{"data":{"filter_options":{"titles":[{"name":"Managing Partner Atlanta Office","value":"Managing Partner Atlanta Office"},{"name":"Partner","value":"Partner"},{"name":"Partner / Head of Pro Bono","value":"Partner / Head of Pro Bono"},{"name":"Partner / Chief Operating Officer","value":"Partner / Chief Operating Officer"},{"name":"Partner / General Counsel","value":"Partner / General Counsel"},{"name":"Partner / Dir. E-Discovery Ops","value":"Partner / Dir. E-Discovery Ops"},{"name":"Partner / Chairman, Saudi Arabia Practice","value":"Partner / Chairman, Saudi Arabia Practice"},{"name":"K\u0026S Talent Partner","value":"K\u0026S Talent Partner"},{"name":"Partner / Chief Human Resources Officer","value":"Partner / Chief Human Resources Officer"},{"name":"Chairman","value":"Chairman"},{"name":"Senior Counsel","value":"Senior Counsel"},{"name":"Associate Director, E-Discovery Operations","value":"Associate Director, E-Discovery Operations"},{"name":"Counsel","value":"Counsel"},{"name":"Senior Associate","value":"Senior Associate"},{"name":"Associate","value":"Associate"},{"name":"Senior Attorney","value":"Senior Attorney"},{"name":"Senior Lawyer","value":"Senior Lawyer"},{"name":"Attorney","value":"Attorney"},{"name":"Senior Counsel and Policy Advisor","value":"Senior Counsel and Policy Advisor"},{"name":"Managing Director - Capital Solutions","value":"Managing Director - Capital Solutions"},{"name":"Senior Government Relations Advisor","value":"Senior Government Relations Advisor"},{"name":"Associate General Counsel","value":"Associate General Counsel"},{"name":"Senior Advisor","value":"Senior Advisor"},{"name":"Patent Agent","value":"Patent Agent"},{"name":"Consultant","value":"Consultant"},{"name":"Government Relations Advisor","value":"Government Relations Advisor"},{"name":"Chief of Lateral Partner Recruiting \u0026 Integration","value":"Chief of Lateral Partner Recruiting \u0026 Integration"},{"name":"Chief Financial Officer","value":"Chief Financial Officer"},{"name":"Chief Information Officer","value":"Chief Information Officer"},{"name":"Chief Revenue Officer","value":"Chief Revenue Officer"},{"name":"Chief Recruiting Officer","value":"Chief Recruiting Officer"},{"name":"Chief Lawyer Talent Development Officer","value":"Chief Lawyer Talent Development Officer"},{"name":"Chief Marketing Officer","value":"Chief Marketing Officer"},{"name":"Tax Consultant","value":"Tax Consultant"},{"name":"Director of Community Affairs","value":"Director of Community Affairs"},{"name":"Director of Facilities \u0026 Admin Operations","value":"Director of Facilities \u0026 Admin Operations"},{"name":"Senior Office Manager","value":"Senior Office Manager"},{"name":"Director of Operations","value":"Director of Operations"},{"name":"Pro Bono Deputy","value":"Pro Bono Deputy"},{"name":"Director of Office Operations","value":"Director of Office Operations"},{"name":"Director of Operations Europe","value":"Director of Operations Europe"},{"name":"Law Clerk","value":"Law Clerk"},{"name":"Deputy General Counsel","value":"Deputy General Counsel"}],"schools":[{"name":"(Commercial Law), in front of Monash University, Australia","value":3045},{"name":"Aberystwyth University","value":3004},{"name":"Albany Law School","value":2118},{"name":"American University Washington College of Law","value":3042},{"name":"American University, Washington College of Law","value":3024},{"name":"Appalachian School of Law","value":2891},{"name":"Ateneo de Manila University","value":2914},{"name":"Ave Maria School of Law","value":2892},{"name":"Baylor University School of Law","value":181},{"name":"Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law","value":2619},{"name":"Binghamton University","value":3002},{"name":"Boston College Law School","value":245},{"name":"Boston University School of Law","value":247},{"name":"BPP Law School Leeds","value":2642},{"name":"BPP Law School London","value":2782},{"name":"BPP University","value":2984},{"name":"Brooklyn Law School","value":2705},{"name":"Cairo University, Law School","value":2962},{"name":"California Western School of Law","value":315},{"name":"Capital University Law School","value":327},{"name":"Case Western Reserve University School of Law","value":345},{"name":"Cecil C. Humphreys School of Law","value":2235},{"name":"Chapman University School of Law","value":377},{"name":"Charleston School of Law","value":2910},{"name":"City Law School, London","value":2998},{"name":"City Law School","value":2857},{"name":"Clark University","value":3006},{"name":"Cleveland-Marshall College of Law","value":426},{"name":"Columbia University School of International and Public Affairs","value":3008},{"name":"Columbia University School of Law","value":485},{"name":"Columbia University","value":3126},{"name":"Columbus School of Law, Catholic University of America","value":3010},{"name":"Columbus School of Law","value":350},{"name":"Concord Law School of Kaplan University","value":1026},{"name":"Cornell Law School","value":512},{"name":"Creighton University School of Law","value":518},{"name":"Creighton University","value":3025},{"name":"Cumberland School of Law","value":1759},{"name":"CUNY School of Law","value":2893},{"name":"David A. Clarke School of Law","value":2399},{"name":"Deakin University School of Law","value":2907},{"name":"DePaul University College of Law","value":565},{"name":"DePaul University College of Law","value":3060},{"name":"Dickinson School of Law","value":2719},{"name":"Drake University Law School","value":609},{"name":"Duke University School of Law","value":613},{"name":"Duquesne University School of Law","value":614},{"name":"Dwayne O. Andreas School of Law","value":173},{"name":"Edinburgh Law School","value":3160},{"name":"Emory University School of Law","value":659},{"name":"ESADE Business and Law School – Universidad Ramon Llull","value":3215},{"name":"Fachseminare von Fürstenberg","value":2918},{"name":"Faculté Libre de Droit, Université Catholique de Lille","value":3055},{"name":"Faculty of Law, University of Zagreb","value":2983},{"name":"Faculty of Law","value":2944},{"name":"Faculty of Law","value":3039},{"name":"Federal University of Rio de Janeiro","value":3022},{"name":"Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul School of Law (Brazil)","value":3062},{"name":"Florida A\u0026M University College of Law","value":699},{"name":"Florida Coastal School of Law","value":2894},{"name":"Florida International College of Law","value":707},{"name":"Florida State University College of Law","value":720},{"name":"Fordham University School of Law","value":722},{"name":"Franklin Pierce Law Center","value":734},{"name":"Friedrich-Schiller-Universität Jena","value":3015},{"name":"George Mason University School of Law","value":752},{"name":"George Washington University Law School","value":753},{"name":"Georgetown University Law Center","value":755},{"name":"Georgia State University College of Law","value":761},{"name":"Ghent Law School","value":2793},{"name":"Golden Gate University School of Law","value":770},{"name":"Gonzaga University School of Law","value":772},{"name":"Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies, Geneva","value":2997},{"name":"Hamline University School of Law","value":811},{"name":"Harvard Law School","value":824},{"name":"Hebrew University of Jerusalem Faculty of Law","value":2994},{"name":"Hofstra University School of Law","value":858},{"name":"Howard University School of Law","value":872},{"name":"Huazhong University of Science and Technology","value":3016},{"name":"Humboldt University of Berlin","value":3012},{"name":"Indiana University School of Law","value":2711},{"name":"Indiana University School of Law","value":890},{"name":"International Association of Privacy Professionals","value":3009},{"name":"J. Reuben Clark Law School","value":262},{"name":"Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center","value":2084},{"name":"James Cook University of North Queensland","value":3034},{"name":"Jean Moulin University Lyon 3, France","value":2938},{"name":"Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health","value":2992},{"name":"Justus-Liebig-Universität Gießen Rechtswissenschaft (Germany)","value":3063},{"name":"Kansas City School of Law","value":2247},{"name":"Keio University","value":2968},{"name":"Kent College of Law","value":883},{"name":"Kline School of Law","value":611},{"name":"KU Leuven","value":3007},{"name":"Levin College of Law","value":2189},{"name":"Lewis and Clark Law School","value":1089},{"name":"Liberty University School of Law","value":1094},{"name":"Lincoln College of Law","value":2253},{"name":"LL.M. in International Crime and Justice UNICRI","value":2937},{"name":"Loyola Law School","value":2895},{"name":"Loyola University Chicago School of Law","value":1135},{"name":"Loyola University New Orleans College of Law","value":1136},{"name":"Marquette University Law School","value":1176},{"name":"McGeorge School of Law","value":2402},{"name":"McGill University","value":2659},{"name":"Melbourne Law School","value":2899},{"name":"Mercer University Walter F. George School of Law","value":1221},{"name":"Mexico Autonomous Institute of Technology","value":2996},{"name":"Michael E. Moritz College of Law","value":2728},{"name":"Michigan State University College of Law","value":1245},{"name":"Mississippi College School of Law","value":1285},{"name":"Moscow State University","value":2815},{"name":"National and Kapodistrian University of Athens","value":3032},{"name":"National Law University Jodhpur","value":3020},{"name":"National University of Singapore, Faculty of Law","value":2662},{"name":"New England School of Law","value":2886},{"name":"New York Law School","value":1403},{"name":"New York University School of Law","value":1406},{"name":"Norman Adrian Wiggins School of Law","value":323},{"name":"North Carolina Central University School of Law","value":1417},{"name":"Northeastern University School of Law","value":1430},{"name":"Northern Illinois University College of Law","value":1432},{"name":"Northwestern Pritzker School of Law","value":1451},{"name":"Notre Dame Law School","value":2278},{"name":"Ohio Northern University Law School","value":3036},{"name":"Oklahoma City University School of Law","value":1487},{"name":"Osgoode Hall Law School","value":3124},{"name":"Pace University School of Law","value":1516},{"name":"Panteion University","value":3033},{"name":"Paul M. Hebert Law Center","value":2713},{"name":"Pennsylvania State University, Dickinson School of Law","value":1562},{"name":"Pepperdine University School of Law","value":1570},{"name":"Pettit College of Law","value":1473},{"name":"Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile","value":3203},{"name":"Pontificia Universidad Catolica del Peru","value":3011},{"name":"Pontificia Universidad Javeriana","value":3013},{"name":"Pontificia Universidade Catolica de Sao Paulo","value":3095},{"name":"Prince Sultan University College of Law","value":3167},{"name":"Queens College, Cambridge","value":3003},{"name":"Quinnipiac University School of Law","value":1626},{"name":"Ralph R. Papitto School of Law","value":1686},{"name":"Regent University School of Law","value":1649},{"name":"Rice University","value":3043},{"name":"Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg","value":3049},{"name":"Rutgers University School of Law-Newark","value":1699},{"name":"Rutgers University School of Law","value":1697},{"name":"S.J. Quinney College of Law","value":2408},{"name":"Saint Louis University School of Law","value":1732},{"name":"Salmon P. Chase College of Law","value":1433},{"name":"Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law","value":103},{"name":"Santa Clara University School of Law","value":1771},{"name":"Seattle University School of Law","value":1787},{"name":"Seton Hall University School of Law","value":1790},{"name":"Shepard Broad Law Center","value":1460},{"name":"South Texas College of Law","value":2721},{"name":"Southern Illinois University School of Law","value":1849},{"name":"Southern Methodist University Dedman School of Law","value":1852},{"name":"Southern University Law Center","value":1857},{"name":"Southwestern Law School","value":1876},{"name":"St. John's University School of Law","value":2724},{"name":"St. Mary's University School of Law","value":1896},{"name":"St. Thomas University School of Law","value":1746},{"name":"Stanford Law School","value":1904},{"name":"Stetson University College of Law","value":1910},{"name":"Sturm College of Law","value":2184},{"name":"Suffolk University Law School","value":1921},{"name":"Syracuse University College of Law","value":1956},{"name":"Temple University Beasley School of Law","value":1974},{"name":"Texas A\u0026M School of Law","value":1980},{"name":"Texas Tech University School of Law","value":1994},{"name":"Texas Wesleyan University School of Law","value":1996},{"name":"The College of Law Australia","value":3091},{"name":"The College of Law, London","value":2935},{"name":"The John Marshall Law School","value":2034},{"name":"The Judge Advocate General's Legal Center and School","value":2896},{"name":"The Ohio State University Moritz College of Law","value":2990},{"name":"The University of Akron School of Law","value":2143},{"name":"The University of Alabama School of Law","value":2045},{"name":"The University of Birmingham, U.K.","value":2796},{"name":"The University of Iowa College of Law","value":2206},{"name":"The University of Texas School of Law","value":2055},{"name":"The University of Tulsa College of Law","value":2407},{"name":"Thomas Jefferson School of Law","value":685},{"name":"Thomas M. Cooley Law School","value":2729},{"name":"Thurgood Marshall School of Law","value":1992},{"name":"Tianjin University of Commerce","value":2995},{"name":"Tulane University Law School","value":2113},{"name":"UC Davis School of Law","value":2160},{"name":"UCLA School of Law","value":2162},{"name":"Universidad Católica de Honduras","value":2916},{"name":"Universidad Francisco Marroquin","value":3090},{"name":"Universidad Panamericana","value":2904},{"name":"Universidad Torcuato di Tella","value":3035},{"name":"Universidade de São Paulo, Faculdade de Direito","value":3028},{"name":"Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie","value":2977},{"name":"Università Commerciale Luigi Bocconi","value":3135},{"name":"University at Buffalo Law School","value":1928},{"name":"University College Dublin Law School","value":2900},{"name":"University of Alberta Faculty of Law","value":3088},{"name":"University of Amsterdam","value":2980},{"name":"University of Arizona, James E. Rogers College of Law","value":2149},{"name":"University of Arkansas School of Law","value":2154},{"name":"University of Baltimore School of Law","value":2156},{"name":"University of California College of the Law","value":3196},{"name":"University of California Hastings College of Law","value":2158},{"name":"University of California Irvine School of Law","value":2161},{"name":"University of California, Berkeley, School of Law","value":2159},{"name":"University of California, Davis","value":3019},{"name":"University of Cambridge, U.K","value":2991},{"name":"University of Canterbury","value":2981},{"name":"University of Central Florida","value":3027},{"name":"University of Chester Law School","value":3005},{"name":"University of Chicago Law School","value":2174},{"name":"University of Chicago","value":3038},{"name":"University of Cincinnati College of Law","value":2175},{"name":"University of Colorado School of Law","value":2177},{"name":"University of Connecticut School of Law","value":2180},{"name":"University of Dayton School of Law","value":2182},{"name":"University of Detroit Mercy School of Law","value":2185},{"name":"University of East Anglia","value":3000},{"name":"University of Florida, Levin College of Law","value":3188},{"name":"University of Georgia School of Law","value":2190},{"name":"University of Houston Law Center","value":2197},{"name":"University of Hull","value":3040},{"name":"University of Idaho College of Law","value":2201},{"name":"University of Illinois College of Law","value":2204},{"name":"University of Kansas School of Law","value":2208},{"name":"University of Kentucky College of Law","value":2210},{"name":"University of La Verne College of Law","value":2211},{"name":"University of Law, London","value":2999},{"name":"University of Lethbridge","value":3030},{"name":"University of Louisville Brandeis School of Law","value":2214},{"name":"University of Maine School of Law","value":2391},{"name":"University of Maryland School of Law","value":2224},{"name":"University of Miami School of Law","value":2236},{"name":"University of Michigan Law School","value":2237},{"name":"University of Minnesota Law School","value":2243},{"name":"University of Mississippi School of Law","value":2244},{"name":"University of Missouri School of Law","value":2246},{"name":"University of Montana School of Law","value":2048},{"name":"University of Nebraska College of Law","value":2744},{"name":"University of New Mexico School of Law","value":2262},{"name":"University of North Carolina School of Law","value":2266},{"name":"University of North Dakota School of Law","value":2271},{"name":"University of Oklahoma Law Center","value":2747},{"name":"University of Oregon School of Law","value":2281},{"name":"University of Pennsylvania Law School","value":2282},{"name":"University of Pittsburgh School of Law","value":2354},{"name":"University of Richmond School of Law","value":2370},{"name":"University of San Diego School of Law","value":2377},{"name":"University of San Francisco School of Law","value":2378},{"name":"University of South Carolina School of Law","value":2750},{"name":"University of South Dakota School of Law","value":2387},{"name":"University of Southern California Gould School of Law","value":3051},{"name":"University of St. Thomas School of Law","value":2751},{"name":"University of Sydney Law School","value":3031},{"name":"University of Tennessee College of Law","value":2051},{"name":"University of the West of England, Bristol","value":3001},{"name":"University of Toledo College of Law","value":2406},{"name":"University of Toronto","value":2912},{"name":"University of Utah","value":3026},{"name":"University of Virginia School of Law","value":2410},{"name":"University of Washington School of Law","value":2412},{"name":"University of Wisconsin Law School","value":2419},{"name":"University of Wyoming College of Law","value":2429},{"name":"University of Zürich","value":3037},{"name":"University Paris Dauphine","value":2976},{"name":"University Paris II Assas","value":2975},{"name":"University Paris II Assas","value":3052},{"name":"USC Gould School of Law","value":2389},{"name":"Utrecht University","value":3085},{"name":"Valparaiso University School of Law","value":2441},{"name":"Vanderbilt University School of Law","value":2442},{"name":"Vermont Law School","value":2451},{"name":"Villanova University School of Law","value":2454},{"name":"Wake Forest University School of Law","value":2471},{"name":"Washburn University School of Law","value":2482},{"name":"Washington and Lee University School of Law","value":2484},{"name":"Washington College of Law","value":61},{"name":"Washington University in St. Louis School of Law","value":2489},{"name":"Wayne State University Law School","value":2493},{"name":"West Virginia University College of Law","value":2517},{"name":"Western New England College School of Law","value":2528},{"name":"Western State College of Law","value":2897},{"name":"Wharton School of Business","value":3044},{"name":"Whittier Law School","value":2564},{"name":"Widener University Delaware Law School","value":2569},{"name":"Willamette University College of Law","value":2573},{"name":"William \u0026 Mary Law School","value":462},{"name":"William H. Bowen School of Law","value":2150},{"name":"William Mitchell College of Law","value":2758},{"name":"William S. Boyd School of Law","value":2256},{"name":"William S. Richardson School of Law","value":2195},{"name":"Wilmington University","value":2993},{"name":"Yale Law School","value":2605}],"offices":[{"name":"Abu Dhabi","value":13},{"name":"Atlanta","value":1},{"name":"Austin","value":12},{"name":"Brussels","value":23},{"name":"Charlotte","value":8},{"name":"Chicago","value":21},{"name":"Dallas","value":28},{"name":"Denver","value":22},{"name":"Dubai","value":6},{"name":"Frankfurt","value":9},{"name":"Geneva","value":15},{"name":"Houston","value":4},{"name":"London","value":5},{"name":"Los Angeles","value":19},{"name":"Miami","value":25},{"name":"New York","value":3},{"name":"Northern Virginia","value":24},{"name":"Paris","value":14},{"name":"Riyadh","value":27},{"name":"Sacramento","value":20},{"name":"San Francisco","value":10},{"name":"Silicon Valley","value":11},{"name":"Singapore","value":16},{"name":"Sydney","value":26},{"name":"Tokyo","value":18},{"name":"Washington, D.C.","value":2}],"capabilities":[{"name":"Corporate, Finance and Investments","value":"cg-1"},{"name":null,"value":72},{"name":null,"value":26},{"name":null,"value":40},{"name":null,"value":27},{"name":null,"value":80},{"name":null,"value":28},{"name":null,"value":35},{"name":null,"value":10},{"name":null,"value":134},{"name":null,"value":121},{"name":null,"value":78},{"name":null,"value":29},{"name":null,"value":32},{"name":null,"value":31},{"name":null,"value":33},{"name":null,"value":126},{"name":"Immobilier","value":36},{"name":null,"value":82},{"name":null,"value":37},{"name":null,"value":115},{"name":"Government Matters","value":"cg-2"},{"name":null,"value":1},{"name":null,"value":6},{"name":null,"value":71},{"name":null,"value":21},{"name":null,"value":23},{"name":null,"value":116},{"name":null,"value":24},{"name":null,"value":135},{"name":null,"value":25},{"name":null,"value":110},{"name":null,"value":20},{"name":null,"value":11},{"name":"Trial and Global Disputes","value":"cg-3"},{"name":null,"value":129},{"name":null,"value":2},{"name":null,"value":38},{"name":null,"value":3},{"name":null,"value":5},{"name":null,"value":19},{"name":null,"value":7},{"name":null,"value":4},{"name":null,"value":136},{"name":null,"value":13},{"name":null,"value":14},{"name":null,"value":15},{"name":null,"value":17},{"name":null,"value":18},{"name":null,"value":16},{"name":"Industries / Issues","value":"cg-4"},{"name":null,"value":133},{"name":null,"value":106},{"name":null,"value":124},{"name":null,"value":111},{"name":null,"value":132},{"name":null,"value":131},{"name":null,"value":102},{"name":null,"value":125},{"name":null,"value":127},{"name":null,"value":107},{"name":null,"value":112},{"name":null,"value":105},{"name":null,"value":109},{"name":null,"value":103},{"name":null,"value":128},{"name":null,"value":123},{"name":null,"value":118}]},"title_id":null,"school_id":null,"office_id":null,"capability_id":"3","extra_filter_id":null,"extra_filter_type":null,"q":null,"starts_with":"S","per_page":12,"people":[{"id":426596,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":5009,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eJacqueline Seidel is a New York-based partner in King \u0026amp; Spalding\u0026rsquo;s Trial \u0026amp; Global Disputes practice.\u0026nbsp; Ms. Seidel defends multi-national companies in complex class and mass action litigation pending in both state and federal court. She frequently\u0026nbsp;partners with clients at the outset of a matter to develop\u0026nbsp;and implement all-inclusive\u0026nbsp;exit strategies for large-scale bet-the-company litigation. Often, such strategies include liaising with clients and virtual law firms to plan a long term, systematic exit strategy and/or global resolution, structuring and implementing court-approved comprehensive settlement programs and successfully resolving large groups of cases.\u0026nbsp;She has also successfully managed - as either national coordinating counsel or as strategic counsel - putative class, mass and individual actions alleging false advertising, unfair business practices, unfair and deceptive trade practices, consumer fraud, consumer protection, and a wide range of common law personal injury and property damage claims.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn recognition of her work representing Fortune 500 automotive and pharmaceutical and medical device companies in bet-the-company litigation, she has been named a New York \"Rising Star\" in class action and product liability defense by Super Lawyers.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWhile Ms. Seidel has represented clients in a wide range of industries, including the automobile, safety equipment, pharmaceutical, medical device, consumer goods, insurance, reinsurance and media industries, recently her practice has centered on negotiating and executing resolutions of some of the largest and most complex litigations in the automotive industry.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMs. Seidel represented client, Toyota, in its settlements of the \u0026ldquo;unintended acceleration\u0026rdquo; economic loss class actions that involved the consolidation of nearly 200 class actions and required close coordination of efforts with the client\u0026rsquo;s virtual law firm partners handling various aspects of the litigation and governmental/regulatory investigations.\u0026nbsp; At the time this class action litigation was settled, it represented the largest automotive settlement in US history.\u0026nbsp; Ms. Seidel was also involved in the establishment of a court-ordered \u0026ldquo;intensive settlement process\u0026rdquo; for the related personal injury and wrongful death product liability cases.\u0026nbsp; This settlement process effectively resolved the majority of individual product liability cases in the litigation.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMs. Seidel also assisted in the negotiations and drafted relevant documents for resolving another billion-dollar class action settlement on behalf of Toyota resulting from the Takata airbag recall that implicated multiple automobile manufacturers and she continues to manage and coordinate roll-out of the multi-year settlement relief.\u0026nbsp; This settlement was finally approved\u0026nbsp;in 2017 and set the tone for subsequent similar settlements by several other auto manufacturers.\u0026nbsp; Ms. Seidel has also successfully resolved other class actions including the Sienna sliding door and Prius IPM class action settlements (the latter\u0026nbsp;is awaiting final approval).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRecently, Ms. Seidel was part of the team that successfully resolved hundreds of matters on behalf of an integrated energy company involving product liability allegations related to a certain herbicide.\u0026nbsp; The cases were brought \u0026nbsp;by the litigation\u0026rsquo;s highest-threat plaintiffs\u0026rsquo; counsel and many were pending in one of the most plaintiff-friendly jurisdictions in the country (St Clair County, IL) including a four-case consolidated trial setting that was resolved at the eve of trial.\u0026nbsp; Since the resolution of those cases, thousands of lawsuits have been filed by individuals who were exposed to the product at issue and Ms. Seidel continues\u0026nbsp;to serve as co-strategic counsel in these cases.\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"jacqueline-seidel","email":"jseidel@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":["\u003cp\u003eImplemented a strategy to resolve, on behalf of one of the world\u0026rsquo;s largest pharmaceutical companies, a prescription drug litigation involving medication to treat Parkinson's Disease.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;a medical device manufacturer in one of the largest nationwide product liability litigations. Assisted in the development of a comprehensive resolution strategy that effectively decreased the number of active filed cases from thousands to just over one hundred cases. Negotiated and drafted relevant documents for various firm-specific global settlement agreements and negotiated and mediated individual cases to successful resolution in federal and state court.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eOversees and executes on innovative strategy to resolve individual automobile product liability cases in federal multi district litigation, state consolidated litigation and other state court cases through court-ordered intensive settlement programs.\u003c/p\u003e"],"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[]},"expertise":[{"id":17,"guid":"17.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":106,"guid":"106.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":3,"guid":"3.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":761,"guid":"761.smart_tags","index":3,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":16,"guid":"16.capabilities","index":4,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":5,"guid":"5.capabilities","index":5,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":103,"guid":"103.capabilities","index":6,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":7,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":762,"guid":"762.smart_tags","index":8,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1256,"guid":"1256.smart_tags","index":9,"source":"smartTags"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Seidel","nick_name":"Jacquie","clerkships":[],"first_name":"Jacqueline","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":202,"law_schools":[{"id":2619,"meta":{"degree":"J.D.","honors":null,"is_law_school":1,"graduation_date":"2003-01-01 00:00:00 UTC"},"order":1,"pin_order":null,"pin_expiration":null}],"middle_name":" ","name_suffix":"","recognitions":[{"title":"Recognized as an \"automotive industry expert.\"","detail":"Legal 500 US, 2023"},{"title":"Named a \"Top Attorney Under 40\" - Product Liability","detail":"Law360, 2018"},{"title":"Named a “Rising Star” - Class Action \u0026 Mass Torts","detail":"Super Lawyers, 2015 - 2018"}],"linked_in_url":null,"seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eJacqueline Seidel is a New York-based partner in King \u0026amp; Spalding\u0026rsquo;s Trial \u0026amp; Global Disputes practice.\u0026nbsp; Ms. Seidel defends multi-national companies in complex class and mass action litigation pending in both state and federal court. She frequently\u0026nbsp;partners with clients at the outset of a matter to develop\u0026nbsp;and implement all-inclusive\u0026nbsp;exit strategies for large-scale bet-the-company litigation. Often, such strategies include liaising with clients and virtual law firms to plan a long term, systematic exit strategy and/or global resolution, structuring and implementing court-approved comprehensive settlement programs and successfully resolving large groups of cases.\u0026nbsp;She has also successfully managed - as either national coordinating counsel or as strategic counsel - putative class, mass and individual actions alleging false advertising, unfair business practices, unfair and deceptive trade practices, consumer fraud, consumer protection, and a wide range of common law personal injury and property damage claims.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn recognition of her work representing Fortune 500 automotive and pharmaceutical and medical device companies in bet-the-company litigation, she has been named a New York \"Rising Star\" in class action and product liability defense by Super Lawyers.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWhile Ms. Seidel has represented clients in a wide range of industries, including the automobile, safety equipment, pharmaceutical, medical device, consumer goods, insurance, reinsurance and media industries, recently her practice has centered on negotiating and executing resolutions of some of the largest and most complex litigations in the automotive industry.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMs. Seidel represented client, Toyota, in its settlements of the \u0026ldquo;unintended acceleration\u0026rdquo; economic loss class actions that involved the consolidation of nearly 200 class actions and required close coordination of efforts with the client\u0026rsquo;s virtual law firm partners handling various aspects of the litigation and governmental/regulatory investigations.\u0026nbsp; At the time this class action litigation was settled, it represented the largest automotive settlement in US history.\u0026nbsp; Ms. Seidel was also involved in the establishment of a court-ordered \u0026ldquo;intensive settlement process\u0026rdquo; for the related personal injury and wrongful death product liability cases.\u0026nbsp; This settlement process effectively resolved the majority of individual product liability cases in the litigation.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMs. Seidel also assisted in the negotiations and drafted relevant documents for resolving another billion-dollar class action settlement on behalf of Toyota resulting from the Takata airbag recall that implicated multiple automobile manufacturers and she continues to manage and coordinate roll-out of the multi-year settlement relief.\u0026nbsp; This settlement was finally approved\u0026nbsp;in 2017 and set the tone for subsequent similar settlements by several other auto manufacturers.\u0026nbsp; Ms. Seidel has also successfully resolved other class actions including the Sienna sliding door and Prius IPM class action settlements (the latter\u0026nbsp;is awaiting final approval).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRecently, Ms. Seidel was part of the team that successfully resolved hundreds of matters on behalf of an integrated energy company involving product liability allegations related to a certain herbicide.\u0026nbsp; The cases were brought \u0026nbsp;by the litigation\u0026rsquo;s highest-threat plaintiffs\u0026rsquo; counsel and many were pending in one of the most plaintiff-friendly jurisdictions in the country (St Clair County, IL) including a four-case consolidated trial setting that was resolved at the eve of trial.\u0026nbsp; Since the resolution of those cases, thousands of lawsuits have been filed by individuals who were exposed to the product at issue and Ms. Seidel continues\u0026nbsp;to serve as co-strategic counsel in these cases.\u003c/p\u003e","matters":["\u003cp\u003eImplemented a strategy to resolve, on behalf of one of the world\u0026rsquo;s largest pharmaceutical companies, a prescription drug litigation involving medication to treat Parkinson's Disease.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;a medical device manufacturer in one of the largest nationwide product liability litigations. Assisted in the development of a comprehensive resolution strategy that effectively decreased the number of active filed cases from thousands to just over one hundred cases. Negotiated and drafted relevant documents for various firm-specific global settlement agreements and negotiated and mediated individual cases to successful resolution in federal and state court.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eOversees and executes on innovative strategy to resolve individual automobile product liability cases in federal multi district litigation, state consolidated litigation and other state court cases through court-ordered intensive settlement programs.\u003c/p\u003e"],"recognitions":[{"title":"Recognized as an \"automotive industry expert.\"","detail":"Legal 500 US, 2023"},{"title":"Named a \"Top Attorney Under 40\" - Product Liability","detail":"Law360, 2018"},{"title":"Named a “Rising Star” - Class Action \u0026 Mass Torts","detail":"Super Lawyers, 2015 - 2018"}]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":5142}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2025-05-26T04:55:06.000Z","updated_at":"2025-05-26T04:55:06.000Z","searchable_text":"Seidel{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Recognized as an \\\"automotive industry expert.