Vincent Chirico

Vince Chirico has over twenty-five years’ experience in litigation, having served as national coordinating counsel for Fortune 500 companies in nationwide and cross-border, industry-wide and individual matters through trial and appeal in federal and state courts. He presents seminars and publishes articles on a range of litigation and transactional topics.

Vince headed his previous firm’s appellate practice, comprised of complex litigation matters for various commercial, construction, maritime and transportation clients. He also coordinated trial and settlement strategies, supervising partners and associates to preserve consistent client mission.

Primary Practice Areas

Areas of Focus
  • Appellate Practice
  • Commercial Litigation
  • Crisis Management
  • Drug, Medical Device, and Chemicals Litigation
  • Long Term & Managed Care
  • Products Liability
  • Retail & Hospitality

Feiliks Int’l Logistics Hong Kong Ltd. v. Feiliks Glob. Logistics Corp., 685 F. App’x 59 (2d Cir. 2017). Frustration of performance excused defendant company’s failure to repay $300,000 loan, where plaintiff lenders breached their implied duty of good faith and fair dealing under loan agreement by undermining company’s business by diverting customers to competitors.

Rabon-Willimack v. Robert Mondavi Corp., 73 A.D.3d 1007 (2nd Dept. 2010). Summary judgment affirmed on product liability matter involving an allegedly defective wine bottle; court held manufacturer had no duty to warn of another product’s known defects.

Meyer v. Alex Lyon & Son Sales Managers & Auctioneers, Inc., 67 A.D.3d 547 (1st Dept. 2009). Manufacturer and seller of telescoping boom lift held not liable for collapse where proximate cause of accident was purchaser’s own disregard of repair company’s representation that lift was unsafe and not certified for use.

John Galliano, S.A. v. Stallion, Inc., 15 N.Y.3d 75 (2010). Appeal (and subsequent U.S. Supreme Court Writ of Certiorari) seeking to reverse French default judgment on Constitutional grounds.

Costello v. Costello Shea & Gaffney, LLP, 93 A.D.3d 684 (2nd Dept. 2012). The terms “capital account” and “capital interest” in a partnership agreement held to have different meanings, and thus deceased partner’s “capital account” held not forfeited when “capital interest” was surrendered.

  • Adjunct Professor of Appellate Advocacy, Persuasion, and Legal Writing and Reasoning at New York Law School (2000-2011)
  • Lecturer, Marino Legal (2012 – present)
  • Columbian Lawyers Association
  • New York City Bar Association (Member, Tort Litigation Committee)
  • New York State Bar Association
  • Brooklyn Bar Association

American Jurisprudence Award for Excellence in Trial Advocacy


American Bar Association – The International Lawyer (2004 – 2005) Annual Year-in-Review contributions on Extraterritorial Application of United States Law and Personal Jurisdiction

Mealey’s Litigation Reports (Various 1998 – 2001) Lead Exposure Does Not Make a Lead Poisoning Case, The Pervasive Presence of Lead

Law Journal Seminars Press Juarez v. Wavecrest: A Defense Counsel’s Interpretation

National Association of Settlement Providers (November 2011) “Mo’ Money, Mo’ Problems: Ensuring Approval of New York Settlement Transfer Agreements”


President, American-Italian Coalition of Organizations, Inc. (

Board Chairperson, Opportunities for a Better Tomorrow (

Vice President, Dyker Heights Athletic Association (