What made you want to do the work you do? Please share the full story.
I studied English and Philosophy at Lafayette College, and while neither of those is the conventional pre-law track, they trained me to read carefully, think rigorously, and construct arguments that actually persuade people, which turned out to be the foundation for everything I do as a litigator. By the time I got to Georgetown University Law Center, I knew that litigation was where I belonged, and serving as a Notes Editor for the Georgetown Journal of Legal Ethics deepened my conviction that legal writing and advocacy carry real consequences far beyond any single case.
After Georgetown, I joined Schulte Roth & Zabel LLP in New York and built my early career on commercial litigation for hedge funds, private equity firms, and publicly traded corporations, which gave me a foundation in high-stakes advocacy that has shaped everything I have done since. I eventually moved to Pomerantz LLP, the oldest firm in the world dedicated to representing the rights of defrauded investors, because I wanted to use that training in service of people who had been harmed rather than the institutions that had harmed them.
Today my practice has broadened further to include business litigation for entrepreneurs and small business owners, and what continues to drive me is the same thing that drew me to the law in the first place: the belief that careful preparation and clear advocacy can genuinely change the outcome of someone’s situation.
Tell us 3 surprisingly easy and 3 surprisingly difficult things about your job.
Surprisingly easy:
1. Building rapport with clients. People assume attorneys have to put on a polished, distant persona to be taken seriously, but the opposite has been true in my experience. Clients respond to honesty and genuine engagement far more than they respond to a polished pitch, and once you understand that, the relationship-building side of the practice becomes natural rather than performative.
2. Identifying the argument that matters most in a case. After years of training at firms like Schulte Roth & Zabel and Pomerantz LLP, where every detail matters, you develop an instinct for cutting through the noise and finding the issue that will actually drive the outcome. It is a skill that feels difficult at first, but it becomes second nature with enough reps.
3. Staying current on legal developments. If you genuinely enjoy the practice of law, keeping up with case law, statutory changes, and procedural developments stops feeling like an obligation and becomes something you do because you find it interesting. That has been my experience.
Surprisingly difficult:
1. Managing client expectations. Even the most prepared and well-supported case can produce outcomes that fall short of what a client hoped for, and helping clients understand the realistic range of outcomes without either overselling or underselling is harder than it sounds. It requires honesty, judgment, and constant calibration.
2. Maintaining work-life balance. The work is intellectually engaging in a way that makes it easy to lose track of time, and litigation deadlines do not pause for personal milestones. I have gotten better at this over time, but it remains an ongoing discipline rather than a problem you ever solve.
3. Protecting your perspective. When you spend years immersed in adversarial proceedings, it becomes easy to start viewing everything through that lens, including situations in your personal life that do not call for it. Staying grounded outside of the courtroom takes effort.
What are the 3 things you like best about your work and why?
The first is the variety, which has only grown as my practice has expanded beyond pure securities litigation. On any given week, I might be working on a partnership dissolution, a landlord-tenant matter, and a commercial dispute involving a small business owner, and that range keeps my thinking sharp and prevents the work from ever becoming routine.
The second is the relationship I get to build with clients, particularly individuals and entrepreneurs who are navigating the legal process for the first time and who need someone they can trust to guide them through it with clarity and care. There is something genuinely rewarding about being that person for someone, and it is a part of the job that I value deeply.
The third is the intellectual challenge of litigation itself, which is something that continues to be a source of real satisfaction. Every case presents a new set of facts, a new strategic puzzle, and a new opportunity to construct an argument that holds up under pressure.
What are your greatest 3 skills and how have they helped you succeed?
The first is legal writing, which is the foundation of everything I do as a litigator. My background in English and Philosophy at Lafayette gave me a head start on this, and serving as a Notes Editor for the Georgetown Journal of Legal Ethics during law school sharpened it further. Whether I am drafting a complaint, a summary judgment motion, or a settlement demand, the ability to communicate precisely and persuasively is what often determines the outcome of a matter long before anyone steps into a courtroom.
The second is preparation, which I’ve learned to take seriously at the highest level. The standard for thoroughness at firms representing institutional investors and publicly traded corporations is unforgiving, and once you internalize that standard, you carry it into every case regardless of the size or nature of the client.
The third is judgment, which is harder to articulate but easier to recognize when it is absent. Litigation requires constant decisions about strategy, timing, and risk, and the attorneys who serve their clients best are the ones who can weigh those considerations clearly under pressure and recommend the path that genuinely makes sense.
Tell us about a time where you saw a surprising outcome that you did not expect.