\\\"\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500 US, 2023\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named a \\\"Top Attorney Under 40\\\" - Product Liability\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Law360, 2018\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named a “Rising Star” - Class Action \u0026amp; Mass Torts\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Super Lawyers, 2015 - 2018\"}{{ FIELD }}Implemented a strategy to resolve, on behalf of one of the world’s largest pharmaceutical companies, a prescription drug litigation involving medication to treat Parkinson's Disease.{{ FIELD }}Represented a medical device manufacturer in one of the largest nationwide product liability litigations. Assisted in the development of a comprehensive resolution strategy that effectively decreased the number of active filed cases from thousands to just over one hundred cases. Negotiated and drafted relevant documents for various firm-specific global settlement agreements and negotiated and mediated individual cases to successful resolution in federal and state court.{{ FIELD }}Oversees and executes on innovative strategy to resolve individual automobile product liability cases in federal multi district litigation, state consolidated litigation and other state court cases through court-ordered intensive settlement programs.{{ FIELD }}Jacqueline Seidel is a New York-based partner in King \u0026amp; Spalding’s Trial \u0026amp; Global Disputes practice.  Ms. Seidel defends multi-national companies in complex class and mass action litigation pending in both state and federal court. She frequently partners with clients at the outset of a matter to develop and implement all-inclusive exit strategies for large-scale bet-the-company litigation. Often, such strategies include liaising with clients and virtual law firms to plan a long term, systematic exit strategy and/or global resolution, structuring and implementing court-approved comprehensive settlement programs and successfully resolving large groups of cases. She has also successfully managed - as either national coordinating counsel or as strategic counsel - putative class, mass and individual actions alleging false advertising, unfair business practices, unfair and deceptive trade practices, consumer fraud, consumer protection, and a wide range of common law personal injury and property damage claims.\nIn recognition of her work representing Fortune 500 automotive and pharmaceutical and medical device companies in bet-the-company litigation, she has been named a New York \"Rising Star\" in class action and product liability defense by Super Lawyers.\nWhile Ms. Seidel has represented clients in a wide range of industries, including the automobile, safety equipment, pharmaceutical, medical device, consumer goods, insurance, reinsurance and media industries, recently her practice has centered on negotiating and executing resolutions of some of the largest and most complex litigations in the automotive industry. \nMs. Seidel represented client, Toyota, in its settlements of the “unintended acceleration” economic loss class actions that involved the consolidation of nearly 200 class actions and required close coordination of efforts with the client’s virtual law firm partners handling various aspects of the litigation and governmental/regulatory investigations.  At the time this class action litigation was settled, it represented the largest automotive settlement in US history.  Ms. Seidel was also involved in the establishment of a court-ordered “intensive settlement process” for the related personal injury and wrongful death product liability cases.  This settlement process effectively resolved the majority of individual product liability cases in the litigation. \nMs. Seidel also assisted in the negotiations and drafted relevant documents for resolving another billion-dollar class action settlement on behalf of Toyota resulting from the Takata airbag recall that implicated multiple automobile manufacturers and she continues to manage and coordinate roll-out of the multi-year settlement relief.  This settlement was finally approved in 2017 and set the tone for subsequent similar settlements by several other auto manufacturers.  Ms. Seidel has also successfully resolved other class actions including the Sienna sliding door and Prius IPM class action settlements (the latter is awaiting final approval).\nRecently, Ms. Seidel was part of the team that successfully resolved hundreds of matters on behalf of an integrated energy company involving product liability allegations related to a certain herbicide.  The cases were brought  by the litigation’s highest-threat plaintiffs’ counsel and many were pending in one of the most plaintiff-friendly jurisdictions in the country (St Clair County, IL) including a four-case consolidated trial setting that was resolved at the eve of trial.  Since the resolution of those cases, thousands of lawsuits have been filed by individuals who were exposed to the product at issue and Ms. Seidel continues to serve as co-strategic counsel in these cases. Partner Recognized as an \"automotive industry expert.\" Legal 500 US, 2023 Named a \"Top Attorney Under 40\" - Product Liability Law360, 2018 Named a “Rising Star” - Class Action \u0026amp; Mass Torts Super Lawyers, 2015 - 2018 Columbia University Columbia University School of Law Yeshiva University Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York Implemented a strategy to resolve, on behalf of one of the world’s largest pharmaceutical companies, a prescription drug litigation involving medication to treat Parkinson's Disease. Represented a medical device manufacturer in one of the largest nationwide product liability litigations. Assisted in the development of a comprehensive resolution strategy that effectively decreased the number of active filed cases from thousands to just over one hundred cases. Negotiated and drafted relevant documents for various firm-specific global settlement agreements and negotiated and mediated individual cases to successful resolution in federal and state court. Oversees and executes on innovative strategy to resolve individual automobile product liability cases in federal multi district litigation, state consolidated litigation and other state court cases through court-ordered intensive settlement programs.","searchable_name":"Jacqueline Seidel (Jacquie)","is_active":true,"featured":null,"publish_date":null,"expiration_date":null,"blog_featured":null,"published_by":202,"capability_group_featured":null,"home_page_featured":null},{"id":442418,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":1470,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eDarren focuses his practice on the defense of\u0026nbsp;high-stakes\u0026nbsp;ERISA litigation matters.\u0026nbsp; He defends leading companies\u0026nbsp;in a variety of ERISA class actions involving retirement\u0026nbsp;plan investments, breach of fiduciary duty claims, and other complex employee benefits disputes.\u0026nbsp;Darren also counsels clients in connection with governmental investigations involving employee benefit plans and assists clients with disputes and investigations involving executive compensation arrangements.\u0026nbsp; Darren has been recognized\u0026nbsp;as a Next Generation Lawyer by\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eThe Legal 500\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;for ERISA Litigation in each of the last five years.\u0026nbsp;[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDarren's representative clients include The Coca-Cola Company, The Home Depot, Bank of America, SunTrust Banks, Waste Management, and Aon Corporation.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHe graduated, \u003cem\u003emagna cum laude\u003c/em\u003e, from The University of Tennessee College of Law, where he was elected to the Order of the Coif.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"darren-shuler","email":"dshuler@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":null,"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[]},"expertise":[{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":502,"guid":"502.smart_tags","index":1,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":3,"guid":"3.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":5,"guid":"5.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":121,"guid":"121.capabilities","index":4,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":15,"guid":"15.capabilities","index":5,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":107,"guid":"107.capabilities","index":6,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":19,"guid":"19.capabilities","index":7,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":103,"guid":"103.capabilities","index":8,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":102,"guid":"102.capabilities","index":9,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":24,"guid":"24.capabilities","index":10,"source":"capabilities"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Shuler","nick_name":"Darren","clerkships":[],"first_name":"Darren","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":35,"law_schools":[],"middle_name":"A.","name_suffix":"","recognitions":[{"title":"Named a Next Generation Lawyer for ERISA Litigation","detail":"Legal 500 US, 2020, 2021, 2022, and 2023"}],"linked_in_url":null,"seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eDarren focuses his practice on the defense of\u0026nbsp;high-stakes\u0026nbsp;ERISA litigation matters.\u0026nbsp; He defends leading companies\u0026nbsp;in a variety of ERISA class actions involving retirement\u0026nbsp;plan investments, breach of fiduciary duty claims, and other complex employee benefits disputes.\u0026nbsp;Darren also counsels clients in connection with governmental investigations involving employee benefit plans and assists clients with disputes and investigations involving executive compensation arrangements.\u0026nbsp; Darren has been recognized\u0026nbsp;as a Next Generation Lawyer by\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eThe Legal 500\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;for ERISA Litigation in each of the last five years.\u0026nbsp;[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDarren's representative clients include The Coca-Cola Company, The Home Depot, Bank of America, SunTrust Banks, Waste Management, and Aon Corporation.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHe graduated, \u003cem\u003emagna cum laude\u003c/em\u003e, from The University of Tennessee College of Law, where he was elected to the Order of the Coif.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e","recognitions":[{"title":"Named a Next Generation Lawyer for ERISA Litigation","detail":"Legal 500 US, 2020, 2021, 2022, and 2023"}]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":11829}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2025-11-05T05:04:54.000Z","updated_at":"2025-11-05T05:04:54.000Z","searchable_text":"Shuler{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named a Next Generation Lawyer for ERISA Litigation\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500 US, 2020, 2021, 2022, and 2023\"}{{ FIELD }}Darren focuses his practice on the defense of high-stakes ERISA litigation matters.  He defends leading companies in a variety of ERISA class actions involving retirement plan investments, breach of fiduciary duty claims, and other complex employee benefits disputes. Darren also counsels clients in connection with governmental investigations involving employee benefit plans and assists clients with disputes and investigations involving executive compensation arrangements.  Darren has been recognized as a Next Generation Lawyer by The Legal 500 for ERISA Litigation in each of the last five years. \nDarren's representative clients include The Coca-Cola Company, The Home Depot, Bank of America, SunTrust Banks, Waste Management, and Aon Corporation. \nHe graduated, magna cum laude, from The University of Tennessee College of Law, where he was elected to the Order of the Coif.  Partner Named a Next Generation Lawyer for ERISA Litigation Legal 500 US, 2020, 2021, 2022, and 2023 Maryville College  The University of Tennessee University of Tennessee College of Law University of Georgia University of Georgia School of Law Florida Georgia State Bar of Georgia State Bar of Florida","searchable_name":"Darren A. Shuler","is_active":true,"featured":null,"publish_date":null,"expiration_date":null,"blog_featured":null,"published_by":35,"capability_group_featured":null,"home_page_featured":null},{"id":427550,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":633,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eLarry Slovensky represents companies and individuals in complex business tort and breach of contract litigation, corporate governance disputes, and legal malpractice/law firm defense matters in Georgia and across the country. He has substantial experience in trying cases before judges and\u0026nbsp;juries, and he has represented clients in business litigation matters for more than 30 years.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eLarry's clients range\u0026nbsp;in size from\u0026nbsp;large publicly traded corporations, to smaller privately-held funds and portfolio companies, to individuals.\u0026nbsp; He has represented clients\u0026nbsp;in a variety of industries, including banking and financial services, construction,\u0026nbsp;consumer retail sales, healthcare, real estate, technology, and telecommunications. Larry has successfully handled corporate governance disputes between\u0026nbsp;LLC members,\u0026nbsp;post-acquisition purchase price adjustment proceedings, and independent board investigations.\u0026nbsp; In addition, he handles a wide range of other business tort, breach of contract, class action and legal malpractice lawsuits in state and federal court.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eLarry spent five years earlier in his career as in-house counsel with a national Internet service provider, where he managed all of the company\u0026rsquo;s litigation, including consumer class actions, patent infringement litigation, intellectual property disputes, anti-spam litigation, consumer disputes and general commercial litigation. He also served as ethics and loss prevention counsel for his prior law firm.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eLarry is the author of a chapter on Business Torts in the annually updated\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eGeorgia Business Litigation\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;treatise.\u0026nbsp; He represents veterans on a pro bono basis through the Emory Law Volunteer Clinic for Veterans and the National Veterans Legal Services Program, and he oversees the firm's veterans pro bono efforts.\u0026nbsp; Larry also actively supports civic and charitable organizations in Atlanta.\u0026nbsp; He is Vice Chair of the board of directors of the Georgia Justice Project and manages our firm's participation in the Cristo Rey High School internship program.\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"lawrence-slovensky","email":"lslovensky@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":["\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eBusiness Litigation and Corporate Governance Disputes\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented a portfolio company of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eOaktree Capital\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in connection with federal litigation filed against the City of Austin, Texas in W.D. Tex. relating to municipal efforts to use condemnation powers to terminate the company\u0026rsquo;s long-term contract for operation of the South Terminal at the Austin-Bergstrom International Airport and related state proceedings ultimately resulting in a $88 million settlement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented multi-family real estate company\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eResia\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003ein asserting multi-million dollar tortious interference and breach of contract claims in the Superior of Fulton County, Georgia\u0026rsquo;s Business Court arising from a failed commercial real estate purchase transaction.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented an affiliate of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eTruist Bank\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in asserting multi-million dollar tort and contract-based claims in M.D. Fla. arising out of an equipment sale and lease-back transaction involving mobile solar generators.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eGlobal Payments Direct, Inc.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a successful appeal to the Georgia Court of Appeals overturning a $135 million jury verdict rendered in the Superior Court of DeKalb County, Georgia.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon declaratory judgment and an attorney's fee award for\u0026nbsp;a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ecommercial real estate private equity fund\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a Delaware Chancery Court expedited proceeding in an intra-LLC dispute over management of a major hotel and convention center renovation.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon final summary judgment for private equity infrastructure fund\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;Highstar Capital IV, LP\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eand its officers in a long-running lawsuit in the Superior Court of Fulton County\u0026rsquo;s Business Court in which the plaintiff sought a multi-million dollar punitive damages award arising from the fund's $470 million acquisition of a portfolio company.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon a jury trial in the Superior Court of Fulton County on behalf of a portfolio company of a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eprivate equity fund\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;sued by a developer over a property line dispute in connection with the acquisition of a multimillion-dollar student housing development; affirmed on appeal by the Georgia Court of Appeals.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon a bench trial in a case filed by\u0026nbsp;a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eGeorgia municipality\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in litigation relating to a long-term $40 million water supply agreement; obtained an order affirming the validity of the underlying agreement, affirmance by the Georgia Court of Appeals, and denial of petition for\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003ecertiorari\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;by the Georgia Supreme Court.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eObtained a multimillion-dollar award for\u0026nbsp;a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003epublicly traded corporation\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a purchase price escrow dispute with former shareholders of an acquired telecommunications company.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eSunTrust Bank\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eand an individual broker in defense of a $100 million claim before a Financial Industry Regulatory Authority arbitration panel arising from sale of preferred securities to state chartered banks.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003ePrepared an independent counsel report for\u0026nbsp;a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003especial litigation committee\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;of a corporate board\u0026nbsp;on responding to shareholder demands for institution of breach of fiduciary duty litigation against directors relating to prior corporate acquisitions.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eConducted an independent investigation for\u0026nbsp;the\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eboard of a publicly traded pharmaceutical corporation\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in response to demands from two board members for review of prior corporate transactions; issued a substantial report to the board, which was unanimously accepted by the board, including by the dissenting board members.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003esoftware purchaser\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in litigation against a software development company in the Superior Court of DeKalb County and obtained a jury verdict awarding all damages sought.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eLegal Malpractice and Professional Liability Defense\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWon final summary judgment for\u0026nbsp;an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eAM Law 100 law firm\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a N.D. Ga. lawsuit brought by a receiver alleging malpractice arising from a Georgia regional bank failure.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eAM Law 100 law firm\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;and an individually-named lawyer\u0026nbsp;in defense of RICO and business tort claims in E.D. Pa. asserted against the law firm by a third party relating to a client's activities and obtained dismissal with prejudice of all claims.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eAM 100 law firm\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in breach of fiduciary duty and malpractice litigation in the Superior Court of DeKalb County, Georgia arising from the firm\u0026rsquo;s prior representation of a closely-held corporation.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003enational law firm and individually named lawyers\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in defense of legal malpractice claims asserted by receiver on behalf of creditors of former regional bank client.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eregional law firm\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in connection with favorable resolution of legal malpractice claims asserted by a bankruptcy trustee on behalf of the estate of the firm\u0026rsquo;s former real estate developer client.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;an\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;Atlanta-based law firm\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003ein connection with favorable resolution of contribution and malpractice claims arising from damages awarded against a former client for fraud in a prior lawsuit.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eindividual Georgia lawyers\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in fee arbitration matters and responses to bar grievances before the State Bar of Georgia.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eClass Action Litigation\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003enational court reporting company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in defense of multiple statewide consumer class actions relating to billing practices, resulting in two orders denying class certification under California and Florida consumer protection statutes and voluntary dismissals of all related cases. See\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eIn Re: Motions to Certify Classes Against Court Reporting Firms\u003c/em\u003e, 715 F. Supp. 2d 1265 (S.D. Fla. 2010) (aff\u0026rsquo;d by 11th Cir.);\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eColapinto v. Esquire Deposition Services, LLC\u003c/em\u003e, 2011 WL 913251 (C.D. Cal. 2011).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003etelecommunications company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in defense of a class action lawsuit under California\u0026rsquo;s call-recording statue and obtained less-than-cost-of-defense settlement.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003enational Internet service provider\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in defense of consumer class action relating to billing practices and related false advertising claims; obtained order compelling arbitration and subsequent favorable settlement and dismissal of claims.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003enational Internet service provider\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in defense of nationwide class action relating to early termination fees; obtained order dismissing damages claims based on voluntary payment doctrine.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ehealthcare insurance company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in defense of multiple consumer and public interest class actions challenging company\u0026rsquo;s conversion from nonprofit to for-profit status.\u003c/p\u003e"],"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[{"id":178}]},"expertise":[{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":18,"guid":"18.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":33,"guid":"33.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":5,"guid":"5.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":19,"guid":"19.capabilities","index":4,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":1248,"guid":"1248.smart_tags","index":5,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":762,"guid":"762.smart_tags","index":6,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1231,"guid":"1231.smart_tags","index":7,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":3,"guid":"3.capabilities","index":8,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":107,"guid":"107.capabilities","index":9,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":102,"guid":"102.capabilities","index":10,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":106,"guid":"106.capabilities","index":11,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":1270,"guid":"1270.smart_tags","index":12,"source":"smartTags"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Slovensky","nick_name":"Larry","clerkships":[],"first_name":"Lawrence","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":35,"law_schools":[],"middle_name":"A.","name_suffix":"","recognitions":[{"title":"Author of “Georgia Business Torts” chapter in Georgia Business Litigation 2024 treatise","detail":"ALM/Law.com"},{"title":"2023 Georgia Best Lawyer’s list for Legal Malpractice Law","detail":"Georgia's Best Lawyers"},{"title":"Peer Rated AV® Preeminent™","detail":"Martindale-Hubbell"},{"title":"2015 Burton Award for Distinguished Legal Writing","detail":"\"Interlocutory Appeal of Class Certification Decisions Under Rule 23(f)”"}],"linked_in_url":"https://www.linkedin.com/in/larryslovensky/","seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eLarry Slovensky represents companies and individuals in complex business tort and breach of contract litigation, corporate governance disputes, and legal malpractice/law firm defense matters in Georgia and across the country. He has substantial experience in trying cases before judges and\u0026nbsp;juries, and he has represented clients in business litigation matters for more than 30 years.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eLarry's clients range\u0026nbsp;in size from\u0026nbsp;large publicly traded corporations, to smaller privately-held funds and portfolio companies, to individuals.\u0026nbsp; He has represented clients\u0026nbsp;in a variety of industries, including banking and financial services, construction,\u0026nbsp;consumer retail sales, healthcare, real estate, technology, and telecommunications. Larry has successfully handled corporate governance disputes between\u0026nbsp;LLC members,\u0026nbsp;post-acquisition purchase price adjustment proceedings, and independent board investigations.\u0026nbsp; In addition, he handles a wide range of other business tort, breach of contract, class action and legal malpractice lawsuits in state and federal court.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eLarry spent five years earlier in his career as in-house counsel with a national Internet service provider, where he managed all of the company\u0026rsquo;s litigation, including consumer class actions, patent infringement litigation, intellectual property disputes, anti-spam litigation, consumer disputes and general commercial litigation. He also served as ethics and loss prevention counsel for his prior law firm.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eLarry is the author of a chapter on Business Torts in the annually updated\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eGeorgia Business Litigation\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;treatise.\u0026nbsp; He represents veterans on a pro bono basis through the Emory Law Volunteer Clinic for Veterans and the National Veterans Legal Services Program, and he oversees the firm's veterans pro bono efforts.\u0026nbsp; Larry also actively supports civic and charitable organizations in Atlanta.\u0026nbsp; He is Vice Chair of the board of directors of the Georgia Justice Project and manages our firm's participation in the Cristo Rey High School internship program.\u003c/p\u003e","matters":["\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eBusiness Litigation and Corporate Governance Disputes\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented a portfolio company of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eOaktree Capital\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in connection with federal litigation filed against the City of Austin, Texas in W.D. Tex. relating to municipal efforts to use condemnation powers to terminate the company\u0026rsquo;s long-term contract for operation of the South Terminal at the Austin-Bergstrom International Airport and related state proceedings ultimately resulting in a $88 million settlement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented multi-family real estate company\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eResia\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003ein asserting multi-million dollar tortious interference and breach of contract claims in the Superior of Fulton County, Georgia\u0026rsquo;s Business Court arising from a failed commercial real estate purchase transaction.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented an affiliate of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eTruist Bank\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in asserting multi-million dollar tort and contract-based claims in M.D. Fla. arising out of an equipment sale and lease-back transaction involving mobile solar generators.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eGlobal Payments Direct, Inc.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a successful appeal to the Georgia Court of Appeals overturning a $135 million jury verdict rendered in the Superior Court of DeKalb County, Georgia.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon declaratory judgment and an attorney's fee award for\u0026nbsp;a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ecommercial real estate private equity fund\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a Delaware Chancery Court expedited proceeding in an intra-LLC dispute over management of a major hotel and convention center renovation.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon final summary judgment for private equity infrastructure fund\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;Highstar Capital IV, LP\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eand its officers in a long-running lawsuit in the Superior Court of Fulton County\u0026rsquo;s Business Court in which the plaintiff sought a multi-million dollar punitive damages award arising from the fund's $470 million acquisition of a portfolio company.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon a jury trial in the Superior Court of Fulton County on behalf of a portfolio company of a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eprivate equity fund\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;sued by a developer over a property line dispute in connection with the acquisition of a multimillion-dollar student housing development; affirmed on appeal by the Georgia Court of Appeals.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon a bench trial in a case filed by\u0026nbsp;a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eGeorgia municipality\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in litigation relating to a long-term $40 million water supply agreement; obtained an order affirming the validity of the underlying agreement, affirmance by the Georgia Court of Appeals, and denial of petition for\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003ecertiorari\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;by the Georgia Supreme Court.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eObtained a multimillion-dollar award for\u0026nbsp;a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003epublicly traded corporation\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a purchase price escrow dispute with former shareholders of an acquired telecommunications company.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eSunTrust Bank\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eand an individual broker in defense of a $100 million claim before a Financial Industry Regulatory Authority arbitration panel arising from sale of preferred securities to state chartered banks.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003ePrepared an independent counsel report for\u0026nbsp;a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003especial litigation committee\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;of a corporate board\u0026nbsp;on responding to shareholder demands for institution of breach of fiduciary duty litigation against directors relating to prior corporate acquisitions.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eConducted an independent investigation for\u0026nbsp;the\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eboard of a publicly traded pharmaceutical corporation\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in response to demands from two board members for review of prior corporate transactions; issued a substantial report to the board, which was unanimously accepted by the board, including by the dissenting board members.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003esoftware purchaser\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in litigation against a software development company in the Superior Court of DeKalb County and obtained a jury verdict awarding all damages sought.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eLegal Malpractice and Professional Liability Defense\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWon final summary judgment for\u0026nbsp;an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eAM Law 100 law firm\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a N.D. Ga. lawsuit brought by a receiver alleging malpractice arising from a Georgia regional bank failure.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eAM Law 100 law firm\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;and an individually-named lawyer\u0026nbsp;in defense of RICO and business tort claims in E.D. Pa. asserted against the law firm by a third party relating to a client's activities and obtained dismissal with prejudice of all claims.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eAM 100 law firm\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in breach of fiduciary duty and malpractice litigation in the Superior Court of DeKalb County, Georgia arising from the firm\u0026rsquo;s prior representation of a closely-held corporation.