Richard S. Order

Partner

Richard S. Order represents clients in business disputes involving contracts, antitrust, franchises, false advertising, ERISA, fraud, RICO, business torts, and unfair competition matters in federal and state trial and appellate courts throughout the country.

Mr. Order also represents clients in domestic and international arbitrations and mediations before such alternative dispute resolution providers as the American Arbitration Association, the International Centre for Dispute Resolution, and the National Association of Securities Dealers Dispute Resolution.  Mr. Order serves as a member of the American Arbitration Association's National Roster of Neutrals.

For a subsidiary of one of the world’s largest chemical companies, Mr. Order helped prevent the disruption of a supply agreement for hydrofluoric acid vital to the company’s refrigerant business in Louisiana.  With aggressive discovery, private mediation and court mediation, the firm positioned the client for negotiation of a replacement supply agreement and the development of an alternate supply source. 

On behalf of another chemical plant subsidiary, Mr. Order initiated breach of contract claims against an oil refinery in an AAA arbitration in New York.  In federal court in New Jersey, Mr. Order has also defended an Italian plant subsidiary against claims of breaching a non-circumvention agreement in the sale of vinyls plant equipment.

Mr. Order defended a Dutch nutritional supplement company and its attorney against vexatious litigation and antitrust claims stemming from their commencement of a patent and trademark infringement action.  The underlying action had been dismissed because the district court granted comity to a French court’s determination that the Dutch company was not the owner of the U.S. patent.  The firm’s defense was that the prior attorney and the client had probable cause to commence and maintain the infringement action and that the U.S. court should have decided the issue of ownership of the patent instead of yielding to the French court.  On the verge of trial, the firm obtained a favorable settlement for the clients.

Mr. Order also successfully defended the nation’s largest third-party administrator of multiple employer welfare benefit plans in a number of cases in Philadelphia, Chicago, Minneapolis and Michigan alleging fraud, breaches of fiduciary duties and RICO and ERISA violations, and seeking appointment of a receiver for one of the plans.  The firm’s vigorous defense contributed to the withdrawal of class action allegations from the Chicago federal court action and a settlement with the plaintiffs.  The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the last-minute attempt of the plaintiffs’ co-counsel to derail the settlement and affirmed dismissal of the case.

In another case, Mr. Order obtained a unanimous reversal by the Connecticut Supreme Court dissolving a prejudgment attachment of the company’s and its principals’ assets.  In a case of first impression, the Court agreed with Mr. Order’s argument that the plaintiff had prematurely commenced an action for enforcement of a foreign judgment before obtaining the judgment.  This ruling provides significant protection for the Connecticut assets of Fortune 500 companies and their executives.

On behalf of individuals and corporations, Mr. Order has filed claims for breach of fiduciary duties and for violations of securities laws against national stock brokerage houses in NASD arbitrations.  The firm’s clients received six- and eight-figure awards.

Mr. Order helped obtain a dismissal of a shareholder derivative action against a Fortune 500 office equipment company, ending a long battle in several courts about accounting procedures employed a decade before.

One of Mr. Order's first prominent cases was Petereit v. S.B. Thomas, Inc., 853 F. Supp. 55 (D. Conn. 1993), aff'd in part, rev'd in part, 63 F.3d 1169 (2d Cir. 1995), which established criteria for determining the elements of a franchise and the concept of constructive termination of a franchise.

Representative Matters

Daniels v. Bursey, 430 F.3d 424 (7th Cir. 2005) (ERISA).
Cahaly v. Benistar Property Exchange Trust Co., 268 Conn. 264 (2004) (prejudgment remedies).
Ambrogio v. Beaver Road Associates, 267 Conn. 148 (2003) (lost profits for breach of construction contract).

Bar & Court Admissions

• Connecticut
• New York
• U.S. District Court District of Connecticut
• U.S. District Court Southern District of New York
• U.S. District Court Eastern District of New York
• U.S. District Court Eastern District of Michigan
• U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
• U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
• U.S. Supreme Court

Education

• Columbia Law School, New York, New York, 1981 J.D. Law Review: Columbia Human Rights Law Review, Managing Editor, 1980 - 1981.
• Wesleyan University, Middletown, Connecticut, 1978 B.A. Honors: Summa Cum Laude; Phi Beta Kappa; Ingraham Prize (Proficiency in Classics); Major: Classics.

Publications

• Doe v. Norwalk Community College Analysis for LexisNexis Expert Commentaries, November 2007
• Arbitration Freed From American Fee Rule, The Connecticut Law Tribune, Business Litigation Supplement, April 17, 2006
• Alternative Dispute Resolution: Simplified Justice or a Shield for Smoking Guns?, Hartford Business Review, June 1993
• Lender's Liens Lost, Connecticut Lawyer, May 1991
• War correspondents: military pawns or truth seekers?, The Hartford Courant, Op-Ed Page, March 31, 1991
• Are Aliens Still a Suspect Class After Norwick?, 11 Columbia Human Rights L. Rev. 227, 1979
• Contributor, Federal Litigation Guide: New York and Connecticut, Matthew Bender, 1998
• Staff Privileges Emerge as Managed Care Battleground, Physician's Management, March, 1997
• Judge Restricts Witness-Coaching at Depositions, Connecticut Bar Association Federal Practice Section Newsletter, Fall, 1994
• Washington turns up antitrust heat on doctors, interview in Medical Economics, August 5, 1991

Seminars & Classes

• Settlement from Inside and Outside, ABA Section of Litigation Committee on Corporate Counsel Annual Meeting, February 14, 2004
• Why Do Franchisors Pick on Good Franchisees?, American Franchisee Association, April 27, 2001
• Everything You Always Wanted to Know About the Federal Courts But Were Afraid to Ask, Connecticut Bar Association Annual Meeting, June 16, 1997
• What Really Is a Franchise? - The Effect of Recent Case Law Changes, Connecticut Bar Association, Franchise Law in Connecticut Seminar, March 9, 1994
• Federal Courts - Avoiding the Pitfalls, Hartford County Bar Association, November 8, 1990

Professional Activities

• American Arbitration Association, Member of the National Roster of Neutrals
• The Institute for Transnational Arbitration, Advisory Board Member
• American Bar Association, Litigation Section, Committee on Corporate Counsel, Co-Chairman ADR Subcommittee (1999-present); Section of Dispute Resolution; and Forum on Franchising
• Connecticut Bar Association, Federal Practice Section, Chairman (1995-98); Treasurer (1993-95); Secretary (1992-93); Executive Committee (1992-present); Franchise Law Section, Executive Committee; International Law Section
• Hartford County Bar Association
• Association of the Bar of the City of New York
• American Franchisee Association, Attorney Affiliate Member