Kevin C. Mortimer

Associate

[email protected]

+1.617.348.1754

Follow:
Share:

Kevin engages in an expansive array of litigation matters. With prior experience as a project management operational consultant at a boutique mechanical engineering subcontracting firm and a large commercial real estate company, Kevin provides a well-informed perspective for groups concentrated on real estate disputes, land use law, and construction law. Kevin employs his educational background in the field of economics in his contributions to matters concerning institutional class action recovery, securities litigation, commercial litigation, and complex insurance coverage issues.

Kevin is also actively engaged in Mintz’s pro bono efforts. Kevin is a Co-chair of the “Lawyer for the Day” pro bono program at Boston’s Housing Court, providing legal representation in civil matters to low-income tenants seeking resolution of disputes with their landlords. He also takes full advantage of Mintz’s Medical Legal Partnership with Dana-Farber, which allies health care providers with legal advocates to improve the health and well-being of low-income cancer patients.

During his time in project management, Kevin provided assistance with contract revisions, proposal and pitch composition, research, zoning code reports, and the valuation of projected developments. Kevin also held a summer position with a law practice in Worcester, Massachusetts, where he gained experience conducting legal research and preparing contracts and memoranda.

While in law school, Kevin held the position of Online Editor of the New England Law Review, and was three-time recipient of both the Dean’s Scholarship and the New England Scholar Award. Kevin also ranked highest among his classmates in the courses of Labor Law, Negotiation, MA Practice and Procedure, Family Law, and Commercial Real Estate Capstone. Prior to law school, Kevin attended Trinity College, where he captained the NESCAC champion Trinity College Baseball Team and graduated as a member of Pi Gamma Mu International Honor Society in Social Sciences.

Outside of the office, Kevin is a regular participant in the Mintz hockey team’s weekly skate.

Education

  • New England Law (JD, magna cum laude)
  • Trinity College (BA, Economics)

Involvement

  • Co-chair of Mintz’s Pro Bono Housing Court Program
  • Participant Captain for the “Lawyers, Bring Us Your Briefs Charity Drive,” providing undergarments to the homeless population of Boston (2015)
  • Member, Pi Gamma Mu International Honor Society
  • Member, Trinity College Long Walk Society (2012 – Present)
  • Volunteer Athlete, Annual Wiffle Ball Challenge, Travis Roy Foundation (2014)
  • Team leader, Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation Walk for a Cure (2006 – Present)
  • Trinity College baseball team representative, Team Impact, a nonprofit that pairs children with life-threatening diseases with local college teams (2011 – 2012)
  • Team leader (2012) and participant (2008 – 2011), Halloween on Vernon, an event that offers Hartford’s underprivileged children a safe environment for trick-or-treating
  • Team leader (2012) and participant (2008 – 2011), Do-It-Day, an event that champions Hartford community service projects

Offices

Admissions

  • Massachusetts

Related Practices

Related Industries

Recent Insights

Viewpoint

U.S. District Court Holds that Certain Claims by Opt-Out Plaintiffs Are Barred by the Statute of Repose

October 10, 2018|Blog

Viewpoint

Court Allows Volkswagen Bondholder Action to Proceed, But Expresses Doubts about the Plaintiff’s Ability to Certify a Class

October 1, 2018|Blog

Viewpoint

In Khoja, the Ninth Circuit Limits Defendants’ Ability to Argue Facts in a Motion to Dismiss

September 18, 2018|Blog

The Increasing Application of Antitrust Claims to Securities Transactions

Members Peter Saparoff and Robert Kidwell and Associates Joel Rothman and Kevin Mortimer authored this ABA’s Section of Litigation column on the trend of plaintiff investors filing a growing number of class action cases against financial institutions alleging violations of U.S. antitrust laws.
View All Insights

Viewpoints

Viewpoint

U.S. District Court Holds that Certain Claims by Opt-Out Plaintiffs Are Barred by the Statute of Repose

October 10, 2018| Blog

In a recent ruling in In re: BP p.l.c. Securities Litigation the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas dismissed claims asserted by opt-out plaintiffs as time barred by the Exchange Act’s statute of repose pursuant to the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in ANZ Securities. This decision underscores that institutional investors should closely monitor the statutes of limitation and repose applicable to securities fraud claims to ensure they are not later barred from recovery.
Viewpoint

Court Allows Volkswagen Bondholder Action to Proceed, But Expresses Doubts about the Plaintiff’s Ability to Certify a Class