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003enational law firm and individually named lawyers\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in defense of legal malpractice claims asserted by receiver on behalf of creditors of former regional bank client.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eregional law firm\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in connection with favorable resolution of legal malpractice claims asserted by a bankruptcy trustee on behalf of the estate of the firm\u0026rsquo;s former real estate developer client.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;an\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;Atlanta-based law firm\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003ein connection with favorable resolution of contribution and malpractice claims arising from damages awarded against a former client for fraud in a prior lawsuit.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eindividual Georgia lawyers\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in fee arbitration matters and responses to bar grievances before the State Bar of Georgia.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eClass Action Litigation\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003enational court reporting company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in defense of multiple statewide consumer class actions relating to billing practices, resulting in two orders denying class certification under California and Florida consumer protection statutes and voluntary dismissals of all related cases. See\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eIn Re: Motions to Certify Classes Against Court Reporting Firms\u003c/em\u003e, 715 F. Supp. 2d 1265 (S.D. Fla. 2010) (aff\u0026rsquo;d by 11th Cir.);\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eColapinto v. Esquire Deposition Services, LLC\u003c/em\u003e, 2011 WL 913251 (C.D. Cal. 2011).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003etelecommunications company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in defense of a class action lawsuit under California\u0026rsquo;s call-recording statue and obtained less-than-cost-of-defense settlement.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003enational Internet service provider\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in defense of consumer class action relating to billing practices and related false advertising claims; obtained order compelling arbitration and subsequent favorable settlement and dismissal of claims.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003enational Internet service provider\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in defense of nationwide class action relating to early termination fees; obtained order dismissing damages claims based on voluntary payment doctrine.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ehealthcare insurance company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in defense of multiple consumer and public interest class actions challenging company\u0026rsquo;s conversion from nonprofit to for-profit status.\u003c/p\u003e"],"recognitions":[{"title":"Author of “Georgia Business Torts” chapter in Georgia Business Litigation 2024 treatise","detail":"ALM/Law.com"},{"title":"2023 Georgia Best Lawyer’s list for Legal Malpractice Law","detail":"Georgia's Best Lawyers"},{"title":"Peer Rated AV® Preeminent™","detail":"Martindale-Hubbell"},{"title":"2015 Burton Award for Distinguished Legal Writing","detail":"\"Interlocutory Appeal of Class Certification Decisions Under Rule 23(f)”"}]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":10517}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2025-05-26T05:02:00.000Z","updated_at":"2025-05-26T05:02:00.000Z","searchable_text":"Slovensky{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Author of “Georgia Business Torts” chapter in Georgia Business Litigation 2024 treatise\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"ALM/Law.com\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"2023 Georgia Best Lawyer’s list for Legal Malpractice Law\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Georgia's Best Lawyers\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Peer Rated AV® Preeminent™\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Martindale-Hubbell\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"2015 Burton Award for Distinguished Legal Writing\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"\\\"Interlocutory Appeal of Class Certification Decisions Under Rule 23(f)”\"}{{ FIELD }}Business Litigation and Corporate Governance Disputes\nRepresented a portfolio company of Oaktree Capital in connection with federal litigation filed against the City of Austin, Texas in W.D. Tex. relating to municipal efforts to use condemnation powers to terminate the company’s long-term contract for operation of the South Terminal at the Austin-Bergstrom International Airport and related state proceedings ultimately resulting in a $88 million settlement.{{ FIELD }}Successfully represented multi-family real estate company Resia in asserting multi-million dollar tortious interference and breach of contract claims in the Superior of Fulton County, Georgia’s Business Court arising from a failed commercial real estate purchase transaction.{{ FIELD }}Successfully represented an affiliate of Truist Bank in asserting multi-million dollar tort and contract-based claims in M.D. Fla. arising out of an equipment sale and lease-back transaction involving mobile solar generators.{{ FIELD }}Represented Global Payments Direct, Inc. in a successful appeal to the Georgia Court of Appeals overturning a $135 million jury verdict rendered in the Superior Court of DeKalb County, Georgia.{{ FIELD }}Won declaratory judgment and an attorney's fee award for a commercial real estate private equity fund in a Delaware Chancery Court expedited proceeding in an intra-LLC dispute over management of a major hotel and convention center renovation.{{ FIELD }}Won final summary judgment for private equity infrastructure fund Highstar Capital IV, LP and its officers in a long-running lawsuit in the Superior Court of Fulton County’s Business Court in which the plaintiff sought a multi-million dollar punitive damages award arising from the fund's $470 million acquisition of a portfolio company.{{ FIELD }}Won a jury trial in the Superior Court of Fulton County on behalf of a portfolio company of a private equity fund sued by a developer over a property line dispute in connection with the acquisition of a multimillion-dollar student housing development; affirmed on appeal by the Georgia Court of Appeals.{{ FIELD }}Won a bench trial in a case filed by a Georgia municipality in litigation relating to a long-term $40 million water supply agreement; obtained an order affirming the validity of the underlying agreement, affirmance by the Georgia Court of Appeals, and denial of petition for certiorari by the Georgia Supreme Court.{{ FIELD }}Obtained a multimillion-dollar award for a publicly traded corporation in a purchase price escrow dispute with former shareholders of an acquired telecommunications company.{{ FIELD }}Represented SunTrust Bank and an individual broker in defense of a $100 million claim before a Financial Industry Regulatory Authority arbitration panel arising from sale of preferred securities to state chartered banks.{{ FIELD }}Prepared an independent counsel report for a special litigation committee of a corporate board on responding to shareholder demands for institution of breach of fiduciary duty litigation against directors relating to prior corporate acquisitions.{{ FIELD }}Conducted an independent investigation for the board of a publicly traded pharmaceutical corporation in response to demands from two board members for review of prior corporate transactions; issued a substantial report to the board, which was unanimously accepted by the board, including by the dissenting board members.{{ FIELD }}Represented a software purchaser in litigation against a software development company in the Superior Court of DeKalb County and obtained a jury verdict awarding all damages sought.{{ FIELD }}Legal Malpractice and Professional Liability Defense\nWon final summary judgment for an AM Law 100 law firm in a N.D. Ga. lawsuit brought by a receiver alleging malpractice arising from a Georgia regional bank failure.\nRepresented an AM Law 100 law firm and an individually-named lawyer in defense of RICO and business tort claims in E.D. Pa. asserted against the law firm by a third party relating to a client's activities and obtained dismissal with prejudice of all claims.\nRepresented an AM 100 law firm in breach of fiduciary duty and malpractice litigation in the Superior Court of DeKalb County, Georgia arising from the firm’s prior representation of a closely-held corporation.\nRepresented a national law firm and individually named lawyers in defense of legal malpractice claims asserted by receiver on behalf of creditors of former regional bank client.\nRepresented a regional law firm in connection with favorable resolution of legal malpractice claims asserted by a bankruptcy trustee on behalf of the estate of the firm’s former real estate developer client.\nRepresented an Atlanta-based law firm in connection with favorable resolution of contribution and malpractice claims arising from damages awarded against a former client for fraud in a prior lawsuit.\nRepresented individual Georgia lawyers in fee arbitration matters and responses to bar grievances before the State Bar of Georgia.{{ FIELD }}Class Action Litigation\nRepresented a national court reporting company in defense of multiple statewide consumer class actions relating to billing practices, resulting in two orders denying class certification under California and Florida consumer protection statutes and voluntary dismissals of all related cases. See In Re: Motions to Certify Classes Against Court Reporting Firms, 715 F. Supp. 2d 1265 (S.D. Fla. 2010) (aff’d by 11th Cir.); Colapinto v. Esquire Deposition Services, LLC, 2011 WL 913251 (C.D. Cal. 2011).\nRepresented a telecommunications company in defense of a class action lawsuit under California’s call-recording statue and obtained less-than-cost-of-defense settlement.\nRepresented a national Internet service provider in defense of consumer class action relating to billing practices and related false advertising claims; obtained order compelling arbitration and subsequent favorable settlement and dismissal of claims.\nRepresented a national Internet service provider in defense of nationwide class action relating to early termination fees; obtained order dismissing damages claims based on voluntary payment doctrine.\nRepresented a healthcare insurance company in defense of multiple consumer and public interest class actions challenging company’s conversion from nonprofit to for-profit status.{{ FIELD }}Larry Slovensky represents companies and individuals in complex business tort and breach of contract litigation, corporate governance disputes, and legal malpractice/law firm defense matters in Georgia and across the country. He has substantial experience in trying cases before judges and juries, and he has represented clients in business litigation matters for more than 30 years.\nLarry's clients range in size from large publicly traded corporations, to smaller privately-held funds and portfolio companies, to individuals.  He has represented clients in a variety of industries, including banking and financial services, construction, consumer retail sales, healthcare, real estate, technology, and telecommunications. Larry has successfully handled corporate governance disputes between LLC members, post-acquisition purchase price adjustment proceedings, and independent board investigations.  In addition, he handles a wide range of other business tort, breach of contract, class action and legal malpractice lawsuits in state and federal court.\nLarry spent five years earlier in his career as in-house counsel with a national Internet service provider, where he managed all of the company’s litigation, including consumer class actions, patent infringement litigation, intellectual property disputes, anti-spam litigation, consumer disputes and general commercial litigation. He also served as ethics and loss prevention counsel for his prior law firm.\nLarry is the author of a chapter on Business Torts in the annually updated Georgia Business Litigation treatise.  He represents veterans on a pro bono basis through the Emory Law Volunteer Clinic for Veterans and the National Veterans Legal Services Program, and he oversees the firm's veterans pro bono efforts.  Larry also actively supports civic and charitable organizations in Atlanta.  He is Vice Chair of the board of directors of the Georgia Justice Project and manages our firm's participation in the Cristo Rey High School internship program. Lawrence A. Slovensky Partner Author of “Georgia Business Torts” chapter in Georgia Business Litigation 2024 treatise ALM/Law.com 2023 Georgia Best Lawyer’s list for Legal Malpractice Law Georgia's Best Lawyers Peer Rated AV® Preeminent™ Martindale-Hubbell 2015 Burton Award for Distinguished Legal Writing \"Interlocutory Appeal of Class Certification Decisions Under Rule 23(f)” University of South Carolina  University of Chicago University of Chicago Law School U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Georgia U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia Georgia Court of Appeals of Georgia Supreme Court of Georgia Business Litigation and Corporate Governance Disputes\nRepresented a portfolio company of Oaktree Capital in connection with federal litigation filed against the City of Austin, Texas in W.D. Tex. relating to municipal efforts to use condemnation powers to terminate the company’s long-term contract for operation of the South Terminal at the Austin-Bergstrom International Airport and related state proceedings ultimately resulting in a $88 million settlement. Successfully represented multi-family real estate company Resia in asserting multi-million dollar tortious interference and breach of contract claims in the Superior of Fulton County, Georgia’s Business Court arising from a failed commercial real estate purchase transaction. Successfully represented an affiliate of Truist Bank in asserting multi-million dollar tort and contract-based claims in M.D. Fla. arising out of an equipment sale and lease-back transaction involving mobile solar generators. Represented Global Payments Direct, Inc. in a successful appeal to the Georgia Court of Appeals overturning a $135 million jury verdict rendered in the Superior Court of DeKalb County, Georgia. Won declaratory judgment and an attorney's fee award for a commercial real estate private equity fund in a Delaware Chancery Court expedited proceeding in an intra-LLC dispute over management of a major hotel and convention center renovation. Won final summary judgment for private equity infrastructure fund Highstar Capital IV, LP and its officers in a long-running lawsuit in the Superior Court of Fulton County’s Business Court in which the plaintiff sought a multi-million dollar punitive damages award arising from the fund's $470 million acquisition of a portfolio company. Won a jury trial in the Superior Court of Fulton County on behalf of a portfolio company of a private equity fund sued by a developer over a property line dispute in connection with the acquisition of a multimillion-dollar student housing development; affirmed on appeal by the Georgia Court of Appeals. Won a bench trial in a case filed by a Georgia municipality in litigation relating to a long-term $40 million water supply agreement; obtained an order affirming the validity of the underlying agreement, affirmance by the Georgia Court of Appeals, and denial of petition for certiorari by the Georgia Supreme Court. Obtained a multimillion-dollar award for a publicly traded corporation in a purchase price escrow dispute with former shareholders of an acquired telecommunications company. Represented SunTrust Bank and an individual broker in defense of a $100 million claim before a Financial Industry Regulatory Authority arbitration panel arising from sale of preferred securities to state chartered banks. Prepared an independent counsel report for a special litigation committee of a corporate board on responding to shareholder demands for institution of breach of fiduciary duty litigation against directors relating to prior corporate acquisitions. Conducted an independent investigation for the board of a publicly traded pharmaceutical corporation in response to demands from two board members for review of prior corporate transactions; issued a substantial report to the board, which was unanimously accepted by the board, including by the dissenting board members. Represented a software purchaser in litigation against a software development company in the Superior Court of DeKalb County and obtained a jury verdict awarding all damages sought. Legal Malpractice and Professional Liability Defense\nWon final summary judgment for an AM Law 100 law firm in a N.D. Ga. lawsuit brought by a receiver alleging malpractice arising from a Georgia regional bank failure.\nRepresented an AM Law 100 law firm and an individually-named lawyer in defense of RICO and business tort claims in E.D. Pa. asserted against the law firm by a third party relating to a client's activities and obtained dismissal with prejudice of all claims.\nRepresented an AM 100 law firm in breach of fiduciary duty and malpractice litigation in the Superior Court of DeKalb County, Georgia arising from the firm’s prior representation of a closely-held corporation.\nRepresented a national law firm and individually named lawyers in defense of legal malpractice claims asserted by receiver on behalf of creditors of former regional bank client.\nRepresented a regional law firm in connection with favorable resolution of legal malpractice claims asserted by a bankruptcy trustee on behalf of the estate of the firm’s former real estate developer client.\nRepresented an Atlanta-based law firm in connection with favorable resolution of contribution and malpractice claims arising from damages awarded against a former client for fraud in a prior lawsuit.\nRepresented individual Georgia lawyers in fee arbitration matters and responses to bar grievances before the State Bar of Georgia. Class Action Litigation\nRepresented a national court reporting company in defense of multiple statewide consumer class actions relating to billing practices, resulting in two orders denying class certification under California and Florida consumer protection statutes and voluntary dismissals of all related cases. See In Re: Motions to Certify Classes Against Court Reporting Firms, 715 F. Supp. 2d 1265 (S.D. Fla. 2010) (aff’d by 11th Cir.); Colapinto v. Esquire Deposition Services, LLC, 2011 WL 913251 (C.D. Cal. 2011).\nRepresented a telecommunications company in defense of a class action lawsuit under California’s call-recording statue and obtained less-than-cost-of-defense settlement.\nRepresented a national Internet service provider in defense of consumer class action relating to billing practices and related false advertising claims; obtained order compelling arbitration and subsequent favorable settlement and dismissal of claims.\nRepresented a national Internet service provider in defense of nationwide class action relating to early termination fees; obtained order dismissing damages claims based on voluntary payment doctrine.\nRepresented a healthcare insurance company in defense of multiple consumer and public interest class actions challenging company’s conversion from nonprofit to for-profit status.","searchable_name":"Lawrence A. Slovensky (Larry)","is_active":true,"featured":null,"publish_date":null,"expiration_date":null,"blog_featured":null,"published_by":35,"capability_group_featured":null,"home_page_featured":null},{"id":442769,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":5404,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cdiv id=\"pnlProfileSummaryShort\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eGlenn Solomon specializes in commercial and government managed care, complex business litigation, arbitration, mediation, class action, investigations, and other dispute resolution matters. As a partner in our Healthcare practice, his diverse clientele includes prominent hospitals and health systems, medical groups, independent physician associations, management services organizations, and other health care providers and entities. On behalf of providers, he has both resolved significant disputes with health plans and negotiated high-profile contracts with them, as well as solved disagreements with other providers.\u0026nbsp; He has helped providers obtain several hundred million\u0026nbsp;dollars through underpayments recoveries, contract improvements, and negotiations.\u0026nbsp; He also has successfully defended against similarly large amounts of alleged overpayments.\u0026nbsp;[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eGlenn\u0026rsquo;s expertise allows him to break down complex disputes to identify and achieve the best options for his clients, whether that be through litigation, arbitration, mediation, or resolved through contractual negotiation. His clients have recovered combined awards and settlements totaling over several hundred million dollars on the plaintiffs\u0026rsquo; side; and have successfully avoided alleged financial exposures of similar figures on the defendants\u0026rsquo; side.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eOver the course of his career, Glenn has litigated, arbitrated, mediated and resolved disputes involving managed care, contracting, management services, class actions, internal and external investigations, fraud and abuse, business relations, reimbursement, trade secrets, misappropriation, real estate, employment, and discrimination. His broad health industry experience involves dealings with health plans, insurance companies, ERISA plans, self-funded plans, qui tam relators, employees, other providers and the government. Glenn\u0026rsquo;s versatile background has allowed him to be a court-designated expert witness.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eGlenn also has experience representing clients in other industries such as telecommunications, accounting, retail, and banking.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eGlenn is also recognized by Legal 500 (2024) as a Key Lawyer in HealthCare: Service Providers, which group has been ranked Tier 1 for this industry.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eGlenn continues to be recognized by Legal 500 (2025) as a Key Lawyer in HealthCare: Service Providers.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eGlenn also has been recognized by Chambers USA, LA Attorney Individual Ranking for Healthcare.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eGlenn has been selected for the Los Angeles Business Journal's 2025 Leaders of Influence: Litigators \u0026amp; Trial Attorneys.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e","slug":"glenn-solomon","email":"gsolomon@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":["\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCalifornia Hospital Association\u003c/strong\u003e,\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eCalifornia Medical Association\u003c/strong\u003e,\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eRegional Medical Center of San Jose, and Good Samaritan Hospital\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;as amici in\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eCounty of Santa Clara v. Sup. Ct.\u003c/em\u003e, 14 Cal.5th 1034 (2023), in which the California Supreme Court, reversing a lower court decision, held that government owned health plans are subject to the Knox-Keene Act and lawsuits for reimbursement by out-of-network providers; potential impact exceeds hundreds of millions of dollars for California out-of-network providers.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eCEP America California dba Vituity\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;against Heritage Provider Network regarding underpayments for out-of-network emergency physician services at many hospitals, resulting in jury award in April 2023, against the health plan on claims exceeding $10 million.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eCalifornia Hospital Association\u003c/strong\u003e,\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eCalifornia Medical Association\u003c/strong\u003e, and a plaintiff class of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eCalifornia hospitals\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;against Blue Cross regarding post-claims underwriting; court-approved settlement pool of $11.8 million for the benefit of all California hospitals that were affected by Blue Cross\u0026rsquo;s rescissions of patient policies.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented plaintiff's class of California \u003cstrong\u003eAmbulatory Surgery Centers\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eagainst United Healthcare, Ingenix (now Optum) and dozens of self-funded plans regarding out-of-network payments; class settlement reached for $9.5 million for the benefit of California ASCs.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eChildren's Hospital Central California\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;against Blue Cross of California in which appeals court held that the parties can present to the jury ona variety of evidence, includingthe hospital's charges, contracted rates and government rates, but not the costs to render the services at issue.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eJury verdict for\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eChildren's Hospital Central California\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003edetermining plan was liable at 100% of charges for post-stabilization services rendered by hospital when plan failed to transfer Medi-Cal managed care beneficiaries to alternative providers; jury rejected plan's argument that hospital had not received authorization or been deemed authored.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eCalifornia Hospital Association\u003c/strong\u003e, plus a national dialysis provider and a putative class of ambulatory surgery centers nationwide, in obtaining court order that national class action settlement agreement regarding United\u0026rsquo;s reimbursement practices to non-contracted physicians doesn\u0026rsquo;t bar facilities from pursuing underpayment claims for facility services.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eC/HCA, Inc.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in federal court to obtain preliminary injunction against Regence Blue Cross Blue Shield of Utah from marketing the hospitals as being in-network providers for new tiered network product that was not contemplated by the parties\u0026rsquo; contract.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eCoast Plaza Doctors Hosp.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;against an Anthem Blue plan in appeals court decision that providers aren\u0026rsquo;t preempted from pursuing direct state law claims against non-self-funded ERISA health plans and can sue such plans, rather than as assignees of the patient\u0026rsquo;s ERISA benefits.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eMount Diablo Medical Center\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in successful defeat of Health Net of California's motion to compel arbitration where dispute also involved the health plan's entity who was not subject to arbitration in multiparty capitation network dispute.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented prominent\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003epsychiatric hospitals\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003ein complex negotiations with the city of Los Angeles for a pre-filing settlement and stipulated judgment to resolve allegations of improper psychiatric patient discharges and then develop patient safety standards with the city for wider use as part of a year-long collaborative task force.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a number of prominent non-profit hospitals in\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eclass action defense\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eagainst uninsured patients challenging various charges and billing practices.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eIn addition to these and other public court matters, Mr. Solomon often resolves matters outside the court system, through settlement negotiations, mediations and arbitrations for providers throughout the country. Over the course of his career he has worked on matters collectively generating\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eseveral hundred million dollars\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003efor his provider clients in additional revenue from underpayments and avoided recoupment of similar amounts in alleged overpayments.\u003c/p\u003e"],"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[]},"expertise":[{"id":24,"guid":"24.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":5,"guid":"5.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":3,"guid":"3.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":12,"guid":"12.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":103,"guid":"103.capabilities","index":4,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":81,"guid":"81.capabilities","index":5,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":11,"guid":"11.capabilities","index":6,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":7,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":740,"guid":"740.smart_tags","index":8,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":122,"guid":"122.capabilities","index":9,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":1185,"guid":"1185.smart_tags","index":10,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1187,"guid":"1187.smart_tags","index":11,"source":"smartTags"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Solomon","nick_name":"Glenn","clerkships":[],"first_name":"Glenn","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":34,"law_schools":[{"id":824,"meta":{"degree":"J.D.","honors":"cum laude","is_law_school":"1","graduation_date":"1991-01-01 00:00:00"},"order":1,"pin_order":null,"pin_expiration":null}],"middle_name":" ","name_suffix":"","recognitions":[{"title":"Key Lawyer in HealthCare: Service Providers","detail":"Legal 500, 2024"},{"title":"Martindale-Hubbell","detail":"AV Rated"},{"title":"Southern California Super Lawyers","detail":"2013-2020"},{"title":"Best Lawyers in America","detail":"2013-2020"}],"linked_in_url":"https://www.linkedin.com/in/glenn-solomon-1188b52/","seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cdiv id=\"pnlProfileSummaryShort\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eGlenn Solomon specializes in commercial and government managed care, complex business litigation, arbitration, mediation, class action, investigations, and other dispute resolution matters. As a partner in our Healthcare practice, his diverse clientele includes prominent hospitals and health systems, medical groups, independent physician associations, management services organizations, and other health care providers and entities. On behalf of providers, he has both resolved significant disputes with health plans and negotiated high-profile contracts with them, as well as solved disagreements with other providers.\u0026nbsp; He has helped providers obtain several hundred million\u0026nbsp;dollars through underpayments recoveries, contract improvements, and negotiations.\u0026nbsp; He also has successfully defended against similarly large amounts of alleged overpayments.\u0026nbsp;[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eGlenn\u0026rsquo;s expertise allows him to break down complex disputes to identify and achieve the best options for his clients, whether that be through litigation, arbitration, mediation, or resolved through contractual negotiation. His clients have recovered combined awards and settlements totaling over several hundred million dollars on the plaintiffs\u0026rsquo; side; and have successfully avoided alleged financial exposures of similar figures on the defendants\u0026rsquo; side.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eOver the course of his career, Glenn has litigated, arbitrated, mediated and resolved disputes involving managed care, contracting, management services, class actions, internal and external investigations, fraud and abuse, business relations, reimbursement, trade secrets, misappropriation, real estate, employment, and discrimination. His broad health industry experience involves dealings with health plans, insurance companies, ERISA plans, self-funded plans, qui tam relators, employees, other providers and the government. Glenn\u0026rsquo;s versatile background has allowed him to be a court-designated expert witness.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eGlenn also has experience representing clients in other industries such as telecommunications, accounting, retail, and banking.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eGlenn is also recognized by Legal 500 (2024) as a Key Lawyer in HealthCare: Service Providers, which group has been ranked Tier 1 for this industry.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eGlenn continues to be recognized by Legal 500 (2025) as a Key Lawyer in HealthCare: Service Providers.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eGlenn also has been recognized by Chambers USA, LA Attorney Individual Ranking for Healthcare.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eGlenn has been selected for the Los Angeles Business Journal's 2025 Leaders of Influence: Litigators \u0026amp; Trial Attorneys.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e","matters":["\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCalifornia Hospital Association\u003c/strong\u003e,\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eCalifornia Medical Association\u003c/strong\u003e,\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eRegional Medical Center of San Jose, and Good Samaritan Hospital\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;as amici in\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eCounty of Santa Clara v. Sup. Ct.\u003c/em\u003e, 14 Cal.5th 1034 (2023), in which the California Supreme Court, reversing a lower court decision, held that government owned health plans are subject to the Knox-Keene Act and lawsuits for reimbursement by out-of-network providers; potential impact exceeds hundreds of millions of dollars for California out-of-network providers.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eCEP America California dba Vituity\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;against Heritage Provider Network regarding underpayments for out-of-network emergency physician services at many hospitals, resulting in jury award in April 2023, against the health plan on claims exceeding $10 million.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eCalifornia Hospital Association\u003c/strong\u003e,\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eCalifornia Medical Association\u003c/strong\u003e, and a plaintiff class of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eCalifornia hospitals\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;against Blue Cross regarding post-claims underwriting; court-approved settlement pool of $11.8 million for the benefit of all California hospitals that were affected by Blue Cross\u0026rsquo;s rescissions of patient policies.