Skip to main content

Mathilda S. McGee-Tubb




Mathilda is a multifaceted litigator who solves clients’ business disputes and personal challenges through creative solutions and traditional litigation mechanisms, driven by each client’s particular priorities.  Mathilda’s practice encompasses complex commercial litigation, class actions, white-collar criminal and administrative investigations, trust and estate litigation, appellate litigation, and insurance coverage disputes. Through strategic discovery, well-researched briefing, and effective oral advocacy, she has repeatedly won cases at the motion to dismiss or summary judgment stage and obtained favorable pre-trial resolutions. 

In her Complex Commercial Litigation practice, Mathilda handles business disputes for companies and non-profits in the higher education, entertainment, pharmaceuticals, retail & consumer brands and real estate industries, among others. Mathilda’s expertise includes contract disputes, trade secrets cases, joint venture and partnership disputes, and business tort claims. In addition, Mathilda regularly and successfully defends against class action claims arising under state consumer protection laws, particularly those brought against landlords by residential tenants, and is one of a handful of class action defense lawyers in Massachusetts with in-depth knowledge of the Massachusetts security deposit and submetering laws.  In her complex litigation practice, Mathilda also defends multinational insurance companies in emerging and complex coverage issues and disputes. This includes representing insurers in state, bankruptcy and federal courts nationwide.

As an associate in the firm’s White-Collar Criminal Defense Group, Mathilda has expertise representing high-profile, high-net-worth individuals in all manner of investigations, with a particular focus on fraud investigations and charges levied by the Department of Justice and private institutions.  In addition to her individual representation in the white-collar space, Mathilda counsels private clients in various probate-related disputes including trustee removal actions, executor and administrator fiduciary duty claims, and a range of will and trust disputes.

As a full-service litigator, Mathilda has experience advising clients in all stages of dispute resolution, from pre-litigation counseling and investigation through discovery, dispositive motion practice, and trial.  She is skilled at guiding her clients, when necessary, through the appeals process, from crafting an appellate strategy to drafting briefs and handling oral arguments. Mathilda’s appellate experience also uniquely positions her to anticipate and lay the foundation for appellate issues at the trial court level.

Mathilda has a particular passion for legal issues facing the higher education industry. For clients in this sector, Mathilda draws on her broad experience as a lead team member in the defense of the “Varsity Blues” college admissions cases, an advisor to companies operating in the education space, and directly in the industry, including as a former legal intern at the United States Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights, an Education Pioneers Fellow, and an administrator at Columbia University. Mathilda has leveraged this experience to advise clients on compliance with federal education laws such as the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) and aid clients in navigating Title IX investigations on campus, among other representations.

Mathilda also has an active pro bono practice, with a particular focus on immigration issues, for which she has received Mintz’s Pro Bono Award and the Lawyers for Civil Rights Pro Bono Award. In 2017, she helped an immigrant secure release from ICE custody after nearly a year of detention on a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in federal court. She has assisted Lawyers for Civil Rights file briefs of amici curiae in seminal cases involving affirmative action and the inclusion of a citizenship question on the U.S. census before the U.S. Supreme Court, partnered with the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts on a seminal case that shifted the burden of proof in bond hearings for certain immigrants detained during removal proceedings, and represented the NAACP – Boston Branch as an intervenor in a high-profile case regarding the admissions criteria for Boston’s highly selective public schools.

Prior to joining the firm, Mathilda served as a judicial law clerk to the Honorable Robert J. Cordy of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court and to the Honorable Douglas P. Woodlock of the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts. During law school, Mathilda was editor-in-chief of the Boston College Law Review and a student attorney in the Boston College Legal Assistance Bureau.


  • Boston College (JD, magna cum laude)
  • Columbia University (MA)
  • Oberlin College (BA)


Commercial Litigation

  • Representing one of the largest generic drug manufacturers in two breach of contract cases.
  • Secured summary judgment and leveraged successful settlement for joint venture fund client in a dispute over ownership rights associated with an $80 million+ hotel property.
  • Prevailed at trial on behalf of a major interactive entertainment company against a claim brought by a player who was banned for cheating.
  • Obtained dismissal of a complex counterclaim asserting violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”) in federal district court.
  • Served as second chair at a trial representing a limited liability company in complex commercial litigation in the Delaware Court of Chancery relating to claims concerning contractual interpretation and fiduciary duties.
  • Obtained a favorable arbitration award in California in a dispute over an oral joint venture to open and operate a garment manufacturing facility in China.
  • Part of a team that obtained complete dismissal of a breach of contract and antitrust complaint in federal district court.

