Skip to main content

Nicholas C. Cramb

Member / Co-chair, Real Estate Litigation Practice

[email protected]



Nick, a litigator with a national practice, represents insurers and reinsurers on all matters of coverage and bad faith. He also represents developers, property owners, and financing agencies with respect to permitting disputes and land use litigation. Nick serves as Chair of the Real Estate Litigation Practice.

Nick is a member in the firm’s Litigation Practice and is based in Boston. His unique practice focuses equally on insurance and reinsurance disputes and real estate litigation.

Nick represents insurers, reinsurers, and insurance brokers on all matters of coverage, including, for example, the duty to defend, allocation, order of coverage, retention warranties, and bad faith. His expertise includes commercial general liability, directors and officers liability and professional liability insurance, and both facultative and treaty reinsurance.

Nick’s Real Estate Litigation practice focuses on disputes involving zoning, subdivision, affordable housing, and environmental issues, including wetlands, waterways, and air pollution control regulation. He represents developers, property owners, energy companies, and financing agencies with respect real estate and land use litigation. 

While an associate at Mintz, Nick served as a Special Assistant District Attorney with the Middlesex District Attorney’s Office, where he handled numerous criminal matters and tried several cases before juries. Prior to joining the Firm, Nick was a law clerk for the Honorable Alexander H. Sands III of the Massachusetts Land Court.


  • Northeastern University (JD)
  • Union College (BA, Philosophy)


  • Defended the developer of a mixed use project, which included over 60 residential units, in an appeal brought by a competing shopping center.
  • Obtained summary judgment on behalf of developer in an action challenging of municipality’s inclusionary zoning determination.
  • Argued an appeal of a Comprehensive Permit before the Supreme Judicial Court, which affirmed our client’s Comprehensive Permit for a residential development of approximately 150 units.
  • Obtained dismissal of lawsuit brought by a municipality challenging a funding agency’s determination of eligibility for a Comprehensive Permit.
  • Defended mall owners in an appeal by neighboring entities of a subdivision approval and variances issued in connection with development for a new anchor tenant, obtaining summary judgment on standing grounds.
  • Successfully appealed to the DHCD a municipality’s determination that it had achieved an affordable housing statutory minimum.
  • Represented North End Restaurant and property owners in suit against the MTA regarding the impact of the Big Dig, obtaining for our clients one of the largest jury verdicts in Massachusetts for 2015
  • Defended an insurer through summary judgment and on appeal against breach of contract and bad faith claims by immediately deposing the insured and proving no damages, while preventing any depositions of the insurer.
  • Defended an insurer against claims that it converted subrogation claims, obtaining summary judgment from the US District Court for the District of Oregon.
  • Represented a college and a private secondary school in suits by neighbors challenging permitting for athletic fields.
  • Brought an appeal of a special permit issued to allow the construction of a wind turbine on behalf of nearby land owners.
  • Represented a UK based reinsurer in a $30 million reinsurance arbitration dispute involving rescission of a workers’ compensation program.
  • Representing energy company in administrative appeals of wetlands and Chapter 91 waterways permitting for natural gas infrastructure.
  • Successfully defended energy company against administrative appeals of an Air Quality Plan Approval for natural gas infrastructure.
  • Successfully represented certain London Market Company Reinsurers in a lengthy litigation proceeding in federal court arising out of a cedent’s $120 million settlement with its insured resolving environmental contamination exposure. The matter involved complex issues of allocation, enforcement of coverage periods, and application of choice of law.

Recognition & Awards

  • Chambers USA: Massachusetts - Insurance: Up and Coming (2021-2022)
  • Best Lawyers in America: Litigation - Insurance, Insurance Law (2018-2022)
  • Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce: Boston's Future Leaders (2013)


  • President of the Massachusetts Reinsurance Bar Association (MReBA) (2016)
  • Member, ARIAS-US
  • Board of Directors, Magic Garden Children’s Center (2016-2017)


Viewpoint Thumbnail

Massachusetts Appeals Court Upholds Liability Insurer’s Contractual Right to Settle

December 14, 2017 | Advisory | By Nicholas Cramb, Lavinia Weizel

On Tuesday, December 12, 2017, the Massachusetts Appeals Court, applying New Hampshire law, held that a professional liability insurer did not breach the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing by settling a New Hampshire medical malpractice suit over its insured’s objection. 
Read more
Real Estate, Construction & Infrastructure Viewpoints Thumbnail
On December 5, 2017, the Massachusetts Appeals Court issued an important decision in Berger v. 2 Wyndcliff, LLC, No. 16-P-336 (Mass. App. Ct. Dec. 5, 2017), clarifying the extent to which land owners in a common-scheme development may extend restrictive covenants.
Read more
On September 23, 2016, the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit concluded that, “for now, at least, the long war over Long Wharf is at an end.”
Read more

Louisiana Supreme Court Adopts Pro Rata Allocation of Defense Costs Among Insurers and Insured

September 22, 2016 | Alert | By Nicholas Cramb, Lavinia Weizel

On September 7, 2016, the Louisiana Supreme Court applied, for the first time, a pro rata allocation method to defense costs where commercial general liability policies provided coverage during a portion of the time of exposure in a long-latency disease case.
Read more

Developers Who Elect Not to Pay Comprehensive Permit Fees in Full Proceed at Their Peril

September 19, 2016 | Alert | By Nicholas Cramb, Joel Rothman

The Massachusetts Appeals Court issued an opinion on August 29, 2016, that has significant ramifications for developers seeking Comprehensive Permits for affordable housing projects under chapter 40B of the Massachusetts General Laws (“Chapter 40B”).
Read more
On Monday, March 7, 2016, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (“SJC”) rejected the “selective tender rule” as contrary to Massachusetts insurance law and sound public policy in Insurance Company of the State of Pennsylvania v. Great Northern Insurance Company.
Read more
On Tuesday, in Zoning Board of Appeals of Lunenburg v. Housing Appeals Committee, the Supreme Judicial Court soundly rejected a zoning board of appeals’ argument that inexpensive market-rate homes may be counted toward a town’s affordable housing obligations under Chapter 40B.
Read more



2017 ARIAS-U.S. Fall Conference


New York, NY


MREBA Fall 2016 Symposium

Massachusetts Reinsurance Bar Association

The Harvard Club of Boston- Back Bay Clubhouse 374 Commonwealth Ave. Boston, MA