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented plaintiff's class of California \u003cstrong\u003eAmbulatory Surgery Centers\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eagainst United Healthcare, Ingenix (now Optum) and dozens of self-funded plans regarding out-of-network payments; class settlement reached for $9.5 million for the benefit of California ASCs.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eChildren's Hospital Central California\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;against Blue Cross of California in which appeals court held that the parties can present to the jury ona variety of evidence, includingthe hospital's charges, contracted rates and government rates, but not the costs to render the services at issue.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eJury verdict for\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eChildren's Hospital Central California\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003edetermining plan was liable at 100% of charges for post-stabilization services rendered by hospital when plan failed to transfer Medi-Cal managed care beneficiaries to alternative providers; jury rejected plan's argument that hospital had not received authorization or been deemed authored.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eCalifornia Hospital Association\u003c/strong\u003e, plus a national dialysis provider and a putative class of ambulatory surgery centers nationwide, in obtaining court order that national class action settlement agreement regarding United\u0026rsquo;s reimbursement practices to non-contracted physicians doesn\u0026rsquo;t bar facilities from pursuing underpayment claims for facility services.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eC/HCA, Inc.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in federal court to obtain preliminary injunction against Regence Blue Cross Blue Shield of Utah from marketing the hospitals as being in-network providers for new tiered network product that was not contemplated by the parties\u0026rsquo; contract.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eCoast Plaza Doctors Hosp.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;against an Anthem Blue plan in appeals court decision that providers aren\u0026rsquo;t preempted from pursuing direct state law claims against non-self-funded ERISA health plans and can sue such plans, rather than as assignees of the patient\u0026rsquo;s ERISA benefits.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eMount Diablo Medical Center\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in successful defeat of Health Net of California's motion to compel arbitration where dispute also involved the health plan's entity who was not subject to arbitration in multiparty capitation network dispute.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented prominent\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003epsychiatric hospitals\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003ein complex negotiations with the city of Los Angeles for a pre-filing settlement and stipulated judgment to resolve allegations of improper psychiatric patient discharges and then develop patient safety standards with the city for wider use as part of a year-long collaborative task force.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a number of prominent non-profit hospitals in\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eclass action defense\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eagainst uninsured patients challenging various charges and billing practices.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eIn addition to these and other public court matters, Mr. Solomon often resolves matters outside the court system, through settlement negotiations, mediations and arbitrations for providers throughout the country. Over the course of his career he has worked on matters collectively generating\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eseveral hundred million dollars\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003efor his provider clients in additional revenue from underpayments and avoided recoupment of similar amounts in alleged overpayments.\u003c/p\u003e"],"recognitions":[{"title":"Key Lawyer in HealthCare: Service Providers","detail":"Legal 500, 2024"},{"title":"Martindale-Hubbell","detail":"AV Rated"},{"title":"Southern California Super Lawyers","detail":"2013-2020"},{"title":"Best Lawyers in America","detail":"2013-2020"}]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":6579}]},"capability_group_id":2},"created_at":"2025-11-13T04:56:47.000Z","updated_at":"2025-11-13T04:56:47.000Z","searchable_text":"Solomon{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Key Lawyer in HealthCare: Service Providers\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500, 2024\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Martindale-Hubbell\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"AV Rated\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Southern California Super Lawyers\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"2013-2020\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Best Lawyers in America\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"2013-2020\"}{{ FIELD }}Represented California Hospital Association, California Medical Association, Regional Medical Center of San Jose, and Good Samaritan Hospital as amici in County of Santa Clara v. Sup. Ct., 14 Cal.5th 1034 (2023), in which the California Supreme Court, reversing a lower court decision, held that government owned health plans are subject to the Knox-Keene Act and lawsuits for reimbursement by out-of-network providers; potential impact exceeds hundreds of millions of dollars for California out-of-network providers.{{ FIELD }}Represented CEP America California dba Vituity against Heritage Provider Network regarding underpayments for out-of-network emergency physician services at many hospitals, resulting in jury award in April 2023, against the health plan on claims exceeding $10 million.{{ FIELD }}Represented California Hospital Association, California Medical Association, and a plaintiff class of California hospitals against Blue Cross regarding post-claims underwriting; court-approved settlement pool of $11.8 million for the benefit of all California hospitals that were affected by Blue Cross’s rescissions of patient policies.{{ FIELD }}Represented plaintiff's class of California Ambulatory Surgery Centers against United Healthcare, Ingenix (now Optum) and dozens of self-funded plans regarding out-of-network payments; class settlement reached for $9.5 million for the benefit of California ASCs.{{ FIELD }}Represented Children's Hospital Central California against Blue Cross of California in which appeals court held that the parties can present to the jury ona variety of evidence, includingthe hospital's charges, contracted rates and government rates, but not the costs to render the services at issue.{{ FIELD }}Jury verdict for Children's Hospital Central California determining plan was liable at 100% of charges for post-stabilization services rendered by hospital when plan failed to transfer Medi-Cal managed care beneficiaries to alternative providers; jury rejected plan's argument that hospital had not received authorization or been deemed authored.{{ FIELD }}Represented California Hospital Association, plus a national dialysis provider and a putative class of ambulatory surgery centers nationwide, in obtaining court order that national class action settlement agreement regarding United’s reimbursement practices to non-contracted physicians doesn’t bar facilities from pursuing underpayment claims for facility services.{{ FIELD }}Represented C/HCA, Inc. in federal court to obtain preliminary injunction against Regence Blue Cross Blue Shield of Utah from marketing the hospitals as being in-network providers for new tiered network product that was not contemplated by the parties’ contract.{{ FIELD }}Represented Coast Plaza Doctors Hosp. against an Anthem Blue plan in appeals court decision that providers aren’t preempted from pursuing direct state law claims against non-self-funded ERISA health plans and can sue such plans, rather than as assignees of the patient’s ERISA benefits.{{ FIELD }}Represented Mount Diablo Medical Center in successful defeat of Health Net of California's motion to compel arbitration where dispute also involved the health plan's entity who was not subject to arbitration in multiparty capitation network dispute.{{ FIELD }}Represented prominent psychiatric hospitals in complex negotiations with the city of Los Angeles for a pre-filing settlement and stipulated judgment to resolve allegations of improper psychiatric patient discharges and then develop patient safety standards with the city for wider use as part of a year-long collaborative task force.{{ FIELD }}Represented a number of prominent non-profit hospitals in class action defense against uninsured patients challenging various charges and billing practices.{{ FIELD }}In addition to these and other public court matters, Mr. Solomon often resolves matters outside the court system, through settlement negotiations, mediations and arbitrations for providers throughout the country. Over the course of his career he has worked on matters collectively generating several hundred million dollars for his provider clients in additional revenue from underpayments and avoided recoupment of similar amounts in alleged overpayments.{{ FIELD }}\nGlenn Solomon specializes in commercial and government managed care, complex business litigation, arbitration, mediation, class action, investigations, and other dispute resolution matters. As a partner in our Healthcare practice, his diverse clientele includes prominent hospitals and health systems, medical groups, independent physician associations, management services organizations, and other health care providers and entities. On behalf of providers, he has both resolved significant disputes with health plans and negotiated high-profile contracts with them, as well as solved disagreements with other providers.  He has helped providers obtain several hundred million dollars through underpayments recoveries, contract improvements, and negotiations.  He also has successfully defended against similarly large amounts of alleged overpayments. \nGlenn’s expertise allows him to break down complex disputes to identify and achieve the best options for his clients, whether that be through litigation, arbitration, mediation, or resolved through contractual negotiation. His clients have recovered combined awards and settlements totaling over several hundred million dollars on the plaintiffs’ side; and have successfully avoided alleged financial exposures of similar figures on the defendants’ side.\nOver the course of his career, Glenn has litigated, arbitrated, mediated and resolved disputes involving managed care, contracting, management services, class actions, internal and external investigations, fraud and abuse, business relations, reimbursement, trade secrets, misappropriation, real estate, employment, and discrimination. His broad health industry experience involves dealings with health plans, insurance companies, ERISA plans, self-funded plans, qui tam relators, employees, other providers and the government. Glenn’s versatile background has allowed him to be a court-designated expert witness.\nGlenn also has experience representing clients in other industries such as telecommunications, accounting, retail, and banking.\nGlenn is also recognized by Legal 500 (2024) as a Key Lawyer in HealthCare: Service Providers, which group has been ranked Tier 1 for this industry. \nGlenn continues to be recognized by Legal 500 (2025) as a Key Lawyer in HealthCare: Service Providers.\nGlenn also has been recognized by Chambers USA, LA Attorney Individual Ranking for Healthcare. \nGlenn has been selected for the Los Angeles Business Journal's 2025 Leaders of Influence: Litigators \u0026amp; Trial Attorneys.\n Partner Key Lawyer in HealthCare: Service Providers Legal 500, 2024 Martindale-Hubbell AV Rated Southern California Super Lawyers 2013-2020 Best Lawyers in America 2013-2020 University of California, Berkeley University of California, Berkeley, School of Law Harvard University Harvard Law School U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit U.S. District Court for the Central District of California U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California California Texas American Health Lawyers Association Healthcare Financial Management Association California Society of Healthcare Attorneys American Bar Association, Health Law and Litigation Sections California Bar Association, Litigation Section Los Angeles County Bar Association, Health Care and Litigation Sections Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Board of Governors, Executive Committee The Maple Counseling Center, Board of Directors, Executive-Finance-Budget Committees Represented California Hospital Association, California Medical Association, Regional Medical Center of San Jose, and Good Samaritan Hospital as amici in County of Santa Clara v. Sup. Ct., 14 Cal.5th 1034 (2023), in which the California Supreme Court, reversing a lower court decision, held that government owned health plans are subject to the Knox-Keene Act and lawsuits for reimbursement by out-of-network providers; potential impact exceeds hundreds of millions of dollars for California out-of-network providers. Represented CEP America California dba Vituity against Heritage Provider Network regarding underpayments for out-of-network emergency physician services at many hospitals, resulting in jury award in April 2023, against the health plan on claims exceeding $10 million. Represented California Hospital Association, California Medical Association, and a plaintiff class of California hospitals against Blue Cross regarding post-claims underwriting; court-approved settlement pool of $11.8 million for the benefit of all California hospitals that were affected by Blue Cross’s rescissions of patient policies. Represented plaintiff's class of California Ambulatory Surgery Centers against United Healthcare, Ingenix (now Optum) and dozens of self-funded plans regarding out-of-network payments; class settlement reached for $9.5 million for the benefit of California ASCs. Represented Children's Hospital Central California against Blue Cross of California in which appeals court held that the parties can present to the jury ona variety of evidence, includingthe hospital's charges, contracted rates and government rates, but not the costs to render the services at issue. Jury verdict for Children's Hospital Central California determining plan was liable at 100% of charges for post-stabilization services rendered by hospital when plan failed to transfer Medi-Cal managed care beneficiaries to alternative providers; jury rejected plan's argument that hospital had not received authorization or been deemed authored. Represented California Hospital Association, plus a national dialysis provider and a putative class of ambulatory surgery centers nationwide, in obtaining court order that national class action settlement agreement regarding United’s reimbursement practices to non-contracted physicians doesn’t bar facilities from pursuing underpayment claims for facility services. Represented C/HCA, Inc. in federal court to obtain preliminary injunction against Regence Blue Cross Blue Shield of Utah from marketing the hospitals as being in-network providers for new tiered network product that was not contemplated by the parties’ contract. Represented Coast Plaza Doctors Hosp. against an Anthem Blue plan in appeals court decision that providers aren’t preempted from pursuing direct state law claims against non-self-funded ERISA health plans and can sue such plans, rather than as assignees of the patient’s ERISA benefits. Represented Mount Diablo Medical Center in successful defeat of Health Net of California's motion to compel arbitration where dispute also involved the health plan's entity who was not subject to arbitration in multiparty capitation network dispute. Represented prominent psychiatric hospitals in complex negotiations with the city of Los Angeles for a pre-filing settlement and stipulated judgment to resolve allegations of improper psychiatric patient discharges and then develop patient safety standards with the city for wider use as part of a year-long collaborative task force. Represented a number of prominent non-profit hospitals in class action defense against uninsured patients challenging various charges and billing practices. In addition to these and other public court matters, Mr. Solomon often resolves matters outside the court system, through settlement negotiations, mediations and arbitrations for providers throughout the country. Over the course of his career he has worked on matters collectively generating several hundred million dollars for his provider clients in additional revenue from underpayments and avoided recoupment of similar amounts in alleged overpayments.","searchable_name":"Glenn Solomon","is_active":true,"featured":null,"publish_date":null,"expiration_date":null,"blog_featured":null,"published_by":34,"capability_group_featured":null,"home_page_featured":null},{"id":427660,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":1257,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eDrawing upon his deep experience with the legislative process, Tom's practice includes the development and execution of Legislative and Executive Branch strategies involving issues critical to domestic and foreign interests. His practice also includes advising corporations on complying with the vast array of laws that regulate the interaction of lobbyists with state and federal government officials.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAs group co-leader of our Government Advocacy \u0026amp; Public Policy practice, Tom is actively involved in numerous lobbying efforts on the most pressing issues in Washington, involving tax, health, energy, defense, aerospace and appropriations.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTom counsels clients on the full suite of political law issues. He advises clients on complying with federal and state laws that regulate and require the reporting of lobbyist activities, and counsels clients on the ethical considerations involved when corporate representatives and government officials interact. He provides guidance on federal and state election laws, and assists corporations with establishing and administering federal and state political action committees. Tom assists foreign entities in complying with the Foreign Agent Registration Act. And he assists tax-exempt organizations with understanding and complying with provisions of law that regulate lobbying and political activities.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBefore entering private practice, Tom served as Staff Director and General Counsel of the House Committee on Rules, as well as General Counsel to the U.S. House of Representatives.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTom was recognized as a leading government relations lawyer by\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eLegal 500\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;in 2015 and 2016\u003cem\u003e.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;He was also ranked by\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eChambers USA\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;in 2011\u0026ndash;2014, and by\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eThe Best Lawyers in America\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;in 2013.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTom is an adjunct professor at Florida State University College\u0026nbsp;Of Law where he teaches political law.\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"thomas-spulak","email":"tspulak@kslaw.com","phone":"+1 202 255 6942","matters":null,"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[]},"expertise":[{"id":106,"guid":"106.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":3,"guid":"3.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":23,"guid":"23.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":102,"guid":"102.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":107,"guid":"107.capabilities","index":4,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":103,"guid":"103.capabilities","index":5,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":81,"guid":"81.capabilities","index":6,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":21,"guid":"21.capabilities","index":7,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":25,"guid":"25.capabilities","index":8,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":687,"guid":"687.smart_tags","index":9,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":984,"guid":"984.smart_tags","index":10,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1097,"guid":"1097.smart_tags","index":11,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":110,"guid":"110.capabilities","index":12,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":111,"guid":"111.capabilities","index":13,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":114,"guid":"114.capabilities","index":14,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":750,"guid":"750.smart_tags","index":15,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":750,"guid":"750.smart_tags","index":16,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1157,"guid":"1157.smart_tags","index":17,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":122,"guid":"122.capabilities","index":18,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":124,"guid":"124.capabilities","index":19,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":125,"guid":"125.capabilities","index":20,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":128,"guid":"128.capabilities","index":21,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":1270,"guid":"1270.smart_tags","index":22,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":132,"guid":"132.capabilities","index":23,"source":"capabilities"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Spulak","nick_name":"Thomas","clerkships":[],"first_name":"Thomas","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":34,"law_schools":[],"middle_name":"J.","name_suffix":"","recognitions":[{"title":"“Top Ranked Lawyer,” Government Relations","detail":"Chambers USA, 2011–2014"},{"title":"\"He is very responsive and client-focused. Thomas is an expert on Congressional ethics laws and FEC compliance.\" ","detail":"CHAMBERS USA, 2022"},{"title":"Named to Best Lawyers in America for Government Relations","detail":"Best Lawyers in America, 2020"},{"title":"Leading Government Relations Lawyer ","detail":"Legal 500, 2015 and 2016"},{"title":"The Best Lawyers in America, 2013","detail":""}],"linked_in_url":null,"seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eDrawing upon his deep experience with the legislative process, Tom's practice includes the development and execution of Legislative and Executive Branch strategies involving issues critical to domestic and foreign interests. His practice also includes advising corporations on complying with the vast array of laws that regulate the interaction of lobbyists with state and federal government officials.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAs group co-leader of our Government Advocacy \u0026amp; Public Policy practice, Tom is actively involved in numerous lobbying efforts on the most pressing issues in Washington, involving tax, health, energy, defense, aerospace and appropriations.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTom counsels clients on the full suite of political law issues. He advises clients on complying with federal and state laws that regulate and require the reporting of lobbyist activities, and counsels clients on the ethical considerations involved when corporate representatives and government officials interact. He provides guidance on federal and state election laws, and assists corporations with establishing and administering federal and state political action committees. Tom assists foreign entities in complying with the Foreign Agent Registration Act. And he assists tax-exempt organizations with understanding and complying with provisions of law that regulate lobbying and political activities.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBefore entering private practice, Tom served as Staff Director and General Counsel of the House Committee on Rules, as well as General Counsel to the U.S. House of Representatives.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTom was recognized as a leading government relations lawyer by\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eLegal 500\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;in 2015 and 2016\u003cem\u003e.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;He was also ranked by\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eChambers USA\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;in 2011\u0026ndash;2014, and by\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eThe Best Lawyers in America\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;in 2013.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTom is an adjunct professor at Florida State University College\u0026nbsp;Of Law where he teaches political law.\u003c/p\u003e","recognitions":[{"title":"“Top Ranked Lawyer,” Government Relations","detail":"Chambers USA, 2011–2014"},{"title":"\"He is very responsive and client-focused. Thomas is an expert on Congressional ethics laws and FEC compliance.\" ","detail":"CHAMBERS USA, 2022"},{"title":"Named to Best Lawyers in America for Government Relations","detail":"Best Lawyers in America, 2020"},{"title":"Leading Government Relations Lawyer ","detail":"Legal 500, 2015 and 2016"},{"title":"The Best Lawyers in America, 2013","detail":""}]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":9887}]},"capability_group_id":2},"created_at":"2025-05-26T05:03:23.000Z","updated_at":"2025-05-26T05:03:23.000Z","searchable_text":"Spulak{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“Top Ranked Lawyer,” Government Relations\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers USA, 2011–2014\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"\\\"He is very responsive and client-focused. Thomas is an expert on Congressional ethics laws and FEC compliance.\\\" \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"CHAMBERS USA, 2022\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named to Best Lawyers in America for Government Relations\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Best Lawyers in America, 2020\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Leading Government Relations Lawyer \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500, 2015 and 2016\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"The Best Lawyers in America, 2013\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"\"}{{ FIELD }}Drawing upon his deep experience with the legislative process, Tom's practice includes the development and execution of Legislative and Executive Branch strategies involving issues critical to domestic and foreign interests. His practice also includes advising corporations on complying with the vast array of laws that regulate the interaction of lobbyists with state and federal government officials.\nAs group co-leader of our Government Advocacy \u0026amp; Public Policy practice, Tom is actively involved in numerous lobbying efforts on the most pressing issues in Washington, involving tax, health, energy, defense, aerospace and appropriations.\nTom counsels clients on the full suite of political law issues. He advises clients on complying with federal and state laws that regulate and require the reporting of lobbyist activities, and counsels clients on the ethical considerations involved when corporate representatives and government officials interact. He provides guidance on federal and state election laws, and assists corporations with establishing and administering federal and state political action committees. Tom assists foreign entities in complying with the Foreign Agent Registration Act. And he assists tax-exempt organizations with understanding and complying with provisions of law that regulate lobbying and political activities.\nBefore entering private practice, Tom served as Staff Director and General Counsel of the House Committee on Rules, as well as General Counsel to the U.S. House of Representatives.\nTom was recognized as a leading government relations lawyer by Legal 500 in 2015 and 2016. He was also ranked by Chambers USA in 2011–2014, and by The Best Lawyers in America in 2013.\nTom is an adjunct professor at Florida State University College Of Law where he teaches political law. Partner “Top Ranked Lawyer,” Government Relations Chambers USA, 2011–2014 \"He is very responsive and client-focused. Thomas is an expert on Congressional ethics laws and FEC compliance.\"  CHAMBERS USA, 2022 Named to Best Lawyers in America for Government Relations Best Lawyers in America, 2020 Leading Government Relations Lawyer  Legal 500, 2015 and 2016 The Best Lawyers in America, 2013  University of Miami University of Miami School of Law Florida State University Florida State University College of Law District of Columbia Florida","searchable_name":"Thomas J. Spulak","is_active":true,"featured":null,"publish_date":null,"expiration_date":null,"blog_featured":null,"published_by":34,"capability_group_featured":null,"home_page_featured":null},{"id":447026,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":5582,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003ePeter Starr is a partner in King \u0026amp; Spalding's Atlanta office and is a member of the firm\u0026rsquo;s Trial and Global Disputes group.\u0026nbsp; His practice focuses on complex commercial litigation, including consumer class actions, securities matters, and business disputes.\u0026nbsp; Peter has also represented companies in multidistrict litigation and in disputes arising from data breaches. He has extensive experience in both state and federal court and represents corporate defendants across a range of industries.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBefore joining King \u0026amp; Spalding, Peter served as a law clerk to the Hon. Edward E. Carnes on the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit.\u0026nbsp; He then entered private practice in New York, working as a litigation associate for Davis Polk \u0026amp; Wardwell LLP before returning home to Atlanta.\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"peter-starr","email":"pstarr@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":null,"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[]},"expertise":[{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":5,"guid":"5.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":19,"guid":"19.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":3,"guid":"3.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":107,"guid":"107.capabilities","index":4,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":1248,"guid":"1248.smart_tags","index":5,"source":"smartTags"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Starr","nick_name":"Peter","clerkships":[{"name":"Law Clerk, Chief Judge Ed Carnes, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit","years_held":"2013 - 2014"}],"first_name":"Peter","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":174,"law_schools":[{"id":2237,"meta":{"degree":"J.D.","honors":"magna cum laude \u0026 Order of the Coif","is_law_school":1,"graduation_date":"2013-01-01 00:00:00 UTC"},"order":1,"pin_order":null,"pin_expiration":null}],"middle_name":" ","name_suffix":"","recognitions":null,"linked_in_url":null,"seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003ePeter Starr is a partner in King \u0026amp; Spalding's Atlanta office and is a member of the firm\u0026rsquo;s Trial and Global Disputes group.\u0026nbsp; His practice focuses on complex commercial litigation, including consumer class actions, securities matters, and business disputes.\u0026nbsp; Peter has also represented companies in multidistrict litigation and in disputes arising from data breaches. He has extensive experience in both state and federal court and represents corporate defendants across a range of industries.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBefore joining King \u0026amp; Spalding, Peter served as a law clerk to the Hon. Edward E. Carnes on the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit.\u0026nbsp; He then entered private practice in New York, working as a litigation associate for Davis Polk \u0026amp; Wardwell LLP before returning home to Atlanta.\u003c/p\u003e"},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":7467}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2026-03-26T04:58:30.000Z","updated_at":"2026-03-26T04:58:30.000Z","searchable_text":"Starr{{ FIELD }}Peter Starr is a partner in King \u0026amp; Spalding's Atlanta office and is a member of the firm’s Trial and Global Disputes group.  His practice focuses on complex commercial litigation, including consumer class actions, securities matters, and business disputes.  Peter has also represented companies in multidistrict litigation and in disputes arising from data breaches. He has extensive experience in both state and federal court and represents corporate defendants across a range of industries.\nBefore joining King \u0026amp; Spalding, Peter served as a law clerk to the Hon. Edward E. Carnes on the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit.  He then entered private practice in New York, working as a litigation associate for Davis Polk \u0026amp; Wardwell LLP before returning home to Atlanta. Partner Birmingham Southern College  University of Michigan University of Michigan Law School U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia Georgia New York Law Clerk, Chief Judge Ed Carnes, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit","searchable_name":"Peter Starr","is_active":true,"featured":null,"publish_date":null,"expiration_date":null,"blog_featured":null,"published_by":174,"capability_group_featured":null,"home_page_featured":null},{"id":446161,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":3412,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eKenneth Steinthal, known for litigating matters in the intellectual property/media sector, is a widely recognized leader in his field, including by \u003cem\u003eNational Law Journal\u003c/em\u003e as a 2016 IP Trailblazer, by \u003cem\u003eLaw360\u003c/em\u003e as 1 of 5 Media \u0026amp; Entertainment MVPs in 2015, by \u003cem\u003eLegal 500\u003c/em\u003e as 1 of only 8 members of its U.S. Copyright Hall of Fame, and on a consistent annual basis (including in 2022) by multiple legal publications including each of \u003cem\u003eLegal 500\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003eChambers USA, Managing IP (as an IP Star)\u003c/em\u003e and the \u003cem\u003eDaily Journal\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rsquo;s listing of Top Intellectual Property Lawyers. [[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eKen has four decades of experience litigating matters spanning the IP/media sector, in jury and bench trial settings and before copyright tribunals in the U.S. and internationally. Ken\u0026rsquo;s practice is focused on copyright, DMCA and antitrust/rate-setting cases involving the distribution of audio and audiovisual content. His litigation matters typically involve the defense of copyright infringement claims, the application of DMCA safe harbors and the establishment of structures and rates for the exploitation of copyrighted works in both traditional (e.g., cable, satellite, broadcast) and new media distribution environments. In just the last few years, Ken has led teams on behalf of Google, Peloton, the Radio Music License Committee (representing the interests of the U.S. broadcast radio industry), NPR/PBS, The Orchard, ESPN and Pandora before different courts and tribunals (including the U.S. Copyright Royalty Board) in defense of copyright infringement claims and establishing rate structures governing his clients' exploitation of music licensed by publishers and labels (and their representative organizations).