Class Action Defense

  • Defeated a motion for class certification and obtained summary judgment on claims brought by a putative class of tenants of a residential realty company asserting violations of the Massachusetts utility submetering laws and the Massachusetts consumer protection act, chapter 93A.
  • Obtained voluntary dismissal of a consumer class action involving unsolicited text messages under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA).

White Collar Criminal Defense

  • Helped to secure dismissal on behalf of a former Saudi intelligence official in a case brought by the kingdom’s sovereign wealth fund and its subsidiaries, alleging our client embezzled billions of dollars.
  • Part of a team defending two parent-defendants in the Varsity Blues college admissions prosecution in the District of Massachusetts.

Trust and Estate Litigation

  • Representing a prominent individual in his capacity as trustee of a multi-million dollar family trust in a dispute in Massachusetts Probate Court regarding the interpretation of core trust terms.
  • Represented a high-net-worth individual as a beneficiary of a $1b estate in a dispute in Massachusetts Probate Court regarding the proper distribution of assets.


  • Representing a residential realty trust in a landlord-tenant class action before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit.
  • Representing a high-profile former Saudi official in a complex dispute before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit.
  • Representing intervenors in Boston Parent Coalition for Academic Excellence Corp. v. The School Committee of the City of Boston before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit.
  • Representing a trustee in a trustee removal action currently pending before the Massachusetts Appeals Court.
  • Represented a residential realty company in an appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit and in the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court on a certified question from the First Circuit.
  • Represented amici in several cases before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit and the United States Supreme Court, including:
    • President and Fellows of Harvard College, et al. v. United States Department of Homeland Security, et al., Case No. 1:20-cv-11283 (D. Mass.), a case challenging interim guidance issued by DHS and ICE during the COVID-19 pandemic that would have prevented international students on F-1 visas from taking online courses while enrolled in a United States academic program.
    • Department of Commerce, et al. v. New York, et al., No. 18-966 (U.S. Sup. Ct.), a case challenging the inclusion of a citizenship question on the decennial census questionnaire.
    • Abigail Noel Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin, et al., No. 14-981 (U.S. Sup. Ct.), a seminal case involving the issue of affirmative action in higher education.

Recognition & Awards

  • Best Lawyers in America "Ones to Watch": Appellate Practice (2022) 
  • Best Lawyers in America "Ones to Watch": Commercial Litigation (2021-2022) 
  • Massachusetts Super Lawyers: Rising Star (2021)
  • Best Lawyers in America "Ones to Watch": Mass Tort Litigation / Class Actions - Defendants (2021-2022) 
  • Richard Mintz Pro Bono Award (2019)
  • Lawyers for Civil Rights, Pro Bono Award (2016 and 2019)
  • Order of the Coif
  • McGrath & Kane Award, Boston College Law School (2013)


  • Member, Subcommittee on Alternative Paths to Admission of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court’s Steering Committee on Bar Admissions (2021- present)
  • Associate Editor, ABA Tort, Trial & Insurance Practice Law Journal (2021- present)
  • Member, Boston Bar Association Civil Rights & Civil Liberties Section Steering Committee (2020- present)
  • Board Member, Lawyers for Civil Rights (2020- present)
  • Gubernatorial Appointee, Metropolitan Area Planning Council (2018– present)
  • Member, Supreme Judicial Court Law Clerks’ Society Governing Board (2015- present)
  • Member, Boston Bar Association Public Interest Leadership Program, Class of 2019- 2020
  • Vice Chair and Board Member, Apprentice Learning (2016– 2019)
  • At-Large Member, Oberlin College Alumni Leadership Council (2016– 2019)
  • Member, ONEin3 Advisory Council to Mayor Thomas M. Menino (2013- 2014)
  • Member, Executive Board & Nominations Committee, Oberlin Alumni Association (2011- 2014)
  • Class Trustee, Oberlin College (2007- 2010)

Recent Insights



Pro Bono Viewpoint
Mintz attorneys represented advocacy groups that intervened in federal litigation to support a temporary selection process for Boston’s exam schools for the 2021–2022 school year. A federal district court judge held the plan to be race-neutral, and Special Counsel Andy Nathanson helped counter the plaintiff’s motion to stop the plan’s implementation during the appeal process. Following revelations of new evidence, the district court judge reaffirmed his ruling.
Read more
Education and Nonprofits Viewpoint Thumbnail
As discussed in an earlier post, colleges and universities are facing a wave of class action lawsuits seeking refunds of tuition, fees, and room and board expenses after schools closed their campus in the spring of 2020 in response to COVID-19.
Read more
Education and Nonprofits Viewpoint Thumbnail

