With broad experience handling appeals before both state and federal appellate courts, the lawyers in Vaughan Baio & Partners’ appellate practice have a long tradition of helping clients uphold their victories and reverse their losses on appeal.
Our involvement often begins in trial court, where we work closely with trial counsel to identify and preserve issues well in advance of an appeal. In other cases, we provide clients with a fresh review of complex lawsuits coupled with a candid analysis of the issues to determine how an appeal might best protect clients’ interests and advance their positions. In all cases, we look for opportunities to change or develop the law in ways that are in line with our clients’ objectives.
Always, we guide our clients to a nuanced understanding of what’s at stake and what’s important to appellate judges, balancing clients’ strategic and business objectives with the costs and challenges of appealing unfavorable decisions. Whether the case involves questions of constitutional interpretation, the correct implementation of class action procedures, the admission of expert testimony, the proper application of substantive law or other issues, clients rely on our seasoned appellate practitioners to evaluate the trial court record and best frame their issues within the applicable standard of review.
We have experience in a wide range of matters, having helped clients preserve or appeal rulings in product liability, medical malpractice, employment law, negligence, constitutional law, contracts, professional liability, premises liability and land use and construction disputes.
When our clients appeal decisions, we write focused and engaging briefs that tell their stories while distilling the case on appeal to the essential factual and legal issues most likely to prevail. Our clients know they can count on us to concisely articulate and advocate for their positions. For example, in one lawsuit, we successfully persuaded the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania not only to consider our client’s argument for review, but succeeded in reversing a multi-million-dollar verdict against them based solely on our initial petition and without full briefing.