Early in my career, my first oral argument before a federal judge produced an outcome I did not see coming. I was so nervous that I was speaking too quickly for the court reporter to keep up, and the judge and opposing counsel, who was significantly more experienced, both started laughing. For a moment I thought I had made a serious mistake, but I quickly realized they were laughing from a place of warmth and recognition because they had each been in that position early in their own careers. That moment broke the tension entirely, and once I calmed down, I was able to deliver a much more effective argument than I would have otherwise.
The lesson I took from it is that the courtroom is fundamentally a human environment, and the ability to be present, adapt in real time, and connect with the people in the room matters as much as how thoroughly you have prepared on paper. It is something I have carried with me into every case I have handled since.
What is the biggest challenge you face each day and how do you handle it?
The biggest daily challenge is balancing the competing demands of a varied caseload, where each matter has its own deadlines, its own strategic considerations, and its own client expectations that need to be managed thoughtfully. The way I handle it is by being disciplined about preparation and prioritization. I start each day by identifying the matters that require the most immediate attention and the ones where preparation will pay the highest dividends down the line, and I work outward from there. The other piece of it is communication, because clients deserve to know where their matter stands and what to expect next, and staying ahead of those updates prevents most of the friction that can otherwise build up in a busy practice. The challenge never fully goes away, but the systems you build for handling it become more refined over time.
What do you value most and why?
What I value most is integrity, both in the work I do and in the relationships I build along the way. Litigation is an adversarial profession, and it would be easy to mistake aggression for effectiveness or to cut corners under the pressure of deadlines, but the attorneys who sustain long and meaningful careers are the ones who refuse to compromise on how they conduct themselves.
I learned that early on at Schulte Roth & Zabel, where the partners I admired most were the ones who held themselves to a higher standard of preparation and conduct than anyone was forcing on them. That principle is one I carry and continues to shape how I approach my work today. At the end of the day, your reputation in this profession is the most valuable thing you have, and it is built or eroded by the choices you make when no one is watching.
What achievement are you the proudest of and why?
The achievement I am proudest of is the pro bono work I was part of at Schulte Roth & Zabel, where our team represented a survivor of domestic violence in a custody matter through Sanctuary for Families, which is New York State’s leading advocate for survivors of domestic violence, sex trafficking, and related forms of gender violence. Our team received the Above & Beyond Award for Excellence in Pro Bono Advocacy for that representation, and it remains the work I think about most when I reflect on what this profession is capable of.
It taught me that the skills you build in high-stakes corporate litigation can have their greatest impact when you bring them to bear for someone who genuinely needs them. That kind of work is a reminder of why I went into this profession in the first place.
What is your favorite book and why?
My favorite book is “Meditations” by Marcus Aurelius, which I have returned to throughout my career, and continues to teach me something new each time I read it. The core idea that you should focus on what is within your control and act with integrity regardless of the circumstances around you has shaped how I approach my work and my life in a fundamental way. There is a clarity to the way Aurelius writes about responsibility and discipline that resonates with me as an attorney, because the practice of law puts you in a position to affect the outcomes of other people’s lives, and how you carry that responsibility matters.
What advice would you give to your younger self and why?
The advice I would give my younger self is to trust that the unconventional foundation you are building will serve you better than you realize. When I was studying English and Philosophy at Lafayette, I sometimes wondered whether I was setting myself up for the practice of law as effectively as my peers who were on more traditional pre-law tracks, and the answer turned out to be that I absolutely was. The ability to read closely, write persuasively, and think rigorously is the engine of everything a litigator does, and those skills do not get built in a single semester of legal research and writing.
I would also tell my younger self to be patient with the pace of growth, because the work that shapes you most as an attorney often unfolds slowly and through experiences you cannot plan for in advance. The pro bono representation I was part of through Sanctuary for Families is a perfect example of that, and the lessons from that work continue to inform how I practice today. Trust the process and stay curious, because the path forward becomes clearer with each step you take.
Are you willing to be a mentor? If yes, what is the best way to reach you?
Yes, I am genuinely open to mentoring younger attorneys and law students who are thinking about a career in litigation, particularly those who are taking a less conventional path into the profession. My own journey from English and Philosophy at Lafayette to Georgetown Law to firms like Schulte Roth & Zabel and Pomerantz LLP gave me a perspective on legal practice that I am happy to share with anyone who finds it useful.
The best way to reach me is through LinkedIn. I do not have a formal mentoring structure, but I have always tried to make time for conversations that I think can help someone earlier in their career figure out their own path. The profession invested in me when I was getting started, and paying that forward is something I take seriously.
Just for fun, what is your favorite food?
This is going to sound boring for someone who lives near New York City, where you have access to every cuisine on earth, but my favorite meal is a really well-made Italian dinner at home with my wife Caroline and our golden retriever Champ underfoot waiting for something to drop. There is something about a long, unhurried dinner that no restaurant can quite replicate, and after a week of deadlines and the pace of litigation practice, that is the meal I look forward to most.