Jump to Navigation

Real Estate Litigation

Any conflict concerning real estate deserves the attention of business-focused, experienced attorney. In Wilmington, our Delaware firm provides insightful and effective trial advocacy through all stages of a real estate litigation case. At Martin D. Haverly, Attorney at Law, we represent individuals and businesses involved in disputes arising from:

  • Commercial leases
  • Real estate contracts, breach of contract
  • Lending, mortgage and loans
  • Commercial landlord-tenant disputes
  • Title insurance and failure to disclose
  • Property rights (regarding boundary lines, easements, nuisance, etc.)

Our clients rely on our proven experience and skills in managing and resolving complex and challenging issues. For many clients, the outcome of a lawsuit, mediation or negotiation greatly affects their business or investment. We give clients our full attention from beginning to end, protecting their interests at every stage. We keep clients informed and involved in the strategic direction.

Led by lawyer Martin D. Haverly, who has over 19 years of business law experience, we give smart and sound counsel. Whether your case requires knowledge of city, county or state laws and ordinances, we are prepared to offer an array of options to consider.

For some business owners and companies, real estate conflicts are not the only type of matters that require legal assistance. Because we handle a broad spectrum of business law issues, we understand the immediate and long-term consequences of any chosen course of action. We pursue outcomes that fulfill clients' present concerns and form a platform for future stability and success.

Delaware Commercial Contract Dispute Lawyers

Contact us to discuss your business objectives and learn how we can help you reach your goals. You can reach us at 302- 529-0121 to schedule your consultation. Our office is conveniently located in the suburbs near Wilmington.

View Cases

  • Sheridan v. E. I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., 100 F.3d 1061 (3rd Cir. 1996) (en banc) (Plaintiff's jury verdict and the "pretext only" paradigm for proof of intentional discrimination established).
  • Hawkins v. Division of State Police, et al., C.A. No. 99-297-SLR (Religious discrimination case which successfully obtained an offer of judgment and caused the State to stop using the MMPI-1.
  • Miller v. Daimler Chrysler Corp., C. A. No. 01-827-JJF (D.Del. 2003) (Race Discrimination claim survived Motion for Summary Judgment).
  • Panaro v. J.C. Penny, Inc., C.A. 01C-02-010 JOH, 2002 WL 130692 (Del. Super. 2002)(In a personal injury case, admission into evidence of direct examination of deceased deponent/plaintiff does not.
  • Price, et al. v. L. Aaron Chaffinch, et al., C.A. No. 04-956-GMS, 2006 WL 1313178 (D.Del. 2006) (First Amendment Retaliation, Petitions Clause and Defamation Claims survived Motion for Summary Judgment).
  • Reyes v. Freebery, 141 Fed. Appx. 49 (3d Cir. 2005) (per curiam) remanding to District Court to explain its restrictions on the public's right to access to judicial records and counsel's First Amendment.
  • Underwood v. Sear Roebuck and Co., 343 F.Supp.2d 259 (D.Del. 2004) (Gender discrimination claim survived Motion for Summary Judgment).
  • Shotzberger v. State of Delaware Dept. Of Correction, 2004 WL 758354 (D.Del. Jan. 30, 2004) (Gender discrimination claim survived Motion for Summary Judgement).
  • Stull v. Thomas S. Neuberger, P.A., 2003 WL 21481016 (Del. Super. Febr. 28, 2003) (Effect of Delaware accord and satisfaction law on a contract for legal services).
View More Cases

Case Evaluation Form

Bold labels are required.

Contact Information
disclaimer.

The use of the Internet or this form for communication with the firm or any individual member of the firm does not establish an attorney-client relationship. Confidential or time-sensitive information should not be sent through this form.

close

Privacy Policy