Experience

George X. Pucci is a principal of Kopelman and Paige and chair of the litigation practice group.  Attorney Pucci represents municipalities and municipal boards in complex litigation.  He litigates wetlands, zoning, and subdivision permitting disputes, including defense of G.L. c.40B affordable housing permitting appeals, adult use zoning cases, real estate disputes, and wetland and zoning enforcement cases.  Attorney Pucci also defends land use related state and federal civil rights claims, including equal protection and constitutional regulatory takings claims.  Additionally, his real estate litigation experience includes representing municipalities seeking to exercise their land acquisition rights under the Massachusetts Chapter Land statutes, G.L. c.61, 61A and 61B.  

As principal in charge of the firm’s tax title litigation practice, Attorney Pucci assists municipalities in tax title foreclosure matters.  Attorney Pucci also leads a team which diligently pursues a large volume  of tax title matters for the City of Springfield through a private sector servicing contractor, assisting the City in collecting more than $24 million in otherwise lost revenue in less than three years.  

Attorney Pucci’s practice also includes insurance defense litigation, contract disputes, and general practice civil litigation.  Additionally, he has substantial experience defending serious personal injury cases, including cases involving premises liability claims, negligent security, motor vehicle accidents, miscellaneous tort and general liability claims.  Attorney Pucci practices before all state and federal courts and has substantial experience successfully arguing appeals before the Massachusetts Appeals Court and Supreme Judicial Court.  

Prior to joining Kopelman and Paige, Attorney Pucci had 10 years of experience as an insurance defense litigator and trial attorney for a Boston insurance defense firm, specializing in construction accident litigation, personal injury defense, and defense of professional liability claims. 

Representative Matters

• Winchendon v. Dillon Investments, LLC, Lawyers Weekly No. 14-147-08 (Land Court, Scheier, C.J., October 30, 2008). Prevailed at trial of the Town’s claim seeking specific performance of an option to purchase more than 700 acres of valuable forestry land under G.L. c. 61. Defeated the defendant/developer’s arguments that 1) the Town waived its specific performance rights by accepting the developer’s payment of roll-back taxes and re-classifying the property as unrestricted land after the developer’s purchase of the property, and 2) that if the Town were to prevail on its specific performance claim, the land had a fair market value of $1.8 million, versus the $1.2 million dollar purchase price which was tendered by the Town.
• Middleborough v. Freitas. Successfully litigated a vigorously contested Chapter 61A agricultural land case as special counsel for the Town of Middleborough, ultimately reaching a favorable settlement which enabled the Town to partner with The Nature Conservancy to preserve an historic agricultural landscape recognized at high sensitivity for prehistoric and/or historic period archeological sites, along the Nemasket River in Southeastern Massachusetts.
• Winchendon v. Boyd. Obtained $583,706 in settlement of a contested Land Court foreclosure action, including 16% interest and attorneys’ fees, after defeating the defendant/developer’s summary judgment argument that a flaw in the Town’s original notice of taking voided any foreclosure action against subsequent purchasers until the tax taking process was initiated anew.
• Adams Road Trust v. Grafton Board of Appeals. Successfully defended the Grafton Zoning Board of Appeals in a seven day trial of a developer’s appeal of a G.L. c.40B comprehensive permit decision. Obtained a ruling from the State’s Housing Appeals Committee upholding the validity of the Board’s denial of extension of Town water to the proposed 40B development on the grounds that the proposed extended water line would result in an increased likelihood of development through an area where the Town had intended to preserve rural character for open space purposes and natural resource protection.
• Dedham v. Home Depot. Obtained $178,548 for the Town of Dedham in settlement of a breach of contract claim in order to fund engineering analyses to determine the extent of roadway and infrastructure improvements necessitated by a box-store commercial development.
• Bakis v. Pagounis. Obtained $900,000 in settlement of a counterclaim asserted in defense of a commercial real estate contract dispute after three days of a jury-waived trial before Judge Raymond Brassard in Norfolk Superior Court.
• Hopedale v. Alderman & MacNeish, Inc. 2001 WL 544024, 13 Mass.L.Rptr. 91 (Mass.Super.2001). Obtained $140,000 in settlement of an architectural malpractice claim after a successful summary judgment ruling in which the Court accepted the Town’s argument that the defendant architect was subject to a six year statute of limitations governing contract actions for breach of express warranties, versus the three year limitations period ordinarily applicable to professional negligence claims, based upon the architect’s acceptance of a higher standard of care than that contained in the standard AIA contract.

Memberships & Affiliations

• Massachusetts Bar Association
• Sherborn Conservation Commission (2003-2009)
• Sherborn Board of Selectmen (2009-Present)
  

Bar & Court Admissions

• Massachusetts Bar, 1989
• New York Bar, 1990
• U.S. District Court (Mass.), 2000

Education

Hofstra University School of Law
Juris Doctor, 1989

University of Massachusetts
Bachelor of Arts, 1986

< Prev		Next >