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn a constantly evolving media distribution environment, Ken and his team also regularly counsel clients regarding the licensing implications and risks associated with their existing or contemplated product offerings spanning both traditional and new media. He also assumed an industry-leading role on behalf of the content distribution community (including Netflix, Paramount Global/ViacomCBS, ESPN, Warner Media/HBO, Discovery Communications, AMC Networks, Fox Cable Network Services, iHeartMedia, Google/YouTube, and many others) in connection with the Department of Justice\u0026rsquo;s periodic investigations of the ASCAP and BMI antitrust consent decrees governing the licensing of public performance rights in musical compositions.\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"kenneth-steinthal","email":"ksteinthal@kslaw.com","phone":"+1 917 825 7293","matters":["\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eRepresentative Copyright Litigations/Matters\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eIn re Determination of Rates and Terms for Digital Performance of Sound Recordings \u0026hellip; (\u003c/em\u003eknown as the\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eWeb V\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;proceedings). Ken leads the representation of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eGoogle\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in these Copyright Royalty Board proceedings against the labels/recording industry to determine statutory royalty rates for digital performances of sound recordings made by non-interactive music streaming services under sections 112 and 114 of the Copyright Act (for the statutory license term 1/1/21-12/31/25). A five-week virtual Zoom trial was held in August - September 2020 (which was one of the first virtual trials of that magnitude conducted during the global pandemic), and ultimately led to a 300-page decision issued in June 2021 largely rejecting the labels\u0026rsquo; positions and adopting much of Google\u0026rsquo;s arguments to minimize any rate increases. The labels have appealed the decision, which appeal is ongoing.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eIn re Determination of Rates and Terms for Making and Distributing Phonorecords.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;Ken leads the representation of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eGoogle\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in the Phonorecords III Copyright Royalty Board proceedings against the music publishing industry that will determine the statutory license rates and terms for the five-year period 2018\u0026ndash;2022; the case involves \"mechanical\" reproduction licenses associated with the distribution of interactive/on-demand streaming services and cloud locker services under section 115 of the Copyright Act. The case is currently on remand to the CRB after the D.C. Circuit\u0026rsquo;s rejection of the publishers\u0026rsquo; core appeal positions while granting the services\u0026rsquo; request to vacate and remand for further proceedings certain aspects of the rate structure adopted by the CRB in its Initial Determination after trial.\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;Johnson v. Copyright Royalty Board\u003c/em\u003e, 969 F.3d 363 (D.C. Cir. 2020). This follows the CRB\u0026rsquo;s initial trial determination agreeing with Google (and other services) in rejecting the core position of the publishers who sought to establish a per-play royalty rate.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eFour Jays Music Company, et al. v. Apple Inc., et al.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eKen led the defense of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eThe Orchard\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;(a subsidiary of Sony Music Entertainment) in this copyright infringement suit in the Southern District of New York claiming that The Orchard distributed digital recordings to stores for sale (through digital service providers such as Apple and Google) where the \u0026ldquo;mechanical\u0026rdquo; reproduction rights associated with the musical compositions embodied in those recordings were not properly licensed. The suit sought damages for infringement on behalf of Harry Warren, whose works were recorded by jazz and popular artists such as Billie Holliday, Dean Martin, Louis Armstrong, and Miles Davis. The case challenged various historical music clearance practices employed by digital music distributors. The case was settled on favorable terms in early 2021.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eIn re Determination of Rates and Terms for Performance or Display of Nondramatic Musical Works ... By Public Broadcasting Entities\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(known as \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003ePB IV\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rdquo;). Ken is lead counsel for\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eCorporation for Public Broadcasting\u003c/strong\u003e,\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eNPR\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eand\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;PBS\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in this Copyright Royalty Board proceeding against the music publishing industry that will determine the statutory license rates and terms (for the five-year period 2023-2027) for public broadcaster uses of musical works under Section 118 of the Copyright Act. Notices of Settlement with 3 of the 5 copyright owner representatives have been filed; if settlements cannot be reached with all the copyright owner participants, trial will be held in 2022. Ken also led the representation of CPB, NPR and PBS in the prior\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;PB III\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;proceedings resulting in favorable statutory rates for the public broadcasters during the five-year term 2018-2022.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eDOJ Investigation of ASCAP and BMI Consent Decrees\u003c/em\u003e. Ken led the representation of a consortium of audiovisual content distributors (including\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eNetflix, Viacom/Showtime Networks, HBO/Turner Broadcasting, AMC Networks, Discovery Communications, ESPN, Fox Cable Network Services\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;and several other entities) engaged in the distribution of audio-visual content in connection with preparing and advancing comments responsive to the US Department of Justice investigation regarding whether the existing antitrust consent decrees regulating the conduct of music performing rights collectives Broadcast Music Inc. (BMI) and the American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers (ASCAP) should be modified and/or terminated. In January 2021 the DOJ adopted the position advocated by Ken\u0026rsquo;s clients\u0026rsquo; determining that there was no basis to modify or terminate the ASCAP and BMI consent decrees. Ken\u0026rsquo;s client group had secured a similar result under the prior Administration in 2016 on behalf of a similar consortium.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eDowntown Music Publishing, LLC v. Peloton Interactive, Inc.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eKen led the defense of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ePeloton\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a high-profile copyright infringement litigation brought by independent music publishers in the Southern District of New York in which the publishers sued Peloton on the eve of Peloton\u0026rsquo;s IPO seeking over $300 million based on claims that Peloton willfully infringed over 21,000 musical works. Peloton in response impleaded third-party National Music Publishers\u0026rsquo; Association (\u0026ldquo;NMPA\u0026rdquo;) and filed counterclaims asserting both antitrust law violations and tortious interference with business relations counterclaims. The case was settled on favorable terms in early 2020.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSESAC v. Radio Music License Committee (\u0026ldquo;RMLC\u0026rdquo;).\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;Ken was lead counsel for the\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eRMLC,\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;the representative body of the broadcast radio industry, in this first-ever arbitration proceeding to determine reasonable industry-wide rates and terms (during the three-year term 2016\u0026ndash;2018) for some 7,000 radio stations' broadcasts and simulcasts of the musical works controlled by performing rights organization SESAC. The arbitration took place in 2017 and resulted in a favorable outcome for RMLC, reducing pre-existing SESAC fee levels by more than 50%.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eESPN v. BMI\u003c/em\u003e. Ken was lead counsel for\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eESPN\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in this litigation against performing rights organization Broadcast Music, Inc. under the BMI antitrust consent decree. ESPN directly licenses from writers and publishers the vast majority of the music it performs; and it sought a determination of reasonable license fees from BMI for the music in commercials or ambient music overheard in stadiums and arenas during sports telecasts, which ESPN is not in a position to directly license. This case would have been the first to challenge BMI\u0026rsquo;s off-the-shelf license structure and rates for audiovisual programming based on evidence of competitive direct licensing transactions and also involved the issue of whether performances of ambient music captured in connection with live sports broadcasts are fair use. The case was settled shortly before trial in 2017.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ePandora Media, Inc. v. ASCAP.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;Ken was lead counsel in this federal court trial and appeal on\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ePandora\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026rsquo;s behalf culminating in the Second Circuit\u0026rsquo;s 2015 affirmance of rulings (i) upholding Pandora\u0026rsquo;s challenge to the efforts of major ASCAP publisher members to \u0026ldquo;partially\u0026rdquo; withdraw from ASCAP in an effort to avoid rate oversight by the court overseeing the ASCAP antitrust consent decree, and (ii) establishing rates consistent with Pandora\u0026rsquo;s position.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eU.S. v. ASCAP, Application of MobiTV, Inc.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;Ken led the federal court trial before the judge supervising the ASCAP antitrust consent decree and ensuing successful Second Circuit appeal resulting in adoption of client\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eMobiTV\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026rsquo;s proposal, establishing favorable rates and terms for mobile distribution of TV/radio content (and rejecting ASCAP\u0026rsquo;s position that mobile/online content distribution entities should be subject to a far more onerous royalty structure than exists for entities distributing content via traditional media vehicles).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eU.S. v. ASCAP, Application of RealNetworks Inc. and Yahoo!, Inc.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;Ken led the trial and argued the appeal on behalf of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eReal Networks\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;and\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eYahoo!\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;leading to this landmark Second Circuit decision in September 2010 (and denial of\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003ecertiorari\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2012) holding that transmissions of music downloads do not trigger public performance rights liabilities for entities engaged in content distribution (and rejecting the position of ASCAP and other copyright organizations to the contrary).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eArista Records, et al. v. Launch Media.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;Ken co-defended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eYahoo! Music\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;(f/k/a Launch Media) in a billion-dollar copyright infringement action brought by various record labels in the SDNY challenging the eligibility of Yahoo!'s Internet radio service for the statutory license under section 114 of the Copyright Act; Yahoo! secured a jury verdict in its favor (later affirmed by the Second Circuit).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026ldquo;Napster II\u0026rdquo; (\u003cem\u003eUMG Recordings, et al. v. Bertelsmann AG, et al\u003c/em\u003e). Ken led the defense of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eBertelsmann\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;against a series of music label and publisher copyright infringement claims brought in the SDNY and NDCA (asserting liability in excess of $20 billion) based on alleged direct, contributory and vicarious liability of Bertelsmann arising from its investments in and relationship with the original Napster file-sharing service; rulings on motions led to favorable settlements shortly before trial.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eEMI Music v. Multiply Inc\u003c/em\u003e. Ken represented this social network service in a lawsuit claiming copyright infringement of works in EMI\u0026rsquo;s label and publisher catalogues asserting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eMultiply\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;did not qualify for the DMCA safe harbor; representation enabled settlement shortly after lawsuit was fied.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSony/ATV Songs LLC, et al. v. MusicNet, Inc.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;Ken led the defense of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eMusicNet\u003c/strong\u003e, an early pioneer in the digital on-demand music service industry, against copyright infringement claims based on the alleged failure of the service to secure musical work reproduction rights licenses; representation enabled settlement not long after suit was filed.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eColeman, et al. v. ESPN\u003c/em\u003e. Ken led the defense of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eESPN\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;against claims of ASCAP members asserting copyright infringement based on ESPN\u0026rsquo;s alleged unlicensed public performance of musical works audible in the background of ESPN\u0026rsquo;s broadcasts of sports programming and challenging ESPN\u0026rsquo;s assertion of the \u0026ldquo;fair use\u0026rdquo; defense to such uses. The case was settled on favorable terms on the eve of trial after successfully defeating publishers\u0026rsquo; summary judgment motion relating to the fair use defense.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eAngel Music, Inc. et al v. ABC Sports, et al\u003c/em\u003e. Ken led the defense of the local television industry in this putative dual plaintiff/defendant class action copyright infringement lawsuit claiming that the\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eABC Television Network\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;had infringed the publishers\u0026rsquo; rights by failing to secure synchronization licenses for so-called \u0026ldquo;one time uses\u0026rdquo; of compositions that were used as background for Olympics sports \u0026ldquo;bio-pic\u0026rdquo; segments; successfully achieved dismissal of action.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eOther \u0026ldquo;Rate Court\u0026rdquo; Proceedings against ASCAP and BMI.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;Ken is and/or has been lead trial counsel for numerous other\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eASCAP/BMI licensees\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;engaged both in traditional and new media forms of content distribution; over the years, he has managed or co-managed the negotiations and, where necessary, trial teams in consent decree proceedings against ASCAP, BMI, SESAC and GMR on behalf of more than forty cable/satellite/broadcast/new media content distribution services and providers.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eAntitrust litigation against ASCAP and BMI.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;Ken was deeply involved in the seminal antitrust cases brought by\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ethe local television industry\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in the early 1980s (\u003cem\u003eBuffalo Broadcasting Co., et al. v. ASCAP, et al\u003c/em\u003e.) and the cable TV industry in the early 1990s (\u003cem\u003eNCTA, et al. v. BMI, et al\u003c/em\u003e.), against both ASCAP and BMI, which set the framework for the consent decree litigations that have followed.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eInternational Copyright Tribunal Matters.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;Ken has been granted \u0026ldquo;rights of audience\u0026rdquo; in the Copyright Tribunals of the UK and Hong Kong to litigate matters pertaining to the proper structure and rates for musical work public performances (and, in some cases, reproductions), on behalf of both new media/online distributors of content and traditional cable/satellite television distributors. For example, he was lead trial counsel in the precedent-setting UK Copyright Tribunal litigation on behalf of a consortium of music service providers (including AOL, Yahoo!, Apple, Napster LLC, RealNetworks and MusicNet) against the UK collective MCPS/PRS. Prior to that, he represented a consortium of cable and satellite providers in proceedings before the Hong Kong Copyright Tribunal against the Composers and Authors Society of Hong Kong (CASH), which resulted in a favorable industry-wide settlement on the eve of trial.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eRepresentative Other Media/Entertainment/Sports Litigation\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eiJaal.com, Inc., et al. v. baazee.com, Inc., et al\u003c/em\u003e. Ken was lead trial counsel in this SDNY jury trial defending\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ebaazee.com\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;(the \u0026ldquo;eBay of India,\u0026rdquo; in which News Corp\u0026rsquo;s Star TV was the primary outside investor before acquisition by eBay after trial) and its principals against claims of breach of oral contract, misappropriation of partnership opportunity, misappropriation of trade secrets and related claims; won complete defense verdict.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ePersky-Bright Organization, et al. v. Columbia Pictures Entertainment, Inc., et al\u003c/em\u003e. Ken was lead trial counsel in defense of two $300 million actions brought in SDNY and CDCA, in which the plaintiff motion picture investment groups alleged a series of violations by\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eColumbia Pictures\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;of motion picture distribution agreements, together with RICO, fraud, antitrust/block booking and tax indemnity claims. The case spanned several years and included a mini-trial of non-jury issues that resulted in the substantial curtailment of issues to proceed before a jury, leading to a favorable settlement thereafter.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eRobehr Films, Inc. v. American Airlines, Inc\u003c/em\u003e. Ken was lead trial counsel in this SDNY jury action brought by an in-flight film supplier alleging fraud and breach of contract by\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eAmerican Airlines.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;Plaintiff claimed American\u0026rsquo;s conduct had forced it out of business. A three-week jury trial resulted in a no-liability defendant\u0026rsquo;s verdict, which was affirmed on appeal to the Second Circuit.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eEuropean American Bank v. Film Finances, Inc., et al\u003c/em\u003e. Ken was lead counsel in defending this action brought by EAB under film loan agreements and a completion bond against clients\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eFilm Finances and production/distribution entities.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;After preliminary pre-trial proceedings and motion practice, the case was settled on a zero-liability basis.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eNorth American Soccer League (NASL) v. National Football\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eLeague\u003c/em\u003e. Ken assisted in representing the\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eNASL\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in this antitrust trial in the SDNY in which the NASL successfully challenged the NFL\u0026rsquo;s \u0026ldquo;cross ownership\u0026rdquo; ban, which would have prevented \u0026ldquo;cross-owners\u0026rdquo; such as Lamar Hunt and Joe Robbie from maintaining their investments in the NASL.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eNew York Islanders Hockey Club LP v. SMG, et al\u003c/em\u003e. Ken was lead trial counsel for\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ethe\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eN.Y. Islanders\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;hockey team in federal and state court litigations against SMG and Nassau County seeking to terminate lease arrangements at the Nassau Coliseum on novel constructive eviction theories. After preliminary injunction trial proceedings and a series of appeals, the case settled on a favorable basis.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eRepresentative Other Engagements\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eDavid Wilson et al. v. Airborne, Inc\u003c/em\u003e. Ken was lead counsel in representation of the\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eAirborne defendants\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in this consumer class action (removed to Central District of CA under CAFA) alleging,\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003einter alia\u003c/em\u003e, false advertising and violations of California consumer protection laws; led to a favorable class settlement.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eIn re CA Title Insurance Litigation.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;Ken was lead trial counsel for\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea national title insurance company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in this putative class action alleging violations of CA UCL \u0026sect;17200; oversaw successful motion practice leading to dismissal and 2012 order compelling individual claim arbitration.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNNN\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eBritannia Business Center, et al v. Grubb \u0026amp;amp;amp; Ellis Co., et al\u003c/em\u003e. Ken was lead trial counsel for\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003edefendants\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in these CA state court actions alleging violations of CA UCL \u0026sect;17200, fraud, etc., associated with the syndication of certain commercial real estate investments; successful motion practice resulted in substantial curtailment of claims at issue.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eRisko v. First Aviation Services, Inc., et al.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;Ken was lead trial counsel in this jury trial in Oakland, CA Superior Court alleging fraud and breach of contract against\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eFirst Aviation and its principals.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;The case was brought by a former First Aviation principal alleging, among other things, entitlements under an oral agreement, and threatened the continued viability of the client group. A two-week jury trial resulted in a no-liability defendants\u0026rsquo; verdict.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ePIA v. UBS Securities, Inc\u003c/em\u003e. Ken was lead trial counsel in defending lender liability, fraud and breach of contract claims brought in New York State Supreme Court by the owners of the Roosevelt Hotel in New York City against\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eUBS,\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;stemming from UBS\u0026rsquo; termination of an agreement to finance the renovation of the hotel. A three-week bench trial resulted in a no-liability defendant\u0026rsquo;s verdict. Appellate proceedings in the New York Appellate Division and Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court rulings in defendant\u0026rsquo;s favor.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eOvernight Partners, et al. v. Ritz Carlton Hotel Co\u003c/em\u003e. Ken was lead counsel in defense of this $300 million \u0026ldquo;kitchen sink\u0026rdquo; action brought in the SDNY by the owners of the Ritz Carlton hotel properties located in New York, Washington D.C., Houston and Aspen CO, against client\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eRitz Carlton.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;The case involved fraud, breach of contract, RICO, trademark and other claims brought by the Saudi group owners of those properties. After protracted pre-trial proceedings, the case settled on a favorable basis, whereby plaintiffs were stripped of their right to operate Ritz Carlton hotels.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eIn re Hylsa, S.A. v. M.W. Kellogg Co\u003c/em\u003e. Ken was lead trial counsel for\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eGrupo Industrial Alfa\u0026rsquo;s steel company, Hylsa, SA,\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in ICC arbitration involving hundreds of millions of dollars in claims and technology issues relating to construction of \u0026ldquo;HYL Process\u0026rdquo; steel plants for SIDOR in Venezuela. After a series of ICC hearings, case was settled on a zero-liability basis to Hylsa.\u003c/p\u003e"],"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[]},"expertise":[{"id":14,"guid":"14.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":1,"guid":"1.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":3,"guid":"3.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":5,"guid":"5.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":763,"guid":"763.smart_tags","index":4,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":5,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":13,"guid":"13.capabilities","index":6,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":1233,"guid":"1233.smart_tags","index":7,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":133,"guid":"133.capabilities","index":8,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":129,"guid":"129.capabilities","index":9,"source":"capabilities"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Steinthal","nick_name":"Kenneth","clerkships":[],"first_name":"Kenneth","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":202,"law_schools":[],"middle_name":"L.","name_suffix":"","recognitions":[{"title":"“He is a sophisticated negotiator and provides top-notch service. He is very responsive and detail-oriented.”","detail":"CHAMBERS USA 2022"},{"title":"IP Trailblazers","detail":"National Law Journal, 2016"},{"title":"1 of 5 Media \u0026 Entertainment MVPs","detail":"Law360, 2015"},{"title":"Top 10 Copyright Lawyers","detail":"The Daily Journal"},{"title":"Leading IP Attorneys: California","detail":"The Daily Journal (multiple years through 2021)"},{"title":"Leading Lawyer: IP/Media \u0026 Entertainment","detail":"Chambers USA and Chambers Global (multiple years through 2022)"},{"title":"Legal 500 USA ","detail":"multiple years through 2022"},{"title":"Northern California Super Lawyer ","detail":"Super Lawyers (multiple years through 2021)"},{"title":"2026 Lawdragon 500","detail":"Leading Global Entertainment, Sports \u0026 Media Lawyers"},{"title":"Power Lawyers: Top 100 Outside Counsel ","detail":"Hollywood Reporter"},{"title":"Outstanding Antitrust Litigation Achievement in Private Law Practice: Finalist ","detail":"AAI, 2014"}],"linked_in_url":null,"seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eKenneth Steinthal, known for litigating matters in the intellectual property/media sector, is a widely recognized leader in his field, including by \u003cem\u003eNational Law Journal\u003c/em\u003e as a 2016 IP Trailblazer, by \u003cem\u003eLaw360\u003c/em\u003e as 1 of 5 Media \u0026amp; Entertainment MVPs in 2015, by \u003cem\u003eLegal 500\u003c/em\u003e as 1 of only 8 members of its U.S. Copyright Hall of Fame, and on a consistent annual basis (including in 2022) by multiple legal publications including each of \u003cem\u003eLegal 500\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003eChambers USA, Managing IP (as an IP Star)\u003c/em\u003e and the \u003cem\u003eDaily Journal\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rsquo;s listing of Top Intellectual Property Lawyers. [[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eKen has four decades of experience litigating matters spanning the IP/media sector, in jury and bench trial settings and before copyright tribunals in the U.S. and internationally. Ken\u0026rsquo;s practice is focused on copyright, DMCA and antitrust/rate-setting cases involving the distribution of audio and audiovisual content. His litigation matters typically involve the defense of copyright infringement claims, the application of DMCA safe harbors and the establishment of structures and rates for the exploitation of copyrighted works in both traditional (e.g., cable, satellite, broadcast) and new media distribution environments. In just the last few years, Ken has led teams on behalf of Google, Peloton, the Radio Music License Committee (representing the interests of the U.S. broadcast radio industry), NPR/PBS, The Orchard, ESPN and Pandora before different courts and tribunals (including the U.S. Copyright Royalty Board) in defense of copyright infringement claims and establishing rate structures governing his clients' exploitation of music licensed by publishers and labels (and their representative organizations).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn a constantly evolving media distribution environment, Ken and his team also regularly counsel clients regarding the licensing implications and risks associated with their existing or contemplated product offerings spanning both traditional and new media. He also assumed an industry-leading role on behalf of the content distribution community (including Netflix, Paramount Global/ViacomCBS, ESPN, Warner Media/HBO, Discovery Communications, AMC Networks, Fox Cable Network Services, iHeartMedia, Google/YouTube, and many others) in connection with the Department of Justice\u0026rsquo;s periodic investigations of the ASCAP and BMI antitrust consent decrees governing the licensing of public performance rights in musical compositions.\u003c/p\u003e","matters":["\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eRepresentative Copyright Litigations/Matters\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eIn re Determination of Rates and Terms for Digital Performance of Sound Recordings \u0026hellip; (\u003c/em\u003eknown as the\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eWeb V\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;proceedings). Ken leads the representation of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eGoogle\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in these Copyright Royalty Board proceedings against the labels/recording industry to determine statutory royalty rates for digital performances of sound recordings made by non-interactive music streaming services under sections 112 and 114 of the Copyright Act (for the statutory license term 1/1/21-12/31/25). A five-week virtual Zoom trial was held in August - September 2020 (which was one of the first virtual trials of that magnitude conducted during the global pandemic), and ultimately led to a 300-page decision issued in June 2021 largely rejecting the labels\u0026rsquo; positions and adopting much of Google\u0026rsquo;s arguments to minimize any rate increases. The labels have appealed the decision, which appeal is ongoing.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eIn re Determination of Rates and Terms for Making and Distributing Phonorecords.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;Ken leads the representation of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eGoogle\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in the Phonorecords III Copyright Royalty Board proceedings against the music publishing industry that will determine the statutory license rates and terms for the five-year period 2018\u0026ndash;2022; the case involves \"mechanical\" reproduction licenses associated with the distribution of interactive/on-demand streaming services and cloud locker services under section 115 of the Copyright Act. The case is currently on remand to the CRB after the D.C. Circuit\u0026rsquo;s rejection of the publishers\u0026rsquo; core appeal positions while granting the services\u0026rsquo; request to vacate and remand for further proceedings certain aspects of the rate structure adopted by the CRB in its Initial Determination after trial.\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;Johnson v. Copyright Royalty Board\u003c/em\u003e, 969 F.3d 363 (D.C. Cir. 2020). This follows the CRB\u0026rsquo;s initial trial determination agreeing with Google (and other services) in rejecting the core position of the publishers who sought to establish a per-play royalty rate.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eFour Jays Music Company, et al. v. Apple Inc., et al.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eKen led the defense of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eThe Orchard\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;(a subsidiary of Sony Music Entertainment) in this copyright infringement suit in the Southern District of New York claiming that The Orchard distributed digital recordings to stores for sale (through digital service providers such as Apple and Google) where the \u0026ldquo;mechanical\u0026rdquo; reproduction rights associated with the musical compositions embodied in those recordings were not properly licensed. The suit sought damages for infringement on behalf of Harry Warren, whose works were recorded by jazz and popular artists such as Billie Holliday, Dean Martin, Louis Armstrong, and Miles Davis. The case challenged various historical music clearance practices employed by digital music distributors. The case was settled on favorable terms in early 2021.