October 1, 2018| Blog

As we previously noted in this post, the United States District Court for the Northern District of California dismissed the Volkswagen Bondholder Plaintiff’s first amended complaint, with leave to amend, holding that it could not rely on the Affiliated Ute or Basic presumptions to plead reliance, and that it had not sufficiently pleaded direct reliance. On April 2, 2018, the Plaintiff filed a Second Amended Bondholder’s Class Action complaint (SAC), which added allegations: (1) of direct reliance, (2) that the bonds at issue were priced and traded on an efficient market, (3) that the defendants’ alleged fraud created the market, and (4) that Volkswagen committed fraud on the regulatory process. On September 7, 2018, the court denied the defendants motion to dismiss, and ruled that that the case may proceed to discovery, but also expressed concerns about the Plaintiffs’ ability to certify a class.
Viewpoint

In Khoja, the Ninth Circuit Limits Defendants’ Ability to Argue Facts in a Motion to Dismiss

September 18, 2018| Blog

In Khoja v. Orexigen Therapeutics, Inc., the Ninth Circuit clarified the “rare circumstances” when a court may review documents extraneous to the pleadings in ruling on a motion to dismiss. Given that it has become routine for securities defendants to attach numerous documents to motions to dismiss, this decision has the potential make it easier for plaintiffs to survive a motion to dismiss. Over the next several months, it will be interesting to see whether this decision survives the defendants’ petition for en banc review, and if so, whether courts outside the Ninth Circuit follow this decision to curtail the use of extraneous documents in deciding motions to dismiss.

Special Master Recommends Return of $10.6 Million in Attorneys’ Fees to Class Members

July 19, 2018| Blog

Former U.S. District Judge Gerald Rosen, the Special Master appointed to investigate alleged improper billing by class plaintiffs’ firms in Arkansas Teacher Retirement System v. State Street Bank and Trust Company, recommended that the firms return up to $10.6 million of the $74.5 million in attorneys’ fees awarded to them after reaching a $300 million settlement in the underlying class action.

Petrobras Court’s Denial of Plaintiffs’ Request for Confidential Treatment of Opt-Out Provisions Could Undermine the Settlement Process

February 14, 2018| Blog

On Tuesday, February 6, 2018, United States District Judge Jed S. Rakoff denied class counsel’s request to file under seal three supplemental agreements to a $2.95 billion settlement in the Petrobras Securities Litigation, and made the side agreements part of the public record.

Court in the BP p.l.c. Securities Litigation Upholds Opt-Out Procedures But Then Allows Individual Action Plaintiffs to Opt Back Into $175 Million Settlement

November 29, 2016| Blog

On November 4, 2016, Judge Keith Ellison of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas granted preliminary approval of a $175 million settlement in the federal securities class action In re: BP p.l.c. Securities Litigation between BP and Lead Plaintiffs for the “post-explosion” class.

Dutch Foundation Dismissed for Inadequate Safeguarding of Members’ Interests

July 14, 2016| Blog

On June 29, 2016, the Dutch Court of East Brabant dismissed a foundation’s claims against Rabobank Group for alleged unlawful selling of interest rate swaps because it failed to meet the requirement of the Dutch Claim Code that a foundation sufficiently safeguard the interests of its members.

Dutch Foundations Negotiate €1.204 billion Settlement with Ageas, formerly Fortis.

March 22, 2016| Blog

Following up on our December 15 post on the debate over the best strategy to recover foreign securities losses, a collection of Dutch Foundations (known as Stichtings) negotiated a substantial collective settlement with Ageas SA/NV, the successor-in-interest to Fortis Holdings.

SEC’s Charges Provide Support for Class Plaintiffs’ Allegations in the Ocwen Securities Litigation

February 18, 2016| Blog

A December 22, 2015 decision of the U.S. District Court of the Southern District of Florida in In re Ocwen Financial Corporation Securities Litigation illustrates the impact that an investigation and order of the Securities Exchange Commission (“SEC”) may have on a plaintiff’s ability to allege actionable false statements by an issuer regarding its internal controls.

Court Orders Plaintiffs to Pay Defendants' $13.3 Million Appellate Costs in Lawrence E. Jaffe Pension Plan v. Household International

November 12, 2015| Blog

Recently, in Lawrence E. Jaffe Pension Plan v. Household International, Inc., the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois granted the defendants’ Rule 39 motion for appellate costs and ordered the plaintiffs to pay a total of $13,281,282.

News & Press

The Increasing Application of Antitrust Claims to Securities Transactions

February 25, 2016

Members Peter Saparoff and Robert Kidwell and Associates Joel Rothman and Kevin Mortimer authored this ABA’s Section of Litigation column on the trend of plaintiff investors filing a growing number of class action cases against financial institutions alleging violations of U.S. antitrust laws.