Juris’ practice focuses on litigation, with particular emphasis on real estate litigation, including filing and foreclosing mechanic’s liens, Real estate broker’s liens, partition actions, property line and easement disputes. Juris began his legal career as a Special Assistant Attorney General in the Consumer Protection and Antitrust Division of the Massachusetts Office of the Attorney General in Boston, Massachusetts.  Juris was also a Temporary Assistant Clerk at Stamford Superior Court in Stamford, Connecticut.

Juris has represented both home owners and contractors in construction disputes and has experience with the Connecticut New Home Construction Contractor Act and the Connecticut Home Improvement Act.   Juris has also facilitate and coordinate complex commercial transactions and represented both buyers and sellers of commercial and residential real estate.

Significant transactions that Juris has worked on include:

·        Sale of Pray Automobile Corporation to New Country;

·        Sale of Brookfield Business and Commercial Center, LLC;

Reported cases on brief:

12 Havemeyer Place Company, LLC v. Allan S. Gordon, 76 Conn.App. 377, 820 A.2d 299 (2003). Represented Plaintiff lessor in a summary process action appealed from judgment of Trial Court rendered in favor of Defendant lessee, Allan S. Gordon. Plaintiff sought eviction of Defendant lessee on grounds that lease was illegal and therefore tenancy was void or voidable pursuant to Sippin v. Ellam, 24 Conn. App. 385, 588 A.2d 660 (1991)

Alliance Partners Inc v. Voltarc, 263 Conn. 204, 820 A.2d 224 (2003). Represented Plaintiff real estate broker in certified appeal involving exercise by Appellate Court of its discretion.

Martin Nussbaum, et al v. Kimberly Timbers, Limited, SC 17070 (Pending). Represented Defendant contractor foreclosing a mechanics lien when homeowner sought to enjoin enforcement of contract in separate action. Homeowner appealed Trial Court decision that contract, which failed to comply with all provisions of New Home Construction Act, General Statutes § 20-417a et seq., was, in fact, enforceable, in contrast to General Statutes § 20-418 et seq., the Connecticut Home Improvement Act. Prior to a reply brief being filed, Supreme Court granted direct review.

EDUCATION

·        J.D., WHITTIER SCHOOL OF LAW, Los Angeles, CA 1995

·        B.A.,  UNION COLLEGE, Schenectady, NY 1991

BAR ADMISSIONS

·        Massachusetts

·        Connecticut