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eIn re Determination of Rates and Terms for Performance or Display of Nondramatic Musical Works ... By Public Broadcasting Entities\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(known as \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003ePB IV\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rdquo;). Ken is lead counsel for\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eCorporation for Public Broadcasting\u003c/strong\u003e,\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eNPR\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eand\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;PBS\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in this Copyright Royalty Board proceeding against the music publishing industry that will determine the statutory license rates and terms (for the five-year period 2023-2027) for public broadcaster uses of musical works under Section 118 of the Copyright Act. Notices of Settlement with 3 of the 5 copyright owner representatives have been filed; if settlements cannot be reached with all the copyright owner participants, trial will be held in 2022. Ken also led the representation of CPB, NPR and PBS in the prior\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;PB III\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;proceedings resulting in favorable statutory rates for the public broadcasters during the five-year term 2018-2022.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eDOJ Investigation of ASCAP and BMI Consent Decrees\u003c/em\u003e. Ken led the representation of a consortium of audiovisual content distributors (including\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eNetflix, Viacom/Showtime Networks, HBO/Turner Broadcasting, AMC Networks, Discovery Communications, ESPN, Fox Cable Network Services\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;and several other entities) engaged in the distribution of audio-visual content in connection with preparing and advancing comments responsive to the US Department of Justice investigation regarding whether the existing antitrust consent decrees regulating the conduct of music performing rights collectives Broadcast Music Inc. (BMI) and the American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers (ASCAP) should be modified and/or terminated. In January 2021 the DOJ adopted the position advocated by Ken\u0026rsquo;s clients\u0026rsquo; determining that there was no basis to modify or terminate the ASCAP and BMI consent decrees. Ken\u0026rsquo;s client group had secured a similar result under the prior Administration in 2016 on behalf of a similar consortium.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eDowntown Music Publishing, LLC v. Peloton Interactive, Inc.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eKen led the defense of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ePeloton\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a high-profile copyright infringement litigation brought by independent music publishers in the Southern District of New York in which the publishers sued Peloton on the eve of Peloton\u0026rsquo;s IPO seeking over $300 million based on claims that Peloton willfully infringed over 21,000 musical works. Peloton in response impleaded third-party National Music Publishers\u0026rsquo; Association (\u0026ldquo;NMPA\u0026rdquo;) and filed counterclaims asserting both antitrust law violations and tortious interference with business relations counterclaims. The case was settled on favorable terms in early 2020.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSESAC v. Radio Music License Committee (\u0026ldquo;RMLC\u0026rdquo;).\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;Ken was lead counsel for the\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eRMLC,\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;the representative body of the broadcast radio industry, in this first-ever arbitration proceeding to determine reasonable industry-wide rates and terms (during the three-year term 2016\u0026ndash;2018) for some 7,000 radio stations' broadcasts and simulcasts of the musical works controlled by performing rights organization SESAC. The arbitration took place in 2017 and resulted in a favorable outcome for RMLC, reducing pre-existing SESAC fee levels by more than 50%.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eESPN v. BMI\u003c/em\u003e. Ken was lead counsel for\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eESPN\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in this litigation against performing rights organization Broadcast Music, Inc. under the BMI antitrust consent decree. ESPN directly licenses from writers and publishers the vast majority of the music it performs; and it sought a determination of reasonable license fees from BMI for the music in commercials or ambient music overheard in stadiums and arenas during sports telecasts, which ESPN is not in a position to directly license. This case would have been the first to challenge BMI\u0026rsquo;s off-the-shelf license structure and rates for audiovisual programming based on evidence of competitive direct licensing transactions and also involved the issue of whether performances of ambient music captured in connection with live sports broadcasts are fair use. The case was settled shortly before trial in 2017.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ePandora Media, Inc. v. ASCAP.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;Ken was lead counsel in this federal court trial and appeal on\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ePandora\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026rsquo;s behalf culminating in the Second Circuit\u0026rsquo;s 2015 affirmance of rulings (i) upholding Pandora\u0026rsquo;s challenge to the efforts of major ASCAP publisher members to \u0026ldquo;partially\u0026rdquo; withdraw from ASCAP in an effort to avoid rate oversight by the court overseeing the ASCAP antitrust consent decree, and (ii) establishing rates consistent with Pandora\u0026rsquo;s position.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eU.S. v. ASCAP, Application of MobiTV, Inc.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;Ken led the federal court trial before the judge supervising the ASCAP antitrust consent decree and ensuing successful Second Circuit appeal resulting in adoption of client\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eMobiTV\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026rsquo;s proposal, establishing favorable rates and terms for mobile distribution of TV/radio content (and rejecting ASCAP\u0026rsquo;s position that mobile/online content distribution entities should be subject to a far more onerous royalty structure than exists for entities distributing content via traditional media vehicles).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eU.S. v. ASCAP, Application of RealNetworks Inc. and Yahoo!, Inc.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;Ken led the trial and argued the appeal on behalf of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eReal Networks\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;and\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eYahoo!\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;leading to this landmark Second Circuit decision in September 2010 (and denial of\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003ecertiorari\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2012) holding that transmissions of music downloads do not trigger public performance rights liabilities for entities engaged in content distribution (and rejecting the position of ASCAP and other copyright organizations to the contrary).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eArista Records, et al. v. Launch Media.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;Ken co-defended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eYahoo! Music\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;(f/k/a Launch Media) in a billion-dollar copyright infringement action brought by various record labels in the SDNY challenging the eligibility of Yahoo!'s Internet radio service for the statutory license under section 114 of the Copyright Act; Yahoo! secured a jury verdict in its favor (later affirmed by the Second Circuit).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026ldquo;Napster II\u0026rdquo; (\u003cem\u003eUMG Recordings, et al. v. Bertelsmann AG, et al\u003c/em\u003e). Ken led the defense of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eBertelsmann\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;against a series of music label and publisher copyright infringement claims brought in the SDNY and NDCA (asserting liability in excess of $20 billion) based on alleged direct, contributory and vicarious liability of Bertelsmann arising from its investments in and relationship with the original Napster file-sharing service; rulings on motions led to favorable settlements shortly before trial.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eEMI Music v. Multiply Inc\u003c/em\u003e. Ken represented this social network service in a lawsuit claiming copyright infringement of works in EMI\u0026rsquo;s label and publisher catalogues asserting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eMultiply\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;did not qualify for the DMCA safe harbor; representation enabled settlement shortly after lawsuit was fied.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSony/ATV Songs LLC, et al. v. MusicNet, Inc.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;Ken led the defense of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eMusicNet\u003c/strong\u003e, an early pioneer in the digital on-demand music service industry, against copyright infringement claims based on the alleged failure of the service to secure musical work reproduction rights licenses; representation enabled settlement not long after suit was filed.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eColeman, et al. v. ESPN\u003c/em\u003e. Ken led the defense of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eESPN\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;against claims of ASCAP members asserting copyright infringement based on ESPN\u0026rsquo;s alleged unlicensed public performance of musical works audible in the background of ESPN\u0026rsquo;s broadcasts of sports programming and challenging ESPN\u0026rsquo;s assertion of the \u0026ldquo;fair use\u0026rdquo; defense to such uses. The case was settled on favorable terms on the eve of trial after successfully defeating publishers\u0026rsquo; summary judgment motion relating to the fair use defense.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eAngel Music, Inc. et al v. ABC Sports, et al\u003c/em\u003e. Ken led the defense of the local television industry in this putative dual plaintiff/defendant class action copyright infringement lawsuit claiming that the\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eABC Television Network\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;had infringed the publishers\u0026rsquo; rights by failing to secure synchronization licenses for so-called \u0026ldquo;one time uses\u0026rdquo; of compositions that were used as background for Olympics sports \u0026ldquo;bio-pic\u0026rdquo; segments; successfully achieved dismissal of action.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eOther \u0026ldquo;Rate Court\u0026rdquo; Proceedings against ASCAP and BMI.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;Ken is and/or has been lead trial counsel for numerous other\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eASCAP/BMI licensees\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;engaged both in traditional and new media forms of content distribution; over the years, he has managed or co-managed the negotiations and, where necessary, trial teams in consent decree proceedings against ASCAP, BMI, SESAC and GMR on behalf of more than forty cable/satellite/broadcast/new media content distribution services and providers.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eAntitrust litigation against ASCAP and BMI.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;Ken was deeply involved in the seminal antitrust cases brought by\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ethe local television industry\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in the early 1980s (\u003cem\u003eBuffalo Broadcasting Co., et al. v. ASCAP, et al\u003c/em\u003e.) and the cable TV industry in the early 1990s (\u003cem\u003eNCTA, et al. v. BMI, et al\u003c/em\u003e.), against both ASCAP and BMI, which set the framework for the consent decree litigations that have followed.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eInternational Copyright Tribunal Matters.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;Ken has been granted \u0026ldquo;rights of audience\u0026rdquo; in the Copyright Tribunals of the UK and Hong Kong to litigate matters pertaining to the proper structure and rates for musical work public performances (and, in some cases, reproductions), on behalf of both new media/online distributors of content and traditional cable/satellite television distributors. For example, he was lead trial counsel in the precedent-setting UK Copyright Tribunal litigation on behalf of a consortium of music service providers (including AOL, Yahoo!, Apple, Napster LLC, RealNetworks and MusicNet) against the UK collective MCPS/PRS. Prior to that, he represented a consortium of cable and satellite providers in proceedings before the Hong Kong Copyright Tribunal against the Composers and Authors Society of Hong Kong (CASH), which resulted in a favorable industry-wide settlement on the eve of trial.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eRepresentative Other Media/Entertainment/Sports Litigation\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eiJaal.com, Inc., et al. v. baazee.com, Inc., et al\u003c/em\u003e. Ken was lead trial counsel in this SDNY jury trial defending\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ebaazee.com\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;(the \u0026ldquo;eBay of India,\u0026rdquo; in which News Corp\u0026rsquo;s Star TV was the primary outside investor before acquisition by eBay after trial) and its principals against claims of breach of oral contract, misappropriation of partnership opportunity, misappropriation of trade secrets and related claims; won complete defense verdict.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ePersky-Bright Organization, et al. v. Columbia Pictures Entertainment, Inc., et al\u003c/em\u003e. Ken was lead trial counsel in defense of two $300 million actions brought in SDNY and CDCA, in which the plaintiff motion picture investment groups alleged a series of violations by\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eColumbia Pictures\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;of motion picture distribution agreements, together with RICO, fraud, antitrust/block booking and tax indemnity claims. The case spanned several years and included a mini-trial of non-jury issues that resulted in the substantial curtailment of issues to proceed before a jury, leading to a favorable settlement thereafter.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eRobehr Films, Inc. v. American Airlines, Inc\u003c/em\u003e. Ken was lead trial counsel in this SDNY jury action brought by an in-flight film supplier alleging fraud and breach of contract by\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eAmerican Airlines.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;Plaintiff claimed American\u0026rsquo;s conduct had forced it out of business. A three-week jury trial resulted in a no-liability defendant\u0026rsquo;s verdict, which was affirmed on appeal to the Second Circuit.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eEuropean American Bank v. Film Finances, Inc., et al\u003c/em\u003e. Ken was lead counsel in defending this action brought by EAB under film loan agreements and a completion bond against clients\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eFilm Finances and production/distribution entities.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;After preliminary pre-trial proceedings and motion practice, the case was settled on a zero-liability basis.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eNorth American Soccer League (NASL) v. National Football\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eLeague\u003c/em\u003e. Ken assisted in representing the\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eNASL\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in this antitrust trial in the SDNY in which the NASL successfully challenged the NFL\u0026rsquo;s \u0026ldquo;cross ownership\u0026rdquo; ban, which would have prevented \u0026ldquo;cross-owners\u0026rdquo; such as Lamar Hunt and Joe Robbie from maintaining their investments in the NASL.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eNew York Islanders Hockey Club LP v. SMG, et al\u003c/em\u003e. Ken was lead trial counsel for\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ethe\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eN.Y. Islanders\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;hockey team in federal and state court litigations against SMG and Nassau County seeking to terminate lease arrangements at the Nassau Coliseum on novel constructive eviction theories. After preliminary injunction trial proceedings and a series of appeals, the case settled on a favorable basis.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eRepresentative Other Engagements\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eDavid Wilson et al. v. Airborne, Inc\u003c/em\u003e. Ken was lead counsel in representation of the\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eAirborne defendants\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in this consumer class action (removed to Central District of CA under CAFA) alleging,\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003einter alia\u003c/em\u003e, false advertising and violations of California consumer protection laws; led to a favorable class settlement.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eIn re CA Title Insurance Litigation.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;Ken was lead trial counsel for\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea national title insurance company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in this putative class action alleging violations of CA UCL \u0026sect;17200; oversaw successful motion practice leading to dismissal and 2012 order compelling individual claim arbitration.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNNN\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eBritannia Business Center, et al v. Grubb \u0026amp;amp;amp; Ellis Co., et al\u003c/em\u003e. Ken was lead trial counsel for\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003edefendants\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in these CA state court actions alleging violations of CA UCL \u0026sect;17200, fraud, etc., associated with the syndication of certain commercial real estate investments; successful motion practice resulted in substantial curtailment of claims at issue.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eRisko v. First Aviation Services, Inc., et al.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;Ken was lead trial counsel in this jury trial in Oakland, CA Superior Court alleging fraud and breach of contract against\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eFirst Aviation and its principals.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;The case was brought by a former First Aviation principal alleging, among other things, entitlements under an oral agreement, and threatened the continued viability of the client group. A two-week jury trial resulted in a no-liability defendants\u0026rsquo; verdict.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ePIA v. UBS Securities, Inc\u003c/em\u003e. Ken was lead trial counsel in defending lender liability, fraud and breach of contract claims brought in New York State Supreme Court by the owners of the Roosevelt Hotel in New York City against\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eUBS,\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;stemming from UBS\u0026rsquo; termination of an agreement to finance the renovation of the hotel. A three-week bench trial resulted in a no-liability defendant\u0026rsquo;s verdict. Appellate proceedings in the New York Appellate Division and Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court rulings in defendant\u0026rsquo;s favor.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eOvernight Partners, et al. v. Ritz Carlton Hotel Co\u003c/em\u003e. Ken was lead counsel in defense of this $300 million \u0026ldquo;kitchen sink\u0026rdquo; action brought in the SDNY by the owners of the Ritz Carlton hotel properties located in New York, Washington D.C., Houston and Aspen CO, against client\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eRitz Carlton.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;The case involved fraud, breach of contract, RICO, trademark and other claims brought by the Saudi group owners of those properties. After protracted pre-trial proceedings, the case settled on a favorable basis, whereby plaintiffs were stripped of their right to operate Ritz Carlton hotels.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eIn re Hylsa, S.A. v. M.W. Kellogg Co\u003c/em\u003e. Ken was lead trial counsel for\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eGrupo Industrial Alfa\u0026rsquo;s steel company, Hylsa, SA,\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in ICC arbitration involving hundreds of millions of dollars in claims and technology issues relating to construction of \u0026ldquo;HYL Process\u0026rdquo; steel plants for SIDOR in Venezuela. After a series of ICC hearings, case was settled on a zero-liability basis to Hylsa.\u003c/p\u003e"],"recognitions":[{"title":"“He is a sophisticated negotiator and provides top-notch service. He is very responsive and detail-oriented.”","detail":"CHAMBERS USA 2022"},{"title":"IP Trailblazers","detail":"National Law Journal, 2016"},{"title":"1 of 5 Media \u0026 Entertainment MVPs","detail":"Law360, 2015"},{"title":"Top 10 Copyright Lawyers","detail":"The Daily Journal"},{"title":"Leading IP Attorneys: California","detail":"The Daily Journal (multiple years through 2021)"},{"title":"Leading Lawyer: IP/Media \u0026 Entertainment","detail":"Chambers USA and Chambers Global (multiple years through 2022)"},{"title":"Legal 500 USA ","detail":"multiple years through 2022"},{"title":"Northern California Super Lawyer ","detail":"Super Lawyers (multiple years through 2021)"},{"title":"2026 Lawdragon 500","detail":"Leading Global Entertainment, Sports \u0026 Media Lawyers"},{"title":"Power Lawyers: Top 100 Outside Counsel ","detail":"Hollywood Reporter"},{"title":"Outstanding Antitrust Litigation Achievement in Private Law Practice: Finalist ","detail":"AAI, 2014"}]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":4405},{"id":4405}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2026-02-25T16:42:53.000Z","updated_at":"2026-02-25T16:42:53.000Z","searchable_text":"Steinthal{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“He is a sophisticated negotiator and provides top-notch service. He is very responsive and detail-oriented.”\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"CHAMBERS USA 2022\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"IP Trailblazers\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"National Law Journal, 2016\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"1 of 5 Media \u0026amp; Entertainment MVPs\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Law360, 2015\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Top 10 Copyright Lawyers\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"The Daily Journal\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Leading IP Attorneys: California\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"The Daily Journal (multiple years through 2021)\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Leading Lawyer: IP/Media \u0026amp; Entertainment\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers USA and Chambers Global (multiple years through 2022)\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500 USA \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"multiple years through 2022\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Northern California Super Lawyer \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Super Lawyers (multiple years through 2021)\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"2026 Lawdragon 500\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Leading Global Entertainment, Sports \u0026amp; Media Lawyers\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Power Lawyers: Top 100 Outside Counsel \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Hollywood Reporter\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Outstanding Antitrust Litigation Achievement in Private Law Practice: Finalist \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"AAI, 2014\"}{{ FIELD }}Representative Copyright Litigations/Matters\nIn re Determination of Rates and Terms for Digital Performance of Sound Recordings … (known as the Web V proceedings). Ken leads the representation of Google in these Copyright Royalty Board proceedings against the labels/recording industry to determine statutory royalty rates for digital performances of sound recordings made by non-interactive music streaming services under sections 112 and 114 of the Copyright Act (for the statutory license term 1/1/21-12/31/25). A five-week virtual Zoom trial was held in August - September 2020 (which was one of the first virtual trials of that magnitude conducted during the global pandemic), and ultimately led to a 300-page decision issued in June 2021 largely rejecting the labels’ positions and adopting much of Google’s arguments to minimize any rate increases. The labels have appealed the decision, which appeal is ongoing.{{ FIELD }}In re Determination of Rates and Terms for Making and Distributing Phonorecords. Ken leads the representation of Google in the Phonorecords III Copyright Royalty Board proceedings against the music publishing industry that will determine the statutory license rates and terms for the five-year period 2018–2022; the case involves \"mechanical\" reproduction licenses associated with the distribution of interactive/on-demand streaming services and cloud locker services under section 115 of the Copyright Act. The case is currently on remand to the CRB after the D.C. Circuit’s rejection of the publishers’ core appeal positions while granting the services’ request to vacate and remand for further proceedings certain aspects of the rate structure adopted by the CRB in its Initial Determination after trial. Johnson v. Copyright Royalty Board, 969 F.3d 363 (D.C. Cir. 2020). This follows the CRB’s initial trial determination agreeing with Google (and other services) in rejecting the core position of the publishers who sought to establish a per-play royalty rate.{{ FIELD }}Four Jays Music Company, et al. v. Apple Inc., et al. Ken led the defense of The Orchard (a subsidiary of Sony Music Entertainment) in this copyright infringement suit in the Southern District of New York claiming that The Orchard distributed digital recordings to stores for sale (through digital service providers such as Apple and Google) where the “mechanical” reproduction rights associated with the musical compositions embodied in those recordings were not properly licensed. The suit sought damages for infringement on behalf of Harry Warren, whose works were recorded by jazz and popular artists such as Billie Holliday, Dean Martin, Louis Armstrong, and Miles Davis. The case challenged various historical music clearance practices employed by digital music distributors. The case was settled on favorable terms in early 2021.\nIn re Determination of Rates and Terms for Performance or Display of Nondramatic Musical Works ... By Public Broadcasting Entities (known as “PB IV”). Ken is lead counsel for Corporation for Public Broadcasting, NPR and PBS in this Copyright Royalty Board proceeding against the music publishing industry that will determine the statutory license rates and terms (for the five-year period 2023-2027) for public broadcaster uses of musical works under Section 118 of the Copyright Act. Notices of Settlement with 3 of the 5 copyright owner representatives have been filed; if settlements cannot be reached with all the copyright owner participants, trial will be held in 2022. Ken also led the representation of CPB, NPR and PBS in the prior PB III proceedings resulting in favorable statutory rates for the public broadcasters during the five-year term 2018-2022.\nDOJ Investigation of ASCAP and BMI Consent Decrees. Ken led the representation of a consortium of audiovisual content distributors (including Netflix, Viacom/Showtime Networks, HBO/Turner Broadcasting, AMC Networks, Discovery Communications, ESPN, Fox Cable Network Services and several other entities) engaged in the distribution of audio-visual content in connection with preparing and advancing comments responsive to the US Department of Justice investigation regarding whether the existing antitrust consent decrees regulating the conduct of music performing rights collectives Broadcast Music Inc. (BMI) and the American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers (ASCAP) should be modified and/or terminated. In January 2021 the DOJ adopted the position advocated by Ken’s clients’ determining that there was no basis to modify or terminate the ASCAP and BMI consent decrees. Ken’s client group had secured a similar result under the prior Administration in 2016 on behalf of a similar consortium.\nDowntown Music Publishing, LLC v. Peloton Interactive, Inc. Ken led the defense of Peloton in a high-profile copyright infringement litigation brought by independent music publishers in the Southern District of New York in which the publishers sued Peloton on the eve of Peloton’s IPO seeking over $300 million based on claims that Peloton willfully infringed over 21,000 musical works. Peloton in response impleaded third-party National Music Publishers’ Association (“NMPA”) and filed counterclaims asserting both antitrust law violations and tortious interference with business relations counterclaims. The case was settled on favorable terms in early 2020.\nSESAC v. Radio Music License Committee (“RMLC”). Ken was lead counsel for the RMLC, the representative body of the broadcast radio industry, in this first-ever arbitration proceeding to determine reasonable industry-wide rates and terms (during the three-year term 2016–2018) for some 7,000 radio stations' broadcasts and simulcasts of the musical works controlled by performing rights organization SESAC. The arbitration took place in 2017 and resulted in a favorable outcome for RMLC, reducing pre-existing SESAC fee levels by more than 50%.\nESPN v. BMI. Ken was lead counsel for ESPN in this litigation against performing rights organization Broadcast Music, Inc. under the BMI antitrust consent decree. ESPN directly licenses from writers and publishers the vast majority of the music it performs; and it sought a determination of reasonable license fees from BMI for the music in commercials or ambient music overheard in stadiums and arenas during sports telecasts, which ESPN is not in a position to directly license. This case would have been the first to challenge BMI’s off-the-shelf license structure and rates for audiovisual programming based on evidence of competitive direct licensing transactions and also involved the issue of whether performances of ambient music captured in connection with live sports broadcasts are fair use. The case was settled shortly before trial in 2017.\nPandora Media, Inc. v. ASCAP. Ken was lead counsel in this federal court trial and appeal on Pandora’s behalf culminating in the Second Circuit’s 2015 affirmance of rulings (i) upholding Pandora’s challenge to the efforts of major ASCAP publisher members to “partially” withdraw from ASCAP in an effort to avoid rate oversight by the court overseeing the ASCAP antitrust consent decree, and (ii) establishing rates consistent with Pandora’s position.\nU.S. v. ASCAP, Application of MobiTV, Inc. Ken led the federal court trial before the judge supervising the ASCAP antitrust consent decree and ensuing successful Second Circuit appeal resulting in adoption of client MobiTV’s proposal, establishing favorable rates and terms for mobile distribution of TV/radio content (and rejecting ASCAP’s position that mobile/online content distribution entities should be subject to a far more onerous royalty structure than exists for entities distributing content via traditional media vehicles).\nU.S. v. ASCAP, Application of RealNetworks Inc. and Yahoo!, Inc. Ken led the trial and argued the appeal on behalf of Real Networks and Yahoo! leading to this landmark Second Circuit decision in September 2010 (and denial of certiorari by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2012) holding that transmissions of music downloads do not trigger public performance rights liabilities for entities engaged in content distribution (and rejecting the position of ASCAP and other copyright organizations to the contrary).\nArista Records, et al. v. Launch Media. Ken co-defended Yahoo! Music (f/k/a Launch Media) in a billion-dollar copyright infringement action brought by various record labels in the SDNY challenging the eligibility of Yahoo!'s Internet radio service for the statutory license under section 114 of the Copyright Act; Yahoo! secured a jury verdict in its favor (later affirmed by the Second Circuit).\n“Napster II” (UMG Recordings, et al. v. Bertelsmann AG, et al). Ken led the defense of Bertelsmann against a series of music label and publisher copyright infringement claims brought in the SDNY and NDCA (asserting liability in excess of $20 billion) based on alleged direct, contributory and vicarious liability of Bertelsmann arising from its investments in and relationship with the original Napster file-sharing service; rulings on motions led to favorable settlements shortly before trial.\nEMI Music v. Multiply Inc. Ken represented this social network service in a lawsuit claiming copyright infringement of works in EMI’s label and publisher catalogues asserting Multiply did not qualify for the DMCA safe harbor; representation enabled settlement shortly after lawsuit was fied.\nSony/ATV Songs LLC, et al. v. MusicNet, Inc. Ken led the defense of MusicNet, an early pioneer in the digital on-demand music service industry, against copyright infringement claims based on the alleged failure of the service to secure musical work reproduction rights licenses; representation enabled settlement not long after suit was filed.\nColeman, et al. v. ESPN. Ken led the defense of ESPN against claims of ASCAP members asserting copyright infringement based on ESPN’s alleged unlicensed public performance of musical works audible in the background of ESPN’s broadcasts of sports programming and challenging ESPN’s assertion of the “fair use” defense to such uses. The case was settled on favorable terms on the eve of trial after successfully defeating publishers’ summary judgment motion relating to the fair use defense.