Ryan Duffy Sullivan

Ryan Duffy Sullivan has 12 years of broad experience in the areas of construction law, bankruptcy, commercial litigation and real estate law. He represents subcontractors and material suppliers relative to all phases of construction, from contract negotiation and drafting to litigation and collection. He prides himself on understanding his clients’ work and the unique challenges posed by each project in order to deliver maximum results.

In addition to his construction practice, Ryan has wide-ranging experience as counsel to Chapter 7 and 13 Debtors, and both secured and unsecured creditors in the bankruptcy arena.

Ryan is a frequent lecturer before professional groups in the area of commercial collections, and a contributor to West’s Bankruptcy Series Bankruptcy Exemption Manual and contributor to the ABA Forum on Construction Law’s Under Construction seasonal publication.

Memberships

Mr. Sullivan is admitted to practice in the state courts of Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Virginia (inactive), Maryland, and the District of Columbia. He is admitted to practice before the United States Courts of Appeals for the First and Fourth Circuits, and the United States District Courts for the Districts of Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Maryland, and the Eastern District of Virginia.

Education

Mr. Sullivan earned his J.D. from the Catholic University of America, Columbus School of Law, and his B.A., magna cum laude, from Stonehill College.

Honors

2012-2016 Massachusetts Super Lawyers Rising Star

Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly

  • Statutory rape appeal rejected by SJC
    The Supreme Judicial Court has denied an appeal filed by a juvenile who was found delinquent for committing statutory rape. The juvenile argued that the statute (G.L.c. 265, §23) is unconstitutional if both the victim and the individual charged with the offense are under the age of 16. He contended that the Legislature’s rationale for […]
  • Tort – Harassment prevention order
    Where a District Court judge extended for one year a harassment prevention order, issued pursuant to G.L.c. 258E, against the defendant, the order must be vacated because there was insufficient evidence to show that the messages at issue were harassing and that the plaintiff was not the intended recipient of the messages. “Here, in her […]

Read feed

Latest stock market news from Wall Street – CNNMoney.com

Read feed