Lippman, Semsker & Salb serves a wide array of clients in the Washington Metro & Baltimore areas. The Firm’s attorneys are licensed to practice in Maryland and Washington, D.C.

We deploy our resources to address your needs with our skills and experience. Our Firm serves as advisors, counselors, and problem-solvers to individuals, small business, and entrepreneurs in both routine business law questions as well as legal disputes. We offer cost-effective, tailored strategies to each case. Although our clients’ cases may settle at any time during the litigation process, our experience includes taking cases to trial. Our daily work includes addressing the full litigation lifecycle, such as pleadings, pre-trial motions, discovery, and trial. We have also successfully represented clients in administrative proceedings before federal and state regulatory agencies. The firm serves as general corporate counsel to numerous local companies.

We have actual trial experience. Lippman, Semsker & Salb attorneys have won jury and judge trials in federal and state courts in Maryland, Virginia, and Washington, D.C. We have prosecuted and defended employment litigation, commercial litigation, business disputes, property litigation, mechanic’s liens, and domestic relations litigation. Our attorneys are well versed in trying cases requiring expert witnesses. It is our practice to provide timely and periodic evaluation of disputes to enable clients to make informed decisions at each juncture in the litigation.

Our successes do not always result in a published decision.  For example, we reach favorable settlements in many of our cases.  But when settlement is not to our client’s benefit, we bring our cases to trial.

It is a signal of the quality and importance of our work that judges and publishers have selected many of the decisions in our case for publication.

Following is a selection of cases on which our Firm has worked.

[Click on case name to view a PDF of the court decision]

Reported Cases in the various United States Courts of Appeal include:

Brooks v. District Hosp. Partners, L.P., 606 F.3d 800 (D.C. Cir. 2010)
Steele v. Schafer, 535 F.3d 689 (2008)
Thompson v. District of Columbia, 530 F.3d 914 (D.C. Cir. 2008)
Aleman v. Chugach Support Services, Inc., 485 F.3d 206 (4th Cir. 2007)
Hardy v. Department of Navy, 393 F.3d 1288 (Fed. Cir. 2005)
Griffin v. Washington Convention Center, 142 F.3d 1308, (D.C.Cir. 1998)
Rao v. County of Fairfax, Virginia, 108 F.3d 42 (4th Cir. 1997)
Marshall v. Int’l Bhd. of Teamsters, 593 F.2d 1297 (D.C. Cir. 1979)
Tabor v. Joint Board for Enrollment of Actuaries, 566 F.2d 705 (D.C. Cir. 1977)
United States v. Tarnopol, 561 F.2d 466 (3rd Cir. 1977)
Brennan v. Int’l Bhd. of Teamsters, 494 F.2d 1092 (D.C. Cir. 1974)

Reported Cases in the various federal district courts include:

Smith v. Cafe Asia, (D.D.C. Slip op., publ. status unknown, 2011)
Papasozomenos v. University of Maryland Medical System Corp., (D.Md. Slip Copy, publ. status unknown, 2011) (Granting Lippman’s client’s petition to remand the case to state court)
Smith v. Cafe Asia, 724 F.Supp.2d 125 (D.D.C. 2010)
Smith v. Cafe Asia, 598 F.Supp.2d 45 (D.D.C. 2009) (granting Lippman’s motion to amend complaint)
Smith v. Cafe Asia, 598 256 F.R.D. 247 (D.D.C. 2009) (granting Lippman’s motion to compel discovery responses)
Marable v. District Hospital Partners, 105 Fair Empl.Prac.Cas. (BNA) 174 (D.D.C. 2008) (denying class action status sought by Lippman’s clients, but reversed on appeal in Prince v. District Hospital Partners, above)
Thompson v. District of Columbia, 478 F.Supp.2d 5 (2007) (reversed on appeal, above)
Radtke v. Caschetta, (Slip op. D.D.C. 2007) (granting Lippman’s motion for reconsideration and denying the defendants’ various motions)
Smith v. Cafe Asia, 246 F.R.D. 19 (D.D.C. 2007) (barring defendant’s access to Lippman’s client’s private information)
Marable v. District Hosp. Partners, L.P. (Slip op. 2006) (Denying class action status sought by Lippman’s clients)
Dickerson et al. v. SecTek, Inc., 238 F.Supp.2d 66 (D.D.C. 2002)
Griffin v. Washington Convention Center, 172 F.Supp.2d 193 (2001)
Griffin v. Washington Convention Center (Slip op. 2000)
Wilson v. Int’l Bhd. of Teamsters, 47 F.Supp.2d 8 (D.D.C.1999)
Sotabinda v. Hotel Lombardy, 173 F.R.D. 3 (D.D.C. 1997) (rejecting opposing party’s effort to withhold discovery)
Smith v. United Parcel Service, Inc., 947 F.Supp. 190 (D.Md. 1996)
Van Allen v. Bell Atlantic-Washington, D.C., Inc., 921 F.Supp. 830 (D.D.C. 1996) (granting Lippman’s motion to remand to state court)
Hosey v. McDonald’s Corporation, 71 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 201 (D.Md. 1996)
Tarnopol v. U.S., 18 Cl. Ct. 89 (Crt of Fed. Clms., 1989)
Retirement Fund of the Fur Manufacturing Industry v. Getto & Getto, 714 F.Supp. 651 (S.D.N.Y. 1989)
Retirement Fund of the Fur Manufacturing Industry v. Getto & Getto, 11 Empl. Benefits Cas. 1561 (S.D.N.Y. 1989)
Schmidt v. National Organization for Women, 562 F.Supp. 210 (N.D.Fl. 1983) (Lippman representing NOW on a question of Federal court removal)
Int’l Brotherhood of Teamsters v. Jacobs Transfer Co., 407 F.Supp. 125 (D.D.C. 1976)

Reported cases in the various state courts include:

Jenkins v. United Healthcare, 82 Fair Empl.Prac.Cas. (BNA) 984 (D.C. Super. Ct. 2000)
Lockhart v. Cade, 728 A.2d 65 (D.C. 1999) (granting Lippman’s appeal, reinstating Lockhart’s legal malpractice action against Cade)
Underwood v. National Credit Union Admin., 665 A.2d 621 (D.C. 1995)
Simard v. Resolution Trust Corp., 639 A.2d 540 (D.C. 1994)
Cox’s Food Center v. Retail Clerk’s Assoc., 457 P.2d 418 (Idaho 1969)
Schermerhorn v. Retail Clerks Int’l, 141 So. 2d 269 (Sup. Ct. of Florida 1962) (protecting union’s “agency shop” provision despite Florida’s “right to work” law)

Reported Cases in the United States Supreme Court are:

Retail Clerks Int’l Assoc. v. Schermerhorn II, 375 U.S. 96 (1963)
Retail Clerks Int’l Assoc. v. Schermerhorn I, 373 U.S. 746 (1963)
Retail Clerks Int’l Assoc. v. Lion Dry Goods, Inc., 369 U.S. 17 (1962)
Retail Clerks Int’l Assoc. v. J.J. Newberry Co., 352 U.S. 987 (1957)