\nAngel Music, Inc. et al v. ABC Sports, et al. Ken led the defense of the local television industry in this putative dual plaintiff/defendant class action copyright infringement lawsuit claiming that the ABC Television Network had infringed the publishers’ rights by failing to secure synchronization licenses for so-called “one time uses” of compositions that were used as background for Olympics sports “bio-pic” segments; successfully achieved dismissal of action.\nOther “Rate Court” Proceedings against ASCAP and BMI. Ken is and/or has been lead trial counsel for numerous other ASCAP/BMI licensees engaged both in traditional and new media forms of content distribution; over the years, he has managed or co-managed the negotiations and, where necessary, trial teams in consent decree proceedings against ASCAP, BMI, SESAC and GMR on behalf of more than forty cable/satellite/broadcast/new media content distribution services and providers.\nAntitrust litigation against ASCAP and BMI. Ken was deeply involved in the seminal antitrust cases brought by the local television industry in the early 1980s (Buffalo Broadcasting Co., et al. v. ASCAP, et al.) and the cable TV industry in the early 1990s (NCTA, et al. v. BMI, et al.), against both ASCAP and BMI, which set the framework for the consent decree litigations that have followed.\nInternational Copyright Tribunal Matters. Ken has been granted “rights of audience” in the Copyright Tribunals of the UK and Hong Kong to litigate matters pertaining to the proper structure and rates for musical work public performances (and, in some cases, reproductions), on behalf of both new media/online distributors of content and traditional cable/satellite television distributors. For example, he was lead trial counsel in the precedent-setting UK Copyright Tribunal litigation on behalf of a consortium of music service providers (including AOL, Yahoo!, Apple, Napster LLC, RealNetworks and MusicNet) against the UK collective MCPS/PRS. Prior to that, he represented a consortium of cable and satellite providers in proceedings before the Hong Kong Copyright Tribunal against the Composers and Authors Society of Hong Kong (CASH), which resulted in a favorable industry-wide settlement on the eve of trial.{{ FIELD }}Representative Other Media/Entertainment/Sports Litigation\niJaal.com, Inc., et al. v. baazee.com, Inc., et al. Ken was lead trial counsel in this SDNY jury trial defending baazee.com (the “eBay of India,” in which News Corp’s Star TV was the primary outside investor before acquisition by eBay after trial) and its principals against claims of breach of oral contract, misappropriation of partnership opportunity, misappropriation of trade secrets and related claims; won complete defense verdict.\nPersky-Bright Organization, et al. v. Columbia Pictures Entertainment, Inc., et al. Ken was lead trial counsel in defense of two $300 million actions brought in SDNY and CDCA, in which the plaintiff motion picture investment groups alleged a series of violations by Columbia Pictures of motion picture distribution agreements, together with RICO, fraud, antitrust/block booking and tax indemnity claims. The case spanned several years and included a mini-trial of non-jury issues that resulted in the substantial curtailment of issues to proceed before a jury, leading to a favorable settlement thereafter.\nRobehr Films, Inc. v. American Airlines, Inc. Ken was lead trial counsel in this SDNY jury action brought by an in-flight film supplier alleging fraud and breach of contract by American Airlines. Plaintiff claimed American’s conduct had forced it out of business. A three-week jury trial resulted in a no-liability defendant’s verdict, which was affirmed on appeal to the Second Circuit.\nEuropean American Bank v. Film Finances, Inc., et al. Ken was lead counsel in defending this action brought by EAB under film loan agreements and a completion bond against clients Film Finances and production/distribution entities. After preliminary pre-trial proceedings and motion practice, the case was settled on a zero-liability basis.\nNorth American Soccer League (NASL) v. National Football League. Ken assisted in representing the NASL in this antitrust trial in the SDNY in which the NASL successfully challenged the NFL’s “cross ownership” ban, which would have prevented “cross-owners” such as Lamar Hunt and Joe Robbie from maintaining their investments in the NASL.\nNew York Islanders Hockey Club LP v. SMG, et al. Ken was lead trial counsel for the N.Y. Islanders hockey team in federal and state court litigations against SMG and Nassau County seeking to terminate lease arrangements at the Nassau Coliseum on novel constructive eviction theories. After preliminary injunction trial proceedings and a series of appeals, the case settled on a favorable basis.{{ FIELD }}Representative Other Engagements\nDavid Wilson et al. v. Airborne, Inc. Ken was lead counsel in representation of the Airborne defendants in this consumer class action (removed to Central District of CA under CAFA) alleging, inter alia, false advertising and violations of California consumer protection laws; led to a favorable class settlement.\nIn re CA Title Insurance Litigation. Ken was lead trial counsel for a national title insurance company in this putative class action alleging violations of CA UCL §17200; oversaw successful motion practice leading to dismissal and 2012 order compelling individual claim arbitration.\nNNN Britannia Business Center, et al v. Grubb \u0026amp;amp;amp; Ellis Co., et al. Ken was lead trial counsel for defendants in these CA state court actions alleging violations of CA UCL §17200, fraud, etc., associated with the syndication of certain commercial real estate investments; successful motion practice resulted in substantial curtailment of claims at issue.\nRisko v. First Aviation Services, Inc., et al. Ken was lead trial counsel in this jury trial in Oakland, CA Superior Court alleging fraud and breach of contract against First Aviation and its principals. The case was brought by a former First Aviation principal alleging, among other things, entitlements under an oral agreement, and threatened the continued viability of the client group. A two-week jury trial resulted in a no-liability defendants’ verdict.\nPIA v. UBS Securities, Inc. Ken was lead trial counsel in defending lender liability, fraud and breach of contract claims brought in New York State Supreme Court by the owners of the Roosevelt Hotel in New York City against UBS, stemming from UBS’ termination of an agreement to finance the renovation of the hotel. A three-week bench trial resulted in a no-liability defendant’s verdict. Appellate proceedings in the New York Appellate Division and Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court rulings in defendant’s favor.\nOvernight Partners, et al. v. Ritz Carlton Hotel Co. Ken was lead counsel in defense of this $300 million “kitchen sink” action brought in the SDNY by the owners of the Ritz Carlton hotel properties located in New York, Washington D.C., Houston and Aspen CO, against client Ritz Carlton. The case involved fraud, breach of contract, RICO, trademark and other claims brought by the Saudi group owners of those properties. After protracted pre-trial proceedings, the case settled on a favorable basis, whereby plaintiffs were stripped of their right to operate Ritz Carlton hotels.\nIn re Hylsa, S.A. v. M.W. Kellogg Co. Ken was lead trial counsel for Grupo Industrial Alfa’s steel company, Hylsa, SA, in ICC arbitration involving hundreds of millions of dollars in claims and technology issues relating to construction of “HYL Process” steel plants for SIDOR in Venezuela. After a series of ICC hearings, case was settled on a zero-liability basis to Hylsa.{{ FIELD }}Kenneth Steinthal, known for litigating matters in the intellectual property/media sector, is a widely recognized leader in his field, including by National Law Journal as a 2016 IP Trailblazer, by Law360 as 1 of 5 Media \u0026amp; Entertainment MVPs in 2015, by Legal 500 as 1 of only 8 members of its U.S. Copyright Hall of Fame, and on a consistent annual basis (including in 2022) by multiple legal publications including each of Legal 500, Chambers USA, Managing IP (as an IP Star) and the Daily Journal’s listing of Top Intellectual Property Lawyers. \nKen has four decades of experience litigating matters spanning the IP/media sector, in jury and bench trial settings and before copyright tribunals in the U.S. and internationally. Ken’s practice is focused on copyright, DMCA and antitrust/rate-setting cases involving the distribution of audio and audiovisual content. His litigation matters typically involve the defense of copyright infringement claims, the application of DMCA safe harbors and the establishment of structures and rates for the exploitation of copyrighted works in both traditional (e.g., cable, satellite, broadcast) and new media distribution environments. In just the last few years, Ken has led teams on behalf of Google, Peloton, the Radio Music License Committee (representing the interests of the U.S. broadcast radio industry), NPR/PBS, The Orchard, ESPN and Pandora before different courts and tribunals (including the U.S. Copyright Royalty Board) in defense of copyright infringement claims and establishing rate structures governing his clients' exploitation of music licensed by publishers and labels (and their representative organizations).\nIn a constantly evolving media distribution environment, Ken and his team also regularly counsel clients regarding the licensing implications and risks associated with their existing or contemplated product offerings spanning both traditional and new media. He also assumed an industry-leading role on behalf of the content distribution community (including Netflix, Paramount Global/ViacomCBS, ESPN, Warner Media/HBO, Discovery Communications, AMC Networks, Fox Cable Network Services, iHeartMedia, Google/YouTube, and many others) in connection with the Department of Justice’s periodic investigations of the ASCAP and BMI antitrust consent decrees governing the licensing of public performance rights in musical compositions. Partner “He is a sophisticated negotiator and provides top-notch service. He is very responsive and detail-oriented.” CHAMBERS USA 2022 IP Trailblazers National Law Journal, 2016 1 of 5 Media \u0026amp; Entertainment MVPs Law360, 2015 Top 10 Copyright Lawyers The Daily Journal Leading IP Attorneys: California The Daily Journal (multiple years through 2021) Leading Lawyer: IP/Media \u0026amp; Entertainment Chambers USA and Chambers Global (multiple years through 2022) Legal 500 USA  multiple years through 2022 Northern California Super Lawyer  Super Lawyers (multiple years through 2021) 2026 Lawdragon 500 Leading Global Entertainment, Sports \u0026amp; Media Lawyers Power Lawyers: Top 100 Outside Counsel  Hollywood Reporter Outstanding Antitrust Litigation Achievement in Private Law Practice: Finalist  AAI, 2014 Williams College  Fordham University Fordham University School of Law Supreme Court of the United States U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York U.S. District Court for the Central District of California U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California California New York Representative Copyright Litigations/Matters\nIn re Determination of Rates and Terms for Digital Performance of Sound Recordings … (known as the Web V proceedings). Ken leads the representation of Google in these Copyright Royalty Board proceedings against the labels/recording industry to determine statutory royalty rates for digital performances of sound recordings made by non-interactive music streaming services under sections 112 and 114 of the Copyright Act (for the statutory license term 1/1/21-12/31/25). A five-week virtual Zoom trial was held in August - September 2020 (which was one of the first virtual trials of that magnitude conducted during the global pandemic), and ultimately led to a 300-page decision issued in June 2021 largely rejecting the labels’ positions and adopting much of Google’s arguments to minimize any rate increases. The labels have appealed the decision, which appeal is ongoing. In re Determination of Rates and Terms for Making and Distributing Phonorecords. Ken leads the representation of Google in the Phonorecords III Copyright Royalty Board proceedings against the music publishing industry that will determine the statutory license rates and terms for the five-year period 2018–2022; the case involves \"mechanical\" reproduction licenses associated with the distribution of interactive/on-demand streaming services and cloud locker services under section 115 of the Copyright Act. The case is currently on remand to the CRB after the D.C. Circuit’s rejection of the publishers’ core appeal positions while granting the services’ request to vacate and remand for further proceedings certain aspects of the rate structure adopted by the CRB in its Initial Determination after trial. Johnson v. Copyright Royalty Board, 969 F.3d 363 (D.C. Cir. 2020). This follows the CRB’s initial trial determination agreeing with Google (and other services) in rejecting the core position of the publishers who sought to establish a per-play royalty rate. Four Jays Music Company, et al. v. Apple Inc., et al. Ken led the defense of The Orchard (a subsidiary of Sony Music Entertainment) in this copyright infringement suit in the Southern District of New York claiming that The Orchard distributed digital recordings to stores for sale (through digital service providers such as Apple and Google) where the “mechanical” reproduction rights associated with the musical compositions embodied in those recordings were not properly licensed. The suit sought damages for infringement on behalf of Harry Warren, whose works were recorded by jazz and popular artists such as Billie Holliday, Dean Martin, Louis Armstrong, and Miles Davis. The case challenged various historical music clearance practices employed by digital music distributors. The case was settled on favorable terms in early 2021.\nIn re Determination of Rates and Terms for Performance or Display of Nondramatic Musical Works ... By Public Broadcasting Entities (known as “PB IV”). Ken is lead counsel for Corporation for Public Broadcasting, NPR and PBS in this Copyright Royalty Board proceeding against the music publishing industry that will determine the statutory license rates and terms (for the five-year period 2023-2027) for public broadcaster uses of musical works under Section 118 of the Copyright Act. Notices of Settlement with 3 of the 5 copyright owner representatives have been filed; if settlements cannot be reached with all the copyright owner participants, trial will be held in 2022. Ken also led the representation of CPB, NPR and PBS in the prior PB III proceedings resulting in favorable statutory rates for the public broadcasters during the five-year term 2018-2022.\nDOJ Investigation of ASCAP and BMI Consent Decrees. Ken led the representation of a consortium of audiovisual content distributors (including Netflix, Viacom/Showtime Networks, HBO/Turner Broadcasting, AMC Networks, Discovery Communications, ESPN, Fox Cable Network Services and several other entities) engaged in the distribution of audio-visual content in connection with preparing and advancing comments responsive to the US Department of Justice investigation regarding whether the existing antitrust consent decrees regulating the conduct of music performing rights collectives Broadcast Music Inc. (BMI) and the American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers (ASCAP) should be modified and/or terminated. In January 2021 the DOJ adopted the position advocated by Ken’s clients’ determining that there was no basis to modify or terminate the ASCAP and BMI consent decrees. Ken’s client group had secured a similar result under the prior Administration in 2016 on behalf of a similar consortium.\nDowntown Music Publishing, LLC v. Peloton Interactive, Inc. Ken led the defense of Peloton in a high-profile copyright infringement litigation brought by independent music publishers in the Southern District of New York in which the publishers sued Peloton on the eve of Peloton’s IPO seeking over $300 million based on claims that Peloton willfully infringed over 21,000 musical works. Peloton in response impleaded third-party National Music Publishers’ Association (“NMPA”) and filed counterclaims asserting both antitrust law violations and tortious interference with business relations counterclaims. The case was settled on favorable terms in early 2020.\nSESAC v. Radio Music License Committee (“RMLC”). Ken was lead counsel for the RMLC, the representative body of the broadcast radio industry, in this first-ever arbitration proceeding to determine reasonable industry-wide rates and terms (during the three-year term 2016–2018) for some 7,000 radio stations' broadcasts and simulcasts of the musical works controlled by performing rights organization SESAC. The arbitration took place in 2017 and resulted in a favorable outcome for RMLC, reducing pre-existing SESAC fee levels by more than 50%.\nESPN v. BMI. Ken was lead counsel for ESPN in this litigation against performing rights organization Broadcast Music, Inc. under the BMI antitrust consent decree. ESPN directly licenses from writers and publishers the vast majority of the music it performs; and it sought a determination of reasonable license fees from BMI for the music in commercials or ambient music overheard in stadiums and arenas during sports telecasts, which ESPN is not in a position to directly license. This case would have been the first to challenge BMI’s off-the-shelf license structure and rates for audiovisual programming based on evidence of competitive direct licensing transactions and also involved the issue of whether performances of ambient music captured in connection with live sports broadcasts are fair use. The case was settled shortly before trial in 2017.\nPandora Media, Inc. v. ASCAP. Ken was lead counsel in this federal court trial and appeal on Pandora’s behalf culminating in the Second Circuit’s 2015 affirmance of rulings (i) upholding Pandora’s challenge to the efforts of major ASCAP publisher members to “partially” withdraw from ASCAP in an effort to avoid rate oversight by the court overseeing the ASCAP antitrust consent decree, and (ii) establishing rates consistent with Pandora’s position.\nU.S. v. ASCAP, Application of MobiTV, Inc. Ken led the federal court trial before the judge supervising the ASCAP antitrust consent decree and ensuing successful Second Circuit appeal resulting in adoption of client MobiTV’s proposal, establishing favorable rates and terms for mobile distribution of TV/radio content (and rejecting ASCAP’s position that mobile/online content distribution entities should be subject to a far more onerous royalty structure than exists for entities distributing content via traditional media vehicles).\nU.S. v. ASCAP, Application of RealNetworks Inc. and Yahoo!, Inc. Ken led the trial and argued the appeal on behalf of Real Networks and Yahoo! leading to this landmark Second Circuit decision in September 2010 (and denial of certiorari by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2012) holding that transmissions of music downloads do not trigger public performance rights liabilities for entities engaged in content distribution (and rejecting the position of ASCAP and other copyright organizations to the contrary).\nArista Records, et al. v. Launch Media. Ken co-defended Yahoo! Music (f/k/a Launch Media) in a billion-dollar copyright infringement action brought by various record labels in the SDNY challenging the eligibility of Yahoo!'s Internet radio service for the statutory license under section 114 of the Copyright Act; Yahoo! secured a jury verdict in its favor (later affirmed by the Second Circuit).\n“Napster II” (UMG Recordings, et al. v. Bertelsmann AG, et al). Ken led the defense of Bertelsmann against a series of music label and publisher copyright infringement claims brought in the SDNY and NDCA (asserting liability in excess of $20 billion) based on alleged direct, contributory and vicarious liability of Bertelsmann arising from its investments in and relationship with the original Napster file-sharing service; rulings on motions led to favorable settlements shortly before trial.\nEMI Music v. Multiply Inc. Ken represented this social network service in a lawsuit claiming copyright infringement of works in EMI’s label and publisher catalogues asserting Multiply did not qualify for the DMCA safe harbor; representation enabled settlement shortly after lawsuit was fied.\nSony/ATV Songs LLC, et al. v. MusicNet, Inc. Ken led the defense of MusicNet, an early pioneer in the digital on-demand music service industry, against copyright infringement claims based on the alleged failure of the service to secure musical work reproduction rights licenses; representation enabled settlement not long after suit was filed.\nColeman, et al. v. ESPN. Ken led the defense of ESPN against claims of ASCAP members asserting copyright infringement based on ESPN’s alleged unlicensed public performance of musical works audible in the background of ESPN’s broadcasts of sports programming and challenging ESPN’s assertion of the “fair use” defense to such uses. The case was settled on favorable terms on the eve of trial after successfully defeating publishers’ summary judgment motion relating to the fair use defense.\nAngel Music, Inc. et al v. ABC Sports, et al. Ken led the defense of the local television industry in this putative dual plaintiff/defendant class action copyright infringement lawsuit claiming that the ABC Television Network had infringed the publishers’ rights by failing to secure synchronization licenses for so-called “one time uses” of compositions that were used as background for Olympics sports “bio-pic” segments; successfully achieved dismissal of action.\nOther “Rate Court” Proceedings against ASCAP and BMI. Ken is and/or has been lead trial counsel for numerous other ASCAP/BMI licensees engaged both in traditional and new media forms of content distribution; over the years, he has managed or co-managed the negotiations and, where necessary, trial teams in consent decree proceedings against ASCAP, BMI, SESAC and GMR on behalf of more than forty cable/satellite/broadcast/new media content distribution services and providers.\nAntitrust litigation against ASCAP and BMI. Ken was deeply involved in the seminal antitrust cases brought by the local television industry in the early 1980s (Buffalo Broadcasting Co., et al. v. ASCAP, et al.) and the cable TV industry in the early 1990s (NCTA, et al. v. BMI, et al.), against both ASCAP and BMI, which set the framework for the consent decree litigations that have followed.\nInternational Copyright Tribunal Matters. Ken has been granted “rights of audience” in the Copyright Tribunals of the UK and Hong Kong to litigate matters pertaining to the proper structure and rates for musical work public performances (and, in some cases, reproductions), on behalf of both new media/online distributors of content and traditional cable/satellite television distributors. For example, he was lead trial counsel in the precedent-setting UK Copyright Tribunal litigation on behalf of a consortium of music service providers (including AOL, Yahoo!, Apple, Napster LLC, RealNetworks and MusicNet) against the UK collective MCPS/PRS. Prior to that, he represented a consortium of cable and satellite providers in proceedings before the Hong Kong Copyright Tribunal against the Composers and Authors Society of Hong Kong (CASH), which resulted in a favorable industry-wide settlement on the eve of trial. Representative Other Media/Entertainment/Sports Litigation\niJaal.com, Inc., et al. v. baazee.com, Inc., et al. Ken was lead trial counsel in this SDNY jury trial defending baazee.com (the “eBay of India,” in which News Corp’s Star TV was the primary outside investor before acquisition by eBay after trial) and its principals against claims of breach of oral contract, misappropriation of partnership opportunity, misappropriation of trade secrets and related claims; won complete defense verdict.\nPersky-Bright Organization, et al. v. Columbia Pictures Entertainment, Inc., et al. Ken was lead trial counsel in defense of two $300 million actions brought in SDNY and CDCA, in which the plaintiff motion picture investment groups alleged a series of violations by Columbia Pictures of motion picture distribution agreements, together with RICO, fraud, antitrust/block booking and tax indemnity claims. The case spanned several years and included a mini-trial of non-jury issues that resulted in the substantial curtailment of issues to proceed before a jury, leading to a favorable settlement thereafter.\nRobehr Films, Inc. v. American Airlines, Inc. Ken was lead trial counsel in this SDNY jury action brought by an in-flight film supplier alleging fraud and breach of contract by American Airlines. Plaintiff claimed American’s conduct had forced it out of business. A three-week jury trial resulted in a no-liability defendant’s verdict, which was affirmed on appeal to the Second Circuit.\nEuropean American Bank v. Film Finances, Inc., et al. Ken was lead counsel in defending this action brought by EAB under film loan agreements and a completion bond against clients Film Finances and production/distribution entities. After preliminary pre-trial proceedings and motion practice, the case was settled on a zero-liability basis.\nNorth American Soccer League (NASL) v. National Football League. Ken assisted in representing the NASL in this antitrust trial in the SDNY in which the NASL successfully challenged the NFL’s “cross ownership” ban, which would have prevented “cross-owners” such as Lamar Hunt and Joe Robbie from maintaining their investments in the NASL.\nNew York Islanders Hockey Club LP v. SMG, et al. Ken was lead trial counsel for the N.Y. Islanders hockey team in federal and state court litigations against SMG and Nassau County seeking to terminate lease arrangements at the Nassau Coliseum on novel constructive eviction theories. After preliminary injunction trial proceedings and a series of appeals, the case settled on a favorable basis. Representative Other Engagements\nDavid Wilson et al. v. Airborne, Inc. Ken was lead counsel in representation of the Airborne defendants in this consumer class action (removed to Central District of CA under CAFA) alleging, inter alia, false advertising and violations of California consumer protection laws; led to a favorable class settlement.\nIn re CA Title Insurance Litigation. Ken was lead trial counsel for a national title insurance company in this putative class action alleging violations of CA UCL §17200; oversaw successful motion practice leading to dismissal and 2012 order compelling individual claim arbitration.\nNNN Britannia Business Center, et al v. Grubb \u0026amp;amp;amp; Ellis Co., et al. Ken was lead trial counsel for defendants in these CA state court actions alleging violations of CA UCL §17200, fraud, etc., associated with the syndication of certain commercial real estate investments; successful motion practice resulted in substantial curtailment of claims at issue.\nRisko v. First Aviation Services, Inc., et al. Ken was lead trial counsel in this jury trial in Oakland, CA Superior Court alleging fraud and breach of contract against First Aviation and its principals. The case was brought by a former First Aviation principal alleging, among other things, entitlements under an oral agreement, and threatened the continued viability of the client group. A two-week jury trial resulted in a no-liability defendants’ verdict.\nPIA v. UBS Securities, Inc. Ken was lead trial counsel in defending lender liability, fraud and breach of contract claims brought in New York State Supreme Court by the owners of the Roosevelt Hotel in New York City against UBS, stemming from UBS’ termination of an agreement to finance the renovation of the hotel. A three-week bench trial resulted in a no-liability defendant’s verdict. Appellate proceedings in the New York Appellate Division and Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court rulings in defendant’s favor.\nOvernight Partners, et al. v. Ritz Carlton Hotel Co. Ken was lead counsel in defense of this $300 million “kitchen sink” action brought in the SDNY by the owners of the Ritz Carlton hotel properties located in New York, Washington D.C., Houston and Aspen CO, against client Ritz Carlton. The case involved fraud, breach of contract, RICO, trademark and other claims brought by the Saudi group owners of those properties. After protracted pre-trial proceedings, the case settled on a favorable basis, whereby plaintiffs were stripped of their right to operate Ritz Carlton hotels.\nIn re Hylsa, S.A. v. M.W. Kellogg Co. Ken was lead trial counsel for Grupo Industrial Alfa’s steel company, Hylsa, SA, in ICC arbitration involving hundreds of millions of dollars in claims and technology issues relating to construction of “HYL Process” steel plants for SIDOR in Venezuela. After a series of ICC hearings, case was settled on a zero-liability basis to Hylsa.","searchable_name":"Kenneth L. Steinthal","is_active":true,"featured":null,"publish_date":null,"expiration_date":null,"blog_featured":null,"published_by":202,"capability_group_featured":null,"home_page_featured":null},{"id":447508,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":7307,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eSteve Stodghill\u0026rsquo;s practice emphasizes all aspects of complex litigation and solidifies him as one of the most accomplished commercial litigators in the country. He has successfully represented numerous high-profile clients across a wide array of complex commercial litigation areas, including over 20 prominent billionaires, Fortune 100 corporations, professional athletes, high-profile celebrities, world-renowned actors, and the owners of the Dallas Mavericks, Texas Rangers, Dallas Stars, Kansas City Chiefs, Liverpool Football Club, and FC Dallas. Since 2019, he has served as Public Safety Commissioner for the State of Texas, an appointment by Texas Governor Greg Abbott, has a Secret Level Clearance from Homeland Security, and has testified multiple times before the Texas State Senate on issues related to public safety. \u0026nbsp;[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn addition to being chief litigation counsel to Mark Cuban and the Dallas Mavericks for over 20 years, Steve has previously represented the interests of over 20 billionaires and other high-net-worth individuals, including Clark Hunt, the Reeder Family interests, Todd Wagner, Tom Dundon, Tom Hicks, Lamar Hunt, Trammell Crow, Phil Romano, Richard Rogers, Tim Headington, Gerald Ford, John Rochon, Geoffrey Raynor, Jim Dondero, the Wilks Brothers, and multiple members of the Al Rajhi family.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHe has represented numerous prominent companies, including ExxonMobil, Yahoo!, Bank One, Zurich Financial, Mary Kay Cosmetics, Alcatel, Guaranty Federal Bank, Trammell Crow, Texaco, Xerox, Sabre, Eljer Industries, Qwest, Hunt Asset Management, Callaway Golf, Dean Foods, Fossil, broadcast.com, Richmont, U.S. Risk, Generation Partners, Prophet Equity, Comerica Bank, PlainsCapital Bank, AdvoCare, Worldwide Express, Cook Children\u0026rsquo;s Hospital, and Driscoll Children\u0026rsquo;s Hospital in significant litigation matters.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn September 2019, Governor Greg Abbott appointed Steve to the Texas Public Safety Commission, which oversees the Texas Department of Public Safety (TxDPS), the agency responsible for statewide planning and policy formation regarding the enforcement of criminal, traffic, and safety laws; crime prevention; and law and public safety education. With an annual budget of $1.2 billion, TxDPS employs 11,000 individuals across 13 divisions including the Texas Rangers, Texas Highway Patrol, Driver License, Regulatory Licensing, and Intelligence and Counterterrorism. In addition, the Commission interfaces with the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Central Intelligence Agency, National Security Agency, Department of Defense, and similar federal agencies, while advising the Governor in responding to state emergencies such as natural disasters, mass shootings, insurrections, invasions, and acts of terrorism.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSteve is an Eagle Scout with a Silver Palm, the highest rank in Scouting, and graduated with high honors, Phi Beta Kappa, from the University of Texas at Austin.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn addition to his legal acumen, Steve has extensive experience in film acting and production, with credits featured on IMDb. His acting roles include appearances in \u003cem\u003eThe Wendell Baker Story\u003c/em\u003e (2007), \u003cem\u003eKarma Police\u003c/em\u003e (2008), \u003cem\u003eDinner\u003c/em\u003e (2010), \u003cem\u003eOccupy, Texas\u003c/em\u003e (2015), \u003cem\u003eThe Starck Club\u003c/em\u003e (2016), \u003cem\u003eUndying\u003c/em\u003e (2019), and \u003cem\u003eSatanic Panic\u003c/em\u003e (2019). In 2018, Steve launched Last Rodeo Studios, which quickly gained recognition with its first two feature films, \u003cem\u003eScare Me\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eSave Yourselves!\u003c/em\u003e, both premiering at Sundance and later securing international distribution. The studio continued its success with \u003cem\u003eSomewhere Quiet\u003c/em\u003e, a suspense thriller that debuted at the Tribeca Film Festival in 2023.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBeyond feature films, Steve earned the prestigious Silver Telly Award in 2021 for co-producing \u003cem\u003eBIG NIGHT (At the Museum)\u003c/em\u003e, a project that celebrated the Country Music Hall of Fame and Museum and raised over one million dollars for the institution. The film also received a Bronze MUSE Award and multiple additional Telly Awards for excellence in engagement and production.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSteve\u0026rsquo;s creative reach extends into literature, appearing as a character in John Grisham\u0026rsquo;s \u003cem\u003eThe Exchange\u003c/em\u003e (2023) and thrillers by authors Harry Hunsicker and Brian Cuban.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn addition to his recognition in the legal community, Steve has received six major awards for his philanthropic efforts on behalf of charitable organizations in Dallas:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cul\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eThe \u003cstrong\u003e2024 Angel Award\u003c/strong\u003e presented annually by the Farrah Fawcett Foundation for his work with cancer-related initiatives, including Cattle Baron\u0026rsquo;s Ball.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eThe \u003cstrong\u003e2021 Silver Telly Award\u003c/strong\u003e for his co-production of BIG NIGHT (At the Museum), a film which highlighted the legacy of the Country Music Hall of Fame and Museum in Nashville, Tennessee.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eThe \u003cstrong\u003e2018 Larry Schoenbrun Jurisprudence Award\u003c/strong\u003e presented annually by the Anti-Defamation League to a member of the legal community for outstanding leadership, exemplary contributions to the community, and a commitment to the ideals of the ADL.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eThe \u003cstrong\u003e2018 Obelisk Award\u003c/strong\u003e presented annually by the Business Council for the Arts to companies and individuals whose contributions and achievements in the arts have made a profound impact in North Texas.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eThe \u003cstrong\u003e2017 Stodghill Award\u003c/strong\u003e presented annually by the Dallas Film Society and Dallas International Film Festival to individuals based on their long-term efforts in support of film in North Texas.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eThe \u003cstrong\u003e2012 Milton Levy Award\u003c/strong\u003e presented annually by Special Care and Career Services/LaunchAbility for lifetime service to children and young adults with cognitive disabilities.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ul\u003e","slug":"steve-stodghill","email":"sstodghill@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":null,"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[]},"expertise":[{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":129,"guid":"129.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":2,"guid":"2.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":3,"guid":"3.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":19,"guid":"19.capabilities","index":4,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":107,"guid":"107.capabilities","index":5,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":103,"guid":"103.capabilities","index":6,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":1233,"guid":"1233.smart_tags","index":7,"source":"smartTags"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Stodghill","nick_name":"Steve","clerkships":[],"first_name":"Steven","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":202,"law_schools":[{"id":2055,"meta":{"degree":"J.D.","honors":"","is_law_school":"1","graduation_date":"1987-01-01 00:00:00"},"order":1,"pin_order":null,"pin_expiration":null}],"middle_name":"H.","name_suffix":"","recognitions":[{"title":"One of the “most powerful business leaders in Dallas/Ft. Worth”, Dallas 500","detail":"DCEO, 2023"},{"title":"Texas “Local Litigation Star”","detail":"Benchmark Litigation, 2017–2025"},{"title":"Texas Super Lawyer","detail":"Texas Monthly, 2005–2026"},{"title":"“500 Leading Litigators in America” – Complex Commercial Litigation","detail":"Lawdragon, 2023–2026"},{"title":"“Litigation Star” – Labor and Employment","detail":"Benchmark Litigation, 2017 – 2026"},{"title":"“Litigation Star” – Intellectual Property","detail":"Benchmark Litigation, 2017-2026"},{"title":"“Litigation Star” – General Commercial Litigation","detail":"Benchmark Litigation, 2017-2026"},{"title":"“500 Leading Lawyers in America” – Litigation","detail":"Lawdragon, 2025"},{"title":"“500 Global Leaders in Crisis Management” – Litigation","detail":"Lawdragon, 2025"},{"title":"Oil and Gas","detail":"The Best Lawyers in America®, 2026"},{"title":"Commercial Litigation","detail":"The Best Lawyers in America®, 2018-2026"},{"title":"Entertainment Law – Motion Pictures and Television","detail":"The Best Lawyers in America®, 2018–2026"},{"title":"Appellate Practice","detail":"The Best Lawyers in America®, 2021–2026"}],"linked_in_url":null,"seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eSteve Stodghill\u0026rsquo;s practice emphasizes all aspects of complex litigation and solidifies him as one of the most accomplished commercial litigators in the country. He has successfully represented numerous high-profile clients across a wide array of complex commercial litigation areas, including over 20 prominent billionaires, Fortune 100 corporations, professional athletes, high-profile celebrities, world-renowned actors, and the owners of the Dallas Mavericks, Texas Rangers, Dallas Stars, Kansas City Chiefs, Liverpool Football Club, and FC Dallas. Since 2019, he has served as Public Safety Commissioner for the State of Texas, an appointment by Texas Governor Greg Abbott, has a Secret Level Clearance from Homeland Security, and has testified multiple times before the Texas State Senate on issues related to public safety. \u0026nbsp;[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn addition to being chief litigation counsel to Mark Cuban and the Dallas Mavericks for over 20 years, Steve has previously represented the interests of over 20 billionaires and other high-net-worth individuals, including Clark Hunt, the Reeder Family interests, Todd Wagner, Tom Dundon, Tom Hicks, Lamar Hunt, Trammell Crow, Phil Romano, Richard Rogers, Tim Headington, Gerald Ford, John Rochon, Geoffrey Raynor, Jim Dondero, the Wilks Brothers, and multiple members of the Al Rajhi family.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHe has represented numerous prominent companies, including ExxonMobil, Yahoo!, Bank One, Zurich Financial, Mary Kay Cosmetics, Alcatel, Guaranty Federal Bank, Trammell Crow, Texaco, Xerox, Sabre, Eljer Industries, Qwest, Hunt Asset Management, Callaway Golf, Dean Foods, Fossil, broadcast.com, Richmont, U.S. Risk, Generation Partners, Prophet Equity, Comerica Bank, PlainsCapital Bank, AdvoCare, Worldwide Express, Cook Children\u0026rsquo;s Hospital, and Driscoll Children\u0026rsquo;s Hospital in significant litigation matters.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn September 2019, Governor Greg Abbott appointed Steve to the Texas Public Safety Commission, which oversees the Texas Department of Public Safety (TxDPS), the agency responsible for statewide planning and policy formation regarding the enforcement of criminal, traffic, and safety laws; crime prevention; and law and public safety education. With an annual budget of $1.2 billion, TxDPS employs 11,000 individuals across 13 divisions including the Texas Rangers, Texas Highway Patrol, Driver License, Regulatory Licensing, and Intelligence and Counterterrorism. In addition, the Commission interfaces with the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Central Intelligence Agency, National Security Agency, Department of Defense, and similar federal agencies, while advising the Governor in responding to state emergencies such as natural disasters, mass shootings, insurrections, invasions, and acts of terrorism.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSteve is an Eagle Scout with a Silver Palm, the highest rank in Scouting, and graduated with high honors, Phi Beta Kappa, from the University of Texas at Austin.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn addition to his legal acumen, Steve has extensive experience in film acting and production, with credits featured on IMDb. His acting roles include appearances in \u003cem\u003eThe Wendell Baker Story\u003c/em\u003e (2007), \u003cem\u003eKarma Police\u003c/em\u003e (2008), \u003cem\u003eDinner\u003c/em\u003e (2010), \u003cem\u003eOccupy, Texas\u003c/em\u003e (2015), \u003cem\u003eThe Starck Club\u003c/em\u003e (2016), \u003cem\u003eUndying\u003c/em\u003e (2019), and \u003cem\u003eSatanic Panic\u003c/em\u003e (2019). In 2018, Steve launched Last Rodeo Studios, which quickly gained recognition with its first two feature films, \u003cem\u003eScare Me\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eSave Yourselves!\u003c/em\u003e, both premiering at Sundance and later securing international distribution. The studio continued its success with \u003cem\u003eSomewhere Quiet\u003c/em\u003e, a suspense thriller that debuted at the Tribeca Film Festival in 2023.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBeyond feature films, Steve earned the prestigious Silver Telly Award in 2021 for co-producing \u003cem\u003eBIG NIGHT (At the Museum)\u003c/em\u003e, a project that celebrated the Country Music Hall of Fame and Museum and raised over one million dollars for the institution. The film also received a Bronze MUSE Award and multiple additional Telly Awards for excellence in engagement and production.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSteve\u0026rsquo;s creative reach extends into literature, appearing as a character in John Grisham\u0026rsquo;s \u003cem\u003eThe Exchange\u003c/em\u003e (2023) and thrillers by authors Harry Hunsicker and Brian Cuban.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn addition to his recognition in the legal community, Steve has received six major awards for his philanthropic efforts on behalf of charitable organizations in Dallas:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cul\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eThe \u003cstrong\u003e2024 Angel Award\u003c/strong\u003e presented annually by the Farrah Fawcett Foundation for his work with cancer-related initiatives, including Cattle Baron\u0026rsquo;s Ball.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eThe \u003cstrong\u003e2021 Silver Telly Award\u003c/strong\u003e for his co-production of BIG NIGHT (At the Museum), a film which highlighted the legacy of the Country Music Hall of Fame and Museum in Nashville, Tennessee.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eThe \u003cstrong\u003e2018 Larry Schoenbrun Jurisprudence Award\u003c/strong\u003e presented annually by the Anti-Defamation League to a member of the legal community for outstanding leadership, exemplary contributions to the community, and a commitment to the ideals of the ADL.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eThe \u003cstrong\u003e2018 Obelisk Award\u003c/strong\u003e presented annually by the Business Council for the Arts to companies and individuals whose contributions and achievements in the arts have made a profound impact in North Texas.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eThe \u003cstrong\u003e2017 Stodghill Award\u003c/strong\u003e presented annually by the Dallas Film Society and Dallas International Film Festival to individuals based on their long-term efforts in support of film in North Texas.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eThe \u003cstrong\u003e2012 Milton Levy Award\u003c/strong\u003e presented annually by Special Care and Career Services/LaunchAbility for lifetime service to children and young adults with cognitive disabilities.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ul\u003e","recognitions":[{"title":"One of the “most powerful business leaders in Dallas/Ft. Worth”, Dallas 500","detail":"DCEO, 2023"},{"title":"Texas “Local Litigation Star”","detail":"Benchmark Litigation, 2017–2025"},{"title":"Texas Super Lawyer","detail":"Texas Monthly, 2005–2026"},{"title":"“500 Leading Litigators in America” – Complex Commercial Litigation","detail":"Lawdragon, 2023–2026"},{"title":"“Litigation Star” – Labor and Employment","detail":"Benchmark Litigation, 2017 – 2026"},{"title":"“Litigation Star” – Intellectual Property","detail":"Benchmark Litigation, 2017-2026"},{"title":"“Litigation Star” – General Commercial Litigation","detail":"Benchmark Litigation, 2017-2026"},{"title":"“500 Leading Lawyers in America” – Litigation","detail":"Lawdragon, 2025"},{"title":"“500 Global Leaders in Crisis Management” – Litigation","detail":"Lawdragon, 2025"},{"title":"Oil and Gas","detail":"The Best Lawyers in America®, 2026"},{"title":"Commercial Litigation","detail":"The Best Lawyers in America®, 2018-2026"},{"title":"Entertainment Law – Motion Pictures and Television","detail":"The Best Lawyers in America®, 2018–2026"},{"title":"Appellate Practice","detail":"The Best Lawyers in America®, 2021–2026"}]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":13344}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2026-04-13T22:07:13.000Z","updated_at":"2026-04-13T22:07:13.000Z","searchable_text":"Stodghill{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"One of the “most powerful business leaders in Dallas/Ft. Worth”, Dallas 500\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"DCEO, 2023\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Texas “Local Litigation Star”\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Benchmark Litigation, 2017–2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Texas Super Lawyer\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Texas Monthly, 2005–2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“500 Leading Litigators in America” – Complex Commercial Litigation\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Lawdragon, 2023–2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“Litigation Star” – Labor and Employment\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Benchmark Litigation, 2017 – 2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“Litigation Star” – Intellectual Property\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Benchmark Litigation, 2017-2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“Litigation Star” – General Commercial Litigation\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Benchmark Litigation, 2017-2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“500 Leading Lawyers in America” – Litigation\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Lawdragon, 2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“500 Global Leaders in Crisis Management” – Litigation\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Lawdragon, 2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Oil and Gas\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"The Best Lawyers in America®, 2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Commercial Litigation\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"The Best Lawyers in America®, 2018-2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Entertainment Law – Motion Pictures and Television\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"The Best Lawyers in America®, 2018–2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Appellate Practice\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"The Best Lawyers in America®, 2021–2026\"}{{ FIELD }}Steve Stodghill’s practice emphasizes all aspects of complex litigation and solidifies him as one of the most accomplished commercial litigators in the country. He has successfully represented numerous high-profile clients across a wide array of complex commercial litigation areas, including over 20 prominent billionaires, Fortune 100 corporations, professional athletes, high-profile celebrities, world-renowned actors, and the owners of the Dallas Mavericks, Texas Rangers, Dallas Stars, Kansas City Chiefs, Liverpool Football Club, and FC Dallas. Since 2019, he has served as Public Safety Commissioner for the State of Texas, an appointment by Texas Governor Greg Abbott, has a Secret Level Clearance from Homeland Security, and has testified multiple times before the Texas State Senate on issues related to public safety.  \nIn addition to being chief litigation counsel to Mark Cuban and the Dallas Mavericks for over 20 years, Steve has previously represented the interests of over 20 billionaires and other high-net-worth individuals, including Clark Hunt, the Reeder Family interests, Todd Wagner, Tom Dundon, Tom Hicks, Lamar Hunt, Trammell Crow, Phil Romano, Richard Rogers, Tim Headington, Gerald Ford, John Rochon, Geoffrey Raynor, Jim Dondero, the Wilks Brothers, and multiple members of the Al Rajhi family.\nHe has represented numerous prominent companies, including ExxonMobil, Yahoo!, Bank One, Zurich Financial, Mary Kay Cosmetics, Alcatel, Guaranty Federal Bank, Trammell Crow, Texaco, Xerox, Sabre, Eljer Industries, Qwest, Hunt Asset Management, Callaway Golf, Dean Foods, Fossil, broadcast.com, Richmont, U.S. Risk, Generation Partners, Prophet Equity, Comerica Bank, PlainsCapital Bank, AdvoCare, Worldwide Express, Cook Children’s Hospital, and Driscoll Children’s Hospital in significant litigation matters.\nIn September 2019, Governor Greg Abbott appointed Steve to the Texas Public Safety Commission, which oversees the Texas Department of Public Safety (TxDPS), the agency responsible for statewide planning and policy formation regarding the enforcement of criminal, traffic, and safety laws; crime prevention; and law and public safety education. With an annual budget of $1.2 billion, TxDPS employs 11,000 individuals across 13 divisions including the Texas Rangers, Texas Highway Patrol, Driver License, Regulatory Licensing, and Intelligence and Counterterrorism. In addition, the Commission interfaces with the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Central Intelligence Agency, National Security Agency, Department of Defense, and similar federal agencies, while advising the Governor in responding to state emergencies such as natural disasters, mass shootings, insurrections, invasions, and acts of terrorism.\nSteve is an Eagle Scout with a Silver Palm, the highest rank in Scouting, and graduated with high honors, Phi Beta Kappa, from the University of Texas at Austin. \nIn addition to his legal acumen, Steve has extensive experience in film acting and production, with credits featured on IMDb. His acting roles include appearances in The Wendell Baker Story (2007), Karma Police (2008), Dinner (2010), Occupy, Texas (2015), The Starck Club (2016), Undying (2019), and Satanic Panic (2019). In 2018, Steve launched Last Rodeo Studios, which quickly gained recognition with its first two feature films, Scare Me and Save Yourselves!, both premiering at Sundance and later securing international distribution. The studio continued its success with Somewhere Quiet, a suspense thriller that debuted at the Tribeca Film Festival in 2023.\nBeyond feature films, Steve earned the prestigious Silver Telly Award in 2021 for co-producing BIG NIGHT (At the Museum), a project that celebrated the Country Music Hall of Fame and Museum and raised over one million dollars for the institution. The film also received a Bronze MUSE Award and multiple additional Telly Awards for excellence in engagement and production.\nSteve’s creative reach extends into literature, appearing as a character in John Grisham’s The Exchange (2023) and thrillers by authors Harry Hunsicker and Brian Cuban.\nIn addition to his recognition in the legal community, Steve has received six major awards for his philanthropic efforts on behalf of charitable organizations in Dallas:\n\nThe 2024 Angel Award presented annually by the Farrah Fawcett Foundation for his work with cancer-related initiatives, including Cattle Baron’s Ball.\nThe 2021 Silver Telly Award for his co-production of BIG NIGHT (At the Museum), a film which highlighted the legacy of the Country Music Hall of Fame and Museum in Nashville, Tennessee.\nThe 2018 Larry Schoenbrun Jurisprudence Award presented annually by the Anti-Defamation League to a member of the legal community for outstanding leadership, exemplary contributions to the community, and a commitment to the ideals of the ADL.\nThe 2018 Obelisk Award presented annually by the Business Council for the Arts to companies and individuals whose contributions and achievements in the arts have made a profound impact in North Texas.\nThe 2017 Stodghill Award presented annually by the Dallas Film Society and Dallas International Film Festival to individuals based on their long-term efforts in support of film in North Texas.\nThe 2012 Milton Levy Award presented annually by Special Care and Career Services/LaunchAbility for lifetime service to children and young adults with cognitive disabilities.\n Partner One of the “most powerful business leaders in Dallas/Ft. Worth”, Dallas 500 DCEO, 2023 Texas “Local Litigation Star” Benchmark Litigation, 2017–2025 Texas Super Lawyer Texas Monthly, 2005–2026 “500 Leading Litigators in America” – Complex Commercial Litigation Lawdragon, 2023–2026 “Litigation Star” – Labor and Employment Benchmark Litigation, 2017 – 2026 “Litigation Star” – Intellectual Property Benchmark Litigation, 2017-2026 “Litigation Star” – General Commercial Litigation Benchmark Litigation, 2017-2026 “500 Leading Lawyers in America” – Litigation Lawdragon, 2025 “500 Global Leaders in Crisis Management” – Litigation Lawdragon, 2025 Oil and Gas The Best Lawyers in America®, 2026 Commercial Litigation The Best Lawyers in America®, 2018-2026 Entertainment Law – Motion Pictures and Television The Best Lawyers in America®, 2018–2026 Appellate Practice The Best Lawyers in America®, 2021–2026 University of Texas  The University of Texas at Austin The University of Texas School of Law American Bar Association Honorary Chair, Country Music Hall of Fame – All for the Hall Gala, 2024 Co-Founder and Chairman of the Board, Dallas Classic Film Festival, 2022-2024 Chair, Dallas Historical Society – Texas Independence Day Celebration, 2022 Architecture Committee, Delta Tau Delta (UT Austin), 2018-2023 External Relations Committee, Parish Episcopal School, 2021-2021 Charter Member, Patrick E. Higginbotham American Inn of Court Research Fellow, Southwestern Legal Foundation Executive Board, Southern Methodist University’s Meadows School of the Arts, 2017-2026 Board of Directors, Texas Book Festival, 2024 Advisory Board, University of Texas School of Liberal Arts, 2014-2023 Dallas Bar Association Advisory Council, University of Texas Harry Ransom Center, 2015-2024 Executive Committee, University of Texas, 2017-2024 Chancellor’s Council, University of Texas, 2016-2024 Board of Directors, University of Texas, The Texas Exes, 2022-2025 Lifetime Member, University of Texas, The Littlefield Society Strategic Advisor, University of Texas School of Law, 2013-2024 Alumni Reunion Committee, University of Texas School of Law, 2017, 2022 Board of Directors, Dallas Police Foundation, 2026 Texas Bar Foundation National Advisory Council, American Film Institute, 2011-2024 Advisory Board, American Journey Experience, 2022-2024 Executive Committee Board, Boy Scouts of America, Circle 10 Council, 2014-2017 Advisory Committee, Cattle Baron’s Ball, 2021, 2022 Chair, Country Music Hall of Fame – All for the Hall Gala with Trisha Yearwood and Brooks \u0026amp; Dunn, 2021 Host, Country Music Hall of Fame – All for the Hall Dallas Exclusive Launch Celebration with Tenille Townes, 2023","searchable_name":"Steven H. Stodghill (Steve)","is_active":true,"featured":null,"publish_date":null,"expiration_date":null,"blog_featured":null,"published_by":202,"capability_group_featured":null,"home_page_featured":null},{"id":442390,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":1058,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003ePaul Straus specializes in defending complex securities and commercial disputes, with a particular concentration in representing financial institutions and accounting firms. A partner in our Securities and Shareholder Litigation and Securities Enforcement and Regulation practices, Paul has successfully represented clients on a wide variety of issues in federal and state courts and in investigations by the Securities and Exchange Commission and other government agencies.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePaul has over 25 years of experience defending clients in complex securities and commercial litigation and government investigations. He has built a reputation for excellent client service by being responsive, available on demand and sensitive to clients\u0026rsquo; business and litigation concerns. He looks to help clients manage risk and reduce costs by winning early dismissals and persuading authorities not to take action. Paul also provides practical dispute advice to financial institutions and other clients seeking to head off full-blown litigation.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWhen trial is the right strategic approach, Paul is prepared to try cases. He second-chaired the trial defense of Jean-Marie Messier, the former Chairman and CEO of Vivendi Universal, S.A., in \u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eIn re Vivendi Securities Litigation\u003c/em\u003e (S.D.N.Y.), said to be the largest federal securities class action trial in history. After a four-month trial, the jury found in favor of Paul's client on all claims.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePaul has represented clients in cases pending in federal and state courts in New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Delaware, Texas, Alabama and Florida. He has represented clients in investigations by the SEC, the New York State Attorney General, the New York Inspector General and other government authorities.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePaul also writes and speaks on various aspects of securities law, accountant liability and civil litigation.\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"paul-straus","email":"pstraus@kslaw.com","phone":"+1 917 696 8804","matters":["\u003cp\u003eWon the dismissal with prejudice of a Section 10(b) complaint against automotive transportation and logistics provider\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;Jack Cooper Holdings\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eand\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;two of its officers\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;by an alleged purchaser of $28 million of the company\u0026rsquo;s senior secured notes (see\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eRiver Birch Capital, LLC v. Jack Cooper Holdings Corp. et al.,\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;2019 WL 1099943 (S.D.N.Y. March 8, 2019)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eJean-Marie Messier\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003e,\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ethe former Chairman and CEO of Vivendi Universal, S.A.,\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in the jury trial of\u0026nbsp;\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eIn re Vivendi Securities Litigation\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(S.D.N.Y.), said to be the largest federal securities class action trial in history. The plaintiff class claimed billions of dollars in damages arising from the company\u0026rsquo;s allegedly false or misleading financial statements and public disclosures. After a four-month trial, the jury found in favor of Mr. Messier on all claims.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended and favorably settled a $120 million securities fraud action against\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ea private equity firm\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;arising from the sale of a natural gas storage facility.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ethe former chairman and CEO of At Home Corporation\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in\u0026nbsp;\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eLeykin v. AT\u0026amp;T Corporation\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(S.D.N.Y.), a shareholder class action alleging securities fraud against the company\u0026rsquo;s officers, directors and controlling corporate shareholders based on alleged misrepresentations concerning the company\u0026rsquo;s proprietary technology, revenues and growth projections.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon the dismissal of multiple securities fraud class actions against\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ean investment advisor\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;arising out of $325 million in losses suffered by closed-end investment trusts investing in mortgage-backed securities and other instruments.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon the dismissal of all claims against\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ethe former CEO of Just For Feet, Inc.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003e,\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an action by purchasers of $200 million in notes (\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003esee\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eAAL High Yield Bond Fund v. Ruttenberg\u003c/em\u003e, 00-C-1404-S, 2001 WL 34372980 (N.D. Ala. Sept. 30, 2001)).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefeated an application for a TRO against\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ean internet retailer\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an action by short sellers alleging that the company was conspiring with its market maker to manipulate the market in the company\u0026rsquo;s stock.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eFavorably settled a securities fraud class action against\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ean underwriter\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;alleging fraud in the issuer\u0026rsquo;s financial statements.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eHas represented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003efinancial institutions, accounting firms and other clients\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in investigations by the SEC and other government agencies.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eHas represented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eaccounting firms\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in investigations by the SEC, the New York Attorney General and other agencies.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ean accounting firm\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a consolidated federal securities class action brought by shareholders of a Bermuda reinsurer with over 25 million shares outstanding during the class period (\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003esee\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eSchnall v. Annuity and Life Re (Holdings), Ltd.,\u003c/em\u003e3:02 CV 2133 (EBB), 2007 WL 2936242 (D. Conn. Oct. 5, 2007)).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ean accounting firm\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a New York state court action alleging fraud, conspiracy, and aiding and abetting.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon the dismissal of all claims against\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ean actuary\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a breach of fiduciary duty suit brought by trustees of major New York pension funds (\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003esee New York District Council of Carpenters Pension Fund v. Savasta\u003c/em\u003e, No. 99 CV 11362 (GBD), 2005 WL 22872 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 4, 2005)).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended and favorably settled a federal action against\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ea major U.S. bank\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;alleging breach of a standby letter of credit.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRegularly counsels\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ecommercial real estate lenders\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in connection with troubled loans, workouts, inter-creditor issues and disputes with borrowers and guarantors, often outside of litigation.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon the dismissal of all claims against global real estate company\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eMitsui Fudosan America, Inc.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in\u0026nbsp;\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eNew York City Council Member Ydanis Rodriguez et al. v. Deputy Inspector Edward Winski et al.\u003c/em\u003e, Civ. No. 12 CIV 3389 (NRB) (RLE).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully opposed a motion for a preliminary injunction against\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ea real estate investment company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in connection with the sale of a downtown Manhattan office building.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended and favorably settled a breach of contract action against\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ea Luxembourg SICAV\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;brought by a putative securities purchaser.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ea global corporate trade credit firm\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an action by a major U.S. insurance company arising out the issuance of insured corporate trade credits.\u003c/p\u003e"],"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[{"id":142}]},"expertise":[{"id":19,"guid":"19.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":5,"guid":"5.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":3,"guid":"3.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":20,"guid":"20.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":18,"guid":"18.capabilities","index":4,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":107,"guid":"107.capabilities","index":5,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":750,"guid":"750.smart_tags","index":6,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":7,"source":"capabilities"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Straus","nick_name":"Paul","clerkships":[],"first_name":"Paul","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":101,"law_schools":[],"middle_name":"A.","name_suffix":"","recognitions":null,"linked_in_url":"https://www.linkedin.com/in/paul-straus-32738b9/","seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003ePaul Straus specializes in defending complex securities and commercial disputes, with a particular concentration in representing financial institutions and accounting firms. A partner in our Securities and Shareholder Litigation and Securities Enforcement and Regulation practices, Paul has successfully represented clients on a wide variety of issues in federal and state courts and in investigations by the Securities and Exchange Commission and other government agencies.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePaul has over 25 years of experience defending clients in complex securities and commercial litigation and government investigations. He has built a reputation for excellent client service by being responsive, available on demand and sensitive to clients\u0026rsquo; business and litigation concerns. He looks to help clients manage risk and reduce costs by winning early dismissals and persuading authorities not to take action. Paul also provides practical dispute advice to financial institutions and other clients seeking to head off full-blown litigation.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWhen trial is the right strategic approach, Paul is prepared to try cases. He second-chaired the trial defense of Jean-Marie Messier, the former Chairman and CEO of Vivendi Universal, S.A., in \u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eIn re Vivendi Securities Litigation\u003c/em\u003e (S.D.N.Y.), said to be the largest federal securities class action trial in history. After a four-month trial, the jury found in favor of Paul's client on all claims.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePaul has represented clients in cases pending in federal and state courts in New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Delaware, Texas, Alabama and Florida. He has represented clients in investigations by the SEC, the New York State Attorney General, the New York Inspector General and other government authorities.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePaul also writes and speaks on various aspects of securities law, accountant liability and civil litigation.\u003c/p\u003e","matters":["\u003cp\u003eWon the dismissal with prejudice of a Section 10(b) complaint against automotive transportation and logistics provider\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;Jack Cooper Holdings\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eand\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;two of its officers\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;by an alleged purchaser of $28 million of the company\u0026rsquo;s senior secured notes (see\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eRiver Birch Capital, LLC v. Jack Cooper Holdings Corp. et al.,\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;2019 WL 1099943 (S.D.N.Y. March 8, 2019)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eJean-Marie Messier\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003e,\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ethe former Chairman and CEO of Vivendi Universal, S.A.,\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in the jury trial of\u0026nbsp;\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eIn re Vivendi Securities Litigