Douglas E. Chabot
Douglas E. Chabot joined personal injury law firm, Decof, Decof & Barry, P.C. in 2010, practicing in the fields of medical malpractice, wrongful death, product liability, pharmaceutical claims and medical device litigation. Before joining the firm, Douglas served as a judicial law clerk for Associate Justice Francis X. Flaherty of the Rhode Island Supreme Court. He also practiced as a student attorney for the Rhode Island Public Defender’s Office and for the Bristol County District Attorney’s Office in Taunton, Massachusetts.
Awards and Other Honors
- Super Lawyers’ Rising Star, 2013-2017
- Associate Executive Editor of the Suffolk Law Review, and supervised Law Review editors and staff in developing student-written notes and comments for the publication.
Memberships and Affiliations
- Rhode Island Bar Association, Member, 2009-present
- American Bar Associations, Member, 2014-present
- Rhode Island Association for Justice, Member, 2010–present
- Federal Bar Association, Member, 2014-present
Education and Admissions
Douglas graduated from Providence College (B.A. 2002) in 2002, majoring in history, with a minor in political science, and from Suffolk University Law School (J.D., magna cum laude) in 2009.
Douglas earned admission to the bar in the states of Rhode Island in 2009 and Massachusetts in 2013. He is also admitted to practice before the United States District Court for the District of Rhode Island (2009) and the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts (2013).
Notable Case Wins
Confidential settlements for multiple claimants injured by a faulty implantable medication pump device.
Confidential settlements on behalf of five teenagers who were ejected from a mini-van when it rolled over following a tire tread separation. One of the occupants was killed and four were seriously injured. Settlements just prior to trial after five years of litigation against one of the world’s largest tire manufacturers.
Successful appeal on behalf of a client following a verdict for the defendant. The trial court had excluded an important part of the testimony of an expert witness for the plaintiff. The state supreme court reversed the judgment for the defense and returned the case for a new trial with the expert testimony intact.
Successful appeal on behalf of a client following a verdict for the defendants. The trial court allowed examination of plaintiff’s expert witness using impermissible materials. The state supreme court reversed the judgment for the defendants and concluded that the admission of the materials prejudiced the plaintiff’s chance at a fair trial. The case was remanded to the superior court for a new trial.