COVID-19 Tuition and Fees Lawsuits: Defending University Practices and Defeating Class Claims

June 26, 2020 | Blog | By Thomas Wintner, Mathilda McGee-Tubb

Across the United States, students have brought over 100 class action lawsuits against public and private colleges and universities seeking refunds of tuition, fees, and room and board expenses after schools closed their physical facilities, including their classrooms and residence halls, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Read more
Viewpoint Thumbnail
On Monday, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court issued a precedential decision in Nguyen v. Massachusetts Institute of Technology et al. (SJC-12329), which addresses the complicated issue of higher education institutions’ responsibility to protect students at risk of suicide.
Read more
In July 2016, four players on the Minnesota Lynx WNBA team wore black shirts in support of the Black Lives Matter social justice movement. The WNBA fined the players, but later rescinded the fines.
Read more
On June 23, 2016, in its second time hearing Fisher v. University of Texas, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the affirmative action admissions program at the University of Texas at Austin. The Court held that the program is lawful under the Equal Protection Clause because it is narrowly tailored to achieving concrete, compelling goals tied to the educational benefits flowing from student body diversity.
Read more
What is the responsibility of a public educational institution when it receives a public records request for material that it believes it must keep private under state and federal student records laws?
Read more

News & Press

News Thumbnail
Kim V. Marrkand, Mintz Member and Founder and Co-Chair of the firm’s Insurance Practice, authored an article published in April 2021 by the Tort, Trial & Insurance Practice Law Journal, a publication of the American Bar Association’s Tort Trial and Insurance Practice Section, that examined Section 12 of the American Law Institute’s Restatement of the Law, Liability Insurance, titled “Liability of Insurer for Conduct of Defense”, wherein Ms. Marrkand shows that Section 12 “invents wholly new rules and a cause of action without either the support of existing case law or compelling policy rationale.” Mintz Associates Mathilda McGee-Tubb and Clare Prober provided significant contributions to the article.
Press Release Thumbnail
Pro bono litigation team recognized for work to achieve groundbreaking victory for immigrants’ rights and mentorship provided to the legal community.
News Thumbnail
An article published by Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly reported that a victory secured in federal court by lawyers from Mintz and the American Civil Liberties Union is having a profound effect on the way bond hearings are conducted in deportation cases. The article included commentary from attorneys on the front lines in the Boston immigration court. One lawyer called the ruling a “breath of fresh air” and a “massive change in the law.”
News Thumbnail
Articles published by Law360 and MassLive reported that Mintz, together with the ACLU of Massachusetts and the ACLU of New Hampshire, achieved a groundbreaking victory for immigrants’ rights when Chief U.S. District Judge Patti B. Saris ruled that the government’s practice of detaining certain immigrants by default violates both due process and the Administrative Procedure Act.

The first-of-its-kind class action lawsuit, Pereira Brito v. Barr, was filed in June on behalf of immigrants who were jailed due to flawed detention hearings in which the detainee was required to bear the burden of proof as to not being a flight risk or a danger to the community. The latest ruling holds that the class of immigrants are entitled to bond hearings at which the government bears the burden of justifying an immigrant’s detention, and at which the immigration court must consider someone’s ability to pay when setting a bond amount.

The Mintz pro bono team representing the plaintiffs in this case includes Members Susan Finegan and Susan Cohen, Special Counsel Andrew Nathanson, and Associates Mathilda McGee-Tubb, Jennifer Mather McCarthy, and Ryan Dougherty.
News Thumbnail
Law360 covered a summary judgment argument by lawyers from Mintz and the American Civil Liberties Union in a class action lawsuit, Pereira Brito v. Barr, challenging the government’s practice of denying due process to detained immigrants.
An article published by Law360 covered a motion hearing in a class action lawsuit, Pereira Brito v. Barr, filed by Mintz, together with the ACLU of Massachusetts and the ACLU of New Hampshire, challenging the government’s practice of denying due process to detained immigrants.
News Thumbnail
Mintz attorneys, Mathilda McGee-Tubb and Joshua Briones, author this article which addresses the case before the Ninth Circuit, where Facebook contends that a BIPA class action would violate federal due process, because it could result in a huge statutory damages award untethered to any injury, and inconsistent with BIPA’s legislative intent. If Facebook succeeds in this argument, it will open the door to other defendants doing the same.