law; Corporate Law Stamford, CT – Best Lawyers®  Patrick W. Begos – Litigation - Insurance Gregory J. Bennici – Insurance Law; Litigation - Insurance Thomas J. Donlon – Appellate Practice Steven L. Elbaum – Real Estate Law John H. Kane – Insurance Law Eric M. Kogan – Corporate Law Charles F. Martin III – Real Estate Law John F.X. Peloso Jr. – Litigation - Real Estate Patricia D. Weitzman – Health Care Law; Litigation - Health Care Stamford, CT - Ones to Watch Emily C. Deans – Energy Law Austin G. Provost – Real Estate Law Boston, MA - Best Lawyers® Joseph A. Barra – Construction Law Kendra L. Berardi – Real Estate Law Amanda S. Eckhoff – Real Estate Law Michael S. Giaimo – Land Use and Zoning Law; Real Estate Law E. Christopher Kehoe – Real Estate Law Matthew J. Lawlor – Land Use and Zoning Law; Real Estate Law Seth B. Orkand – Criminal Defense: General Practice, Criminal Defense: White-Collar Kathleen M. Porter – Information Technology Law Deirdre M. Robinson – Real Estate Law Boston, MA - Ones to Watch Jessica D. Bardi – Environmental Law; Land Use and Zoning Law; Litigation - Environmental Jonathan L. Cabot – Corporate Law; Public Finance Law Julianna M. Charpentier – Commercial Litigation; Litigation - Real Estate Jeffrey R. Gribouski – Commercial Litigation; Insurance Law; Litigation – Construction; Litigation – Environmental; Personal Injury Litigation - Defendants New York, NY - Best Lawyers® Ian T. Clarke-Fisher – Litigation - Labor and Employment E. Evans Wohlforth, Jr. – Commercial Litigation New York, NY - Ones to Watch Janet (Zhanna) Kljyan – Commercial Litigation Albany, NY - Best Lawyers® Danielle H. Tangorre – Administrative / Regulatory Law; Elder Law; Health Care Law Philadelphia, PA - Best Lawyers® Laurie A. Krepto – Bankruptcy and Creditor Debtor Rights / Insolvency and Reorganization Law Philadelphia, PA - Ones to Watch Katherine M. Fix – Bankruptcy and Creditor Debtor Rights / Insolvency and Reorganization Law Wilmington, DE - Best Lawyers® Natalie D. Ramsey – Bankruptcy and Creditor Debtor Rights / Insolvency and Reorganization Law; Litigation - Bankruptcy Providence, RI - Best Lawyers® William M. Daley – Commercial Litigation; Insurance Law; Litigation - Insurance Linn F. Freedman – Artificial Intelligence Law; Commercial Litigation; Privacy and Data Security Law Dana M. Horton – Insurance Law; Litigation - Insurance; Personal Injury Litigation - Defendants Patricia J. Igoe – Commercial Finance Law Roger A. Peters II – Real Estate Law Daniel F. Sullivan – Insurance Law George W. Watson III – Energy Regulatory Law Miami, FL -  Ones to Watch Audrey E. Goldman – Insurance Law Washington, DC - Ones to Watch Kyle G. Hepner – Intellectual Property Law; Litigation - Intellectual Property

Firm receives top listing in Connecticut lawyer count in national peer review survey
78 Robinson+Cole Lawyers Listed in The Best Lawyers in America© 2026 teaser
August 15, 2024

78 Robinson+Cole Lawyers Listed in The Best Lawyers in America© 2025

78 Robinson+Cole Lawyers Listed in <i>The Best Lawyers in America</i>© 2025 teaser
August 17, 2023

78 Robinson+Cole Lawyers Listed in The Best Lawyers in America© 2024

Best Lawyers in America
78 Robinson+Cole Lawyers Listed in The Best Lawyers in America© 2024 teaser
August 26, 2025

78 Robinson+Cole Lawyers Listed in The Best Lawyers in America© 2026

The Best Lawyers in America© has named 78 Robinson+Cole lawyers across the firm’s practice groups and offices for inclusion in and recognition in its 2026 edition. The firm had 57 lawyers resident in its Connecticut offices named to the list and continues to have the highest number of recognized lawyers in the state. Robinson+Cole also has the highest number of listed lawyers in Connecticut in the areas of environmental law, health care law, and insurance law. Additionally, eight lawyers were named Best Lawyers® 2026 “Lawyer of the Year.” A Best Lawyers® “Lawyer of the Year” designation is awarded to one lawyer in each of various high-profile specialties in large legal communities. These lawyers received the highest ratings among their peers for their abilities, professionalism, and integrity. They include: Hartford, CT – Best Lawyers® 2026 “Lawyer of the Year” Christine E. Bromberg – Tax Law Emilee Mooney Scott – Environmental Law Gregory R. Faulkner – Construction Law Joey Lee Miranda – Energy Law John B. Lynch, Jr. – Corporate Law John H. Mutchler – Copyright Law Michael R. Enright – Bankruptcy and Creditor Debtor Rights / Insolvency and Reorganization Law Providence, RI – Best Lawyers® 2026 “Lawyer of the Year” Roger A. Peters, II – Real Estate Law The sixth edition of Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch® in America was also released, which includes 14 Robinson+Cole lawyers. The “Ones to Watch” recognition is given to lawyers early in their careers for their outstanding professional excellence in private practice in the United States. The firm has the highest number of lawyers to receive this designation in Hartford, Connecticut. Inclusion in The Best Lawyers in America® and Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch® in America is determined through a comprehensive peer-review survey. The 2026 awards were created by analyzing over 3.4 million evaluations, assessing over 130,000 vetted nominees. Additional information regarding the Best Lawyers selection methodology can be read here. Congratulations to the following Robinson+Cole lawyers: Hartford, CT – Best Lawyers® Wystan M. Ackerman – Litigation -Insurance Kenneth C. Baldwin – Energy Law Bruce B. Barth – Employee Benefits (ERISA) Law Garry C. Berman – Real Estate Law Patrick M. Birney – Bankruptcy and Creditor Debtor Rights / Insolvency and Reorganization Law Lisa M. Boyle – Health Care Law Dan A. Brody – Commercial Litigation; Criminal Defense: White-Collar Christine E. Bromberg – Nonprofit / Charities Law; Tax Law Dennis C. Cavanaugh – Construction Law; Litigation-Construction Stephen O. Clancy – Commercial Litigation; Litigation - Insurance Thomas P. Cody – Real Estate Law Britt-Marie K. Cole-Johnson – Employment Law - Individuals; Employment Law - Management John L. Cordani – Litigation - Intellectual Property; Trade Secrets Law; Trademark Law Kevin P. Daly – Commercial Litigation Raymond T. DeMeo – Insurance Law Natale V. DiNatale – Employment Law - Management; Labor Law - Management Conor O. Duffy – Health Care Law Michael R. Enright – Bankruptcy and Creditor Debtor Rights / Insolvency and Reorganization Law; Litigation - Bankruptcy Gregory R. Faulkner – Construction Law; Litigation - Construction Brian C. Freeman – Environmental Law; Litigation - Environmental Stephen E. Goldman – Insurance Law Matthew J. Guanci, Jr. – Corporate Law Edward J. Heath – Commercial Litigation Frederick E. Hedberg – Construction Law, Litigation - Construction Christopher J. Hug – Litigation - Construction Rachel V. Kushel – Employment Law - Management; Labor Law - Management John B. Lynch Jr. – Corporate Law; Mergers and Acquisitions Law Michael F. Maglio – Banking and Finance Law; Commercial Finance Law; Equipment Finance Law; Securitization and Structured Finance Law Virginia E. McGarrity – Employee Benefits (ERISA) Law Robert S. Melvin – Environmental Law; Litigation - Environmental Joey Lee Miranda – Energy Law; Energy Regulatory Law; Environmental Law Linda L. Morkan – Appellate Practice John H. Mutchler – Copyright Law; Patent Law; Trademark Law Megan R. Naughton – Immigration Law Martin A. Onorato – Construction Law; Litigation - Construction David M. Panico – Public Finance Law Earl W. Phillips, Jr. – Environmental Law James P. Ray – Environmental Law; Litigation - Environmental Edward J. Samorajczyk, Jr. – Corporate Law; Securities / Capital Markets Law Jacqueline Pennino Scheib – Copyright Law; Trademark Law Emilee Mooney Scott – Environmental Law Jonathan E. Small – Insurance Law Brian R. Smith – Land Use and Zoning Law Rhonda J. Tobin – Insurance Law Theodore J. Tucci – Health Care Law; Insurance Law Abby M. Warren – Employment Law - Management Jeffrey J. White – Commercial Litigation; Mass Tort Litigation / Class Actions - Defendants William S. Wilson II – Construction Law; Litigation - Construction Hartford, CT - Ones to Watch Christopher A. Costain – Personal Injury Litigation - Defendants Jason H. DePatie – Insurance Law Scott T. Garosshen – Appellate Practice Abigail L. Preissler – Banking and Finance Law; Corporate Law Stamford, CT – Best Lawyers®  Patrick W. Begos – Litigation - Insurance Gregory J. Bennici – Insurance Law; Litigation - Insurance Thomas J. Donlon – Appellate Practice Steven L. Elbaum – Real Estate Law John H. Kane – Insurance Law Eric M. Kogan – Corporate Law Charles F. Martin III – Real Estate Law John F.X. Peloso Jr. – Litigation - Real Estate Patricia D. Weitzman – Health Care Law; Litigation - Health Care Stamford, CT - Ones to Watch Emily C. Deans – Energy Law Austin G. Provost – Real Estate Law Boston, MA - Best Lawyers® Joseph A. Barra – Construction Law Kendra L. Berardi – Real Estate Law Amanda S. Eckhoff – Real Estate Law Michael S. Giaimo – Land Use and Zoning Law; Real Estate Law E. Christopher Kehoe – Real Estate Law Matthew J. Lawlor – Land Use and Zoning Law; Real Estate Law Seth B. Orkand – Criminal Defense: General Practice, Criminal Defense: White-Collar Kathleen M. Porter – Information Technology Law Deirdre M. Robinson – Real Estate Law Boston, MA - Ones to Watch Jessica D. Bardi – Environmental Law; Land Use and Zoning Law; Litigation - Environmental Jonathan L. Cabot – Corporate Law; Public Finance Law Julianna M. Charpentier – Commercial Litigation; Litigation - Real Estate Jeffrey R. Gribouski – Commercial Litigation; Insurance Law; Litigation – Construction; Litigation – Environmental; Personal Injury Litigation - Defendants New York, NY - Best Lawyers® Ian T. Clarke-Fisher – Litigation - Labor and Employment E. Evans Wohlforth, Jr. – Commercial Litigation New York, NY - Ones to Watch Janet (Zhanna) Kljyan – Commercial Litigation Albany, NY - Best Lawyers® Danielle H. Tangorre – Administrative / Regulatory Law; Elder Law; Health Care Law Philadelphia, PA - Best Lawyers® Laurie A. Krepto – Bankruptcy and Creditor Debtor Rights / Insolvency and Reorganization Law Philadelphia, PA - Ones to Watch Katherine M. Fix – Bankruptcy and Creditor Debtor Rights / Insolvency and Reorganization Law Wilmington, DE - Best Lawyers® Natalie D. Ramsey – Bankruptcy and Creditor Debtor Rights / Insolvency and Reorganization Law; Litigation - Bankruptcy Providence, RI - Best Lawyers® William M. Daley – Commercial Litigation; Insurance Law; Litigation - Insurance Linn F. Freedman – Artificial Intelligence Law; Commercial Litigation; Privacy and Data Security Law Dana M. Horton – Insurance Law; Litigation - Insurance; Personal Injury Litigation - Defendants Patricia J. Igoe – Commercial Finance Law Roger A. Peters II – Real Estate Law Daniel F. Sullivan – Insurance Law George W. Watson III – Energy Regulatory Law Miami, FL -  Ones to Watch Audrey E. Goldman – Insurance Law Washington, DC - Ones to Watch Kyle G. Hepner – Intellectual Property Law; Litigation - Intellectual Property

Firm receives top listing in Connecticut lawyer count in national peer review survey
78 Robinson+Cole Lawyers Listed in The Best Lawyers in America© 2026 teaser
August 15, 2024

78 Robinson+Cole Lawyers Listed in The Best Lawyers in America© 2025

78 Robinson+Cole Lawyers Listed in <i>The Best Lawyers in America</i>© 2025 teaser
August 17, 2023

78 Robinson+Cole Lawyers Listed in The Best Lawyers in America© 2024

Best Lawyers in America
78 Robinson+Cole Lawyers Listed in The Best Lawyers in America© 2024 teaser
August 16, 2022

Kathleen Porter, William Egan and Ian Clarke-Fisher Author Article on Website Accessibility and ADA Compliance

ADVOC Gazette
March 29, 2021

Transactional Health Law Team Represents ViaQuest in Significant Investment Agreement

October 28, 2020

Three Lawyers From Robinson+Cole’s New York Office Recognized by Super Lawyers®

Super Lawyers®
October 17, 2019

Robinson+Cole Lawyers Recognized by Super Lawyers®

December 5, 2018

Robinson+Cole Elects New Partners

December 3, 2018

Ian Clarke-Fisher and Brian Wheelin Present Program for ACC Westchester/Southern Connecticut


August 16, 2022

Kathleen Porter, William Egan and Ian Clarke-Fisher Author Article on Website Accessibility and ADA Compliance

ADVOC Gazette
March 29, 2021

Transactional Health Law Team Represents ViaQuest in Significant Investment Agreement

October 28, 2020

Three Lawyers From Robinson+Cole’s New York Office Recognized by Super Lawyers®

Super Lawyers®
October 17, 2019

Robinson+Cole Lawyers Recognized by Super Lawyers®

December 5, 2018

Robinson+Cole Elects New Partners

December 3, 2018

Ian Clarke-Fisher and Brian Wheelin Present Program for ACC Westchester/Southern Connecticut


Events


Past

It's Just Boilerplate, Until It's Not: The Clauses We Copy, Paste, and Then Litigate

Jun 9 2026
Lawline
Past

Litigation in Focus: Navigating Complex Disputes

Mar 27 2026
SCG Legal’s 2026 Midyear Meeting
Past

It's Just Boilerplate, Until It's Not: The Clauses We Copy, Paste, and Then Litigate

Jun 9 2026
Lawline
Past

Litigation in Focus: Navigating Complex Disputes

Mar 27 2026
SCG Legal’s 2026 Midyear Meeting
Past

Navigating the Boilerplate – A Discussion of Common Commercial Clauses From a Litigation Perspective

Oct 25 2022
Lawline
Past

What Corporate Lawyers Need to Know About Non-Competes and Restrictive Covenants (Update)

Oct 4 2021
Lawline
Past

What Corporate Lawyers Need to Know About Non-Competes and Restrictive Covenants

Oct 4 2019
Lawline
Past

Bulletproofing Your Deals 2018 - Lessons from the Litigation Battlefield on Commercial Contracts Clauses

Nov 14 2018
Association of Corporate Counsel (ACC) Westchester/Southern Connecticut
Past

Navigating the Boilerplate – A Discussion of Common Commercial Clauses From a Litigation Perspective

Oct 25 2022
Lawline
Past

What Corporate Lawyers Need to Know About Non-Competes and Restrictive Covenants (Update)

Oct 4 2021
Lawline
Past

What Corporate Lawyers Need to Know About Non-Competes and Restrictive Covenants

Oct 4 2019
Lawline
Past

Bulletproofing Your Deals 2018 - Lessons from the Litigation Battlefield on Commercial Contracts Clauses

Nov 14 2018
Association of Corporate Counsel (ACC) Westchester/Southern Connecticut

Health Law Diagnosis Blog


Below is an excerpt of the Health Law Diagnosis blog posts authored by Ian.

New York Legislature Passes Bill Allowing Employees to Place a Lien on Employer’s Property for Wage Claims

The New York Senate and Assembly recently passed Senate Bill S2844B to strengthen current laws for employees who are victims of wage theft to secure and collect unpaid wages from their employers for work already performed. This bill would amend five sections of the law (Lien Law; Labor Law; Attachment under the Civil Practice Law and Rules; the Business Corporations Law; and the Limited Liability Law). If signed by the Governor, this bill would create a broad right for any employee to obtain a lien on an employer’s property based on the allegation of a wage claim and would significantly increase employee power in such disputes. The bill would expand on current lien remedies and create an “employee lien,” which would allow an employee who has a wage claim to place a lien on his or her employer’s interest in property (real or personal property) for the value of that employee’s wage claim, plus liquidated damages. “Wage claim” is defined as any claim constituting a violation of New York Labor Law § 170 (overtime), § 193 (improper deductions), § 196-d (gratuities), or § 652 and § 673 (minimum wage). Wage claims also include claims for breach of employment contract in which wages are not payed under the contract, and Federal minimum wage claims pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 206 and § 207. The employee’s lien cannot be placed on an employer’s deposit accounts or goods. Notice of the lien must be filed within three years of the end of employment that gave rise to the wage claim. Real property notice must be filed in the clerk’s office of the county where the property is located. Personal property notice must be filed with a financing statement pursuant to section 9-501 of the Uniform Commercial Code. Employee’s liens may be filed by the employee or the New York State Department of Labor and the New York Attorney General for wage claims that are subject of their investigations, court actions or administrative agency actions. Notice of an employee’s lien must be served upon the employer within five days before or 30 days after filing notice. The lien is valid for one year unless extension is filed with the county clerk. If no action is commenced during the extension period, the lien will be automatically extinguished unless extended by a court order. If passed, this bill would also streamline the procedures by which employees may hold the ten largest shareholders of a non-publicly traded corporation and the ten members with the largest ownership interests in a limited liability company personally liable for wage theft. The bill also contains a provision that would allow employees to examine a business corporation’s and limited liability company’s records to obtain the shareholders’ or members’ (as the case may be) names, addresses, and ownership value in the company. Once the bill is signed by the Governor, it will take effect 30 days after becoming law and will apply to all claims for liabilities that arose prior to its passage. This post was co-authored by Michael Lisitano, legal intern at Robinson+Cole. Michael is not yet admitted to practice law.

Visit Blog

New York Court of Appeals Upholds Thirteen-Hour Rule for Home Health Aide Pay

On March 26, 2019, the New York Court of Appeals upheld the state Department of Labor’s (the DOL) so-called “13-hour rule” governing payment of home health care aides who work 24-hour shifts. In a closely-watched decision with significant ramifications for the state’s home health industry,  New York’s highest court reversed two 2017 appellate decisions that had overturned the DOL’s  rule and caused substantial uncertainty for home health providers throughout the state.  In short, the New York Court of Appeals confirmed that New York home health care aides may be paid for 13 hours of a 24-hour shift, as long as the aides are given eight hours of sleep time (with five of those being uninterrupted hours) and three hours of meal breaks. As background, in New York home health aides who work 24-hour shifts have been treated as “live-in employees” for purposes of New York’s Minimum Wage Order regulation (the Wage Order). Under the DOL’s interpretation of the Wage Order, employers were not required to pay an aide for each hour of a 24-hour shift as long as the aide was given up to eight hours of sleep time (with at least five of those hours uninterrupted) and three hours for meal breaks. The DOL most recently affirmed its interpretation via an opinion letter issued in March 2010, which states in pertinent part that “it is the opinion and policy of this Department that live-in employees must be paid not less than for 13 hours per 24-hour period provided that they are afforded at least eight hours for sleep and actually receive five hours of uninterrupted sleep, and that they are afforded three hours for meals.” This recognition of the 13-hour rule for live-in employees was consistent with positions taken by the DOL in previous decades. In recent years a number of home health aides have brought class action suits against employers seeking to challenge DOL’s interpretation of the Wage Order, and therefore seeking payment for all 24-hours of a live-in shift. In 2017, courts in the First and Second Departments of the New York Appellate Division affirmed trial court decisions overturning DOL’s interpretation of the Wage Order.  In Andryeyeva v. New York Health Care, Inc., the Second Department of the Appellate Division held that DOL’s interpretation of the Wage Order was “neither rational nor reasonable, because it conflicts with the plain language of the Wage Order.” In support of its determination, the Second Department noted that live-in employees were required to be present in patients’ homes and perform services as needed, and therefore were “available for work” at all times, regardless of sleep or meal breaks. Similarly, in Moreno v. Future Care Health Services, Inc., the Second Department held that the DOL’s 13-hour rule “conflicts with the plain meaning” of the Wage Order, and therefore live-in aides were entitled to be paid for every hour of a 24-hour shift. And the First Department held in Tokhtaman v. Human Care, LLC that the DOL’s 13-hour rule conflicted with the plain meaning of the Wage Order. In response to the appellate decisions overturning the 13-hour rule, suits alleging violations of the Wage Order seeking back-pay and other damages have been filed against many home health providers in New York, potentially exposing the industry to extensive financial liabilities.  In this case, the New York Court of Appeals consolidated the Andryeyeva and Moreno cases to determine in part if the Appellate Division “erroneously disregarded DOL’s interpretation” of the Wage Order. In its decision, the Court of Appeals held that the DOL’s interpretation of the Wage Order does not conflict with the “plain language” of the Wage Order, “nor is it an irrational or unreasonable construction of the Wage Order” as applied to home health aides working 24-hour shifts. The Court characterized the DOL’s interpretation as reflecting the DOL’s “specialized knowledge of labor law’s evolving application to domestic workers and the home health care industry [and] expertise in handling labor law violations.” In reaching its decision upholding the DOL’s interpretation, the Court noted that “this interpretation of the Wage Order is similar to the federal government’s guidance on the minimum compensable hours for 24-hour shift employees under the Fair Labor Standards Act.” The Court ultimately concluded that “the Appellate Division failed to afford adequate deference to DOL’s interpretation of the Wage Order” and reversed the orders of the Appellate Division. In accordance with its holding, the Court remanded the Andryeyeva case back to the trial court, and the Moreno case back to the Appellate Division, to consider whether class certification is proper under New York law and the DOL’s 13-hour rule for purposes of the plaintiffs’ remaining claims concerning labor law violations. It is important to note, the Court reiterated that under the  DOL’s interpretation, any violation by an employer of the 13-hour rule (e.g., allowing only four hours 59 minutes of uninterrupted sleep) negates applicability of the 13-hour rule and mandates payment for the entire 24-hour shift. While the decision is a significant development for the state’s home health industry, litigation based on compliance with the 13-hour rule will likely continue. Accordingly, home health employers may wish to evaluate their pay practices to ensure compliance.

Visit Blog