Elizabeth Leong

Elizabeth R. Leong

Counsel

Elizabeth R. Leong

Counsel

  • Overview

    Biography

    Elizabeth Leong, a member of the firm's Business Litigation Group, focuses her practice on complex business and ecclesiastical litigation.

    Complex Business Litigation

    Elizabeth has extensive experience representing clients in complex commercial matters involving contract and business tort disputes, unfair and deceptive trade practices, antitrust, and products liability issues. She has handled many class actions, including matters involving the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), antitrust, and products liability claims. She is currently defending a university in a putative class action seeking a refund of tuition and fees due to the COVID-19 pandemic. She has achieved positive results for clients, such as successfully moving to strike class action and antitrust allegations in a case which sought $50 million in damages from a cable communications company.

    Ecclesiastical Litigation

    Elizabeth defends religious organizations against vicarious liability and negligence claims arising out of allegations of sexual abuse. Her successes include winning a motion for summary judgment for a religious order in an action brought by two plaintiffs who claimed they were abused by the order’s founder.

    Prior to joining Robinson+Cole, Elizabeth was an associate with a major law firm in New York where she was involved in complex commercial and trademark infringement litigation.
     

  • Experience
    • Experience

      Experience

      • Drafted successful motions to strike class action allegations and antitrust claim for Fortune 50 telecommunications company in action where the plaintiff sought $50 million in damages.

      • Won motion for summary judgment for religious order in action brought by two Mexican nationals who claimed to have been abused by their biological father and stepfather, who they claimed was the order’s founder. The court held that the religious order owed no duty to the plaintiffs because, among other reasons, they did not know that their father/stepfather was a priest, did not know of the defendants, and there was no evidence that the defendants knew that the plaintiffs existed.

      • Drafted successful motion to dismiss claims brought by insurance agent for breach of contract, implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, unfair trade practices, tortious interference with business expectancy, and negligent misrepresentation arising out of the insurer’s termination of agency agreement.

      • Represented commercial property insurers in several multimillion-dollar cases involving business interruption and property damage losses sustained due to Hurricane Katrina. Notable successes included drafting a winning motion to exclude the plaintiff's bad faith expert in one case where the plaintiff claimed $10 million in bad faith damages, and in another matter, winning a motion for partial summary judgment regarding the limit of civil authority coverage.

      • Represented plaintiff class of managerial employees and retirees of Fortune 100 company in action brought under ERISA seeking to recover approximately $4 billion of lost value in company stock held in 401(k) plan. A favorable settlement was obtained for the class.

      • Won motion to dismiss plaintiff's complaint against insurer alleging breach of contract for business property damage claims and subsequently negotiated a complete dismissal of all of plaintiff's claims without any payment made to the plaintiff.

      • Won summary judgment for commercial property insurer on the grounds that the policy's suit limitation provision barred plaintiff's claims.

      • Won summary judgment for insurer under professional liability policy in action where insured sought coverage for assault committed by its employee against its customer. The court granted summary judgment in insurer's favor, holding that the assault was not a "professional service" within the meaning of the policy and that the policy's criminal acts exclusion barred coverage.
      • Using Catalyst, worked with client’s preferred E-Discovery vendor to collect and review materials for production in connection with a putative class action alleging antitrust violations, fraud, and unfair trade practices.

      • Represented insurer in claim brought by a seller of Christian-based inspirational gift items, to recover business interruption losses and expenses in excess of $10 million and bad faith damages following a fire that damaged the insured's warehouse and inventory. Drafted the insurer's motion for partial summary judgment on several issues significant to the litigation and successfully opposed the plaintiff's motion for partial summary judgment. The case settled shortly before trial with a settlement favorable to insurer.

        • back to top
    • Professional Associations

      Professional Associations

      Connecticut Bar Association

      American Bar Association
  • NEWS + PRESS
    • Publications

      Publications

      "Ballot Initiatives & Identifiable Minorities: A Textual Call to Congress," 28 Rutgers L.J. 677 (1997)

    • News

      R+C in the News

      • March 14, 2012

        Robinson & Cole Attorneys Successfully Move to Strike Class Action Count

        • » more info

          Robinson & Cole Attorneys Successfully Move to Strike Class Action Count

          Attorneys Elizabeth R. Leong, Jamie M. Landry, and Laura Torchio and paralegal Lori Gizzi recently secured a significant victory for their client when the Connecticut Superior Court granted their motion to strike the class action count of a lawsuit seeking over $50 million in damages. The class action count alleged breach of contract, intentional misrepresentation, negligent misrepresentation, and violation of the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act relating to the sale of cable television advertising. In a relatively rare decision based solely on the pleadings, the Connecticut Superior Court granted the motion to strike, holding that the commonality, predominance, and superiority requirements for class certification could never be satisfied.