|Professional Liability Litigation, Securities Litigation and Arbitration Insurance Coverage and Litigation, Commercial and Business Litigation, Labor and Employment, Municipality Defense
vCard: Download File
Jody N. Cappello is a partner with Winget, Spadafora & Schwartzberg, LLP. His practice focuses primarily on professional liability litigation as well as securities defense litigation and arbitration, focusing on the representation of financial service industry professionals, securities broker-dealers and registered representatives. In addition, Mr. Cappello practices in the areas of labor and employment litigation and general liability.
Mr. Cappello is a 1999 graduate of Connecticut College, where he earned his B.A. in economics and history. He attended the Boston University School of Law, receiving his J.D. in 2002.
Mr. Cappello is admitted to practice law in Connecticut and is also licensed to practice before the United States District Court of Connecticut. He is a member of the American Bar Association and the Connecticut Bar Association.
- Corbeil v. Blood, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 60525 (D. Vt. June 6, 2011) affirmed 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 3613 (2d Cir. Vt., Feb. 21, 2013) - obtained summary judgment of negligence and breach of fiduciary duty claim brought against insurance broker as the Plaintiff could not prove that any conduct of the broker caused his claimed damages.
- Namoury v. Tibbetts, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 85541 (D. Conn. Oct. 20, 2008) - obtained summary judgment of breach of contract and breach of fiduciary duties of claims against an attorney because the plaintiff respectively failed to prove the existence of a contract and had no evidence of fraud, self-dealing or conflict of interest.
- Northrop v. United States, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 85540 (D. Conn. Aug. 28, 2008) - obtained dismissal of legal malpractice claims alleging ineffective assistance of counsel as they were barred by prior litigation.
- Pelletier v. Galske, 285 Conn. 921 (Conn. 2008) affirming 105 Conn. App. 77 (2007) obtained dismissal of a breach of contract claim against an attorney because the claim was actually a legal malpractice claim disguised as a contract claim and was barred by the three years statute of limitations applicable tort claims and not the six year statute of limitations applicable to breach of contract claims.
- Aurora Loan Servs., LLC v. Hirsch, 2013 Conn. Super. LEXIS 1509 (Conn. Super. Ct. June 28, 2013) - Obtained dismissal of claims against original closing attorney brought by current holder of note and mortgage as it had no relationship with the attorney and thus lacked standing to pursue any claims against him.