Litigation

Prevailed in corporate litigation appeal before the Nevada Supreme Court. Shareholders invoked the "substantial benefit" doctrine and demanded that our client, a publicly traded corporation, pay $250,000 in attorney's fees because the corporation took corrective action in response to the Shareholders' demand letter. The Shareholders, however, never filed suit on the corrective action. The Nevada Supreme Court held that the substantial benefit doctrine in Nevada (analogously called the "corporate benefit doctrine" in Delaware) requires predicate litigation before shareholders can recover attorney's fees. This was a case of first impression for a state supreme court and implicates shareholder litigation across the nation.

Secured dismissal from a putative class action in the Eastern District of New York for the client, an au pair organization. The plaintiff asserted minimum wage and overtime violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act, the New York Labor Law, and the wage and hour laws of all other states; and sought to represent a nationwide FLSA collective action and a nationwide state wage-and-hour law class action. After moving to compel arbitration or dismiss, the plaintiff dismissed the client from the lawsuit.

Represented companies defending, and shareholders and members prosecuting, actions seeking access to a company’s books and records pursuant to Section 220 of the Delaware General Corporation Law and Section 18-305 of the Delaware LLC Act.

Defended company in Delaware chancery court in action brought by former officers and directors for advancement of attorneys’ fees and expenses under indemnification provisions of company’s corporate charter and separate indemnification agreements.

Served as defense counsel to employee and employee’s company against an action by former joint venture partner to obtain a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction involving contested nondisclosure and noncompete agreements.

Served as lead and trial counsel to lender in federal litigation for breach of contract, fraud, and replevin and for non-dischargeability and defense of lien avoidance in subsequent bankruptcy.

Served as counsel to lender/servicer in defense of multi-count counterclaim for damages in context of foreclosure action, affirmed on appeal following differing decisions by original and successor trial judge.

Secured dismissal of abuse of process and malicious prosecution claims against our client, a fire origin and cause expert who had been retained by an insurance company to investigate a house fire. Based on the expert’s opinion that the fire was intentionally set, the insurer filed a declaratory judgment action seeking a determination of no insurance coverage. A jury found against the insurer and in favor of the homeowner. Subsequently, the homeowner filed suit against the insurer and expert for actual and punitive damages, alleging the expert “instigated” the declaratory judgment action by providing false information because he did not follow the proper scientific methodology contained in NFPA 921. The U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri granted the motion to dismiss all claims against the expert based on its finding that the expert did not instigate the declaratory judgment action, the declaratory judgment action presented an actual case or controversy, and the expert’s opinion met the requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 702 and NFPA 921.

Served as counsel in a first-of-its-kind, five-day preliminary injunction hearing, winning a complete victory for a large career college, in which the Colorado Attorney General’s office sought 21 separate, broad injunctions. Subsequently tried a four-week bench trial against consumer protection and lending claims where the Colorado Attorney General sought $240 million. A decision in the matter is pending.

Successfully defended the operator of a commercial website against a putative class action involving alleged interception of an online customer's personal information, including credit card information, and disclosure of that information to third parties without the customer's consent. The plaintiff argued that this information, which was stored in a browser file before being sent to the website, was not yet a communication to website and that the interception and transmission of that information via JavaScript commands was illegal under the Wiretap Act. The court agreed with the website operator's arguments and dismissed the action. Plaintiff's counsel was seeking over $1 billion in damages, making this a significant victory.
 

Secured a defense verdict for a St. Louis, Missouri-area medical group following a five-day jury trial. The plaintiff and her attorneys asked for a verdict of $3.7 million following a laparoscopic gynecological surgery. After 82 minutes of deliberation, the jury returned with a defense verdict.

Obtained jury verdict and award of $12 million in past damages against a client's subsidiary for infringement of computer software patent. Additionally, obtained jury verdict of noninfringement on patent infringement counterclaims.

Won the largest 2014 defense verdict in Missouri on behalf of a gas company in a $30 million furnace explosion case. The ranking was reported by Missouri Lawyers Weekly.

Successfully defended client against claims of patent infringement, trademark infringement, trade secret misappropriation and unfair competition brought by leading manufacturer of snack chips. Secured a defense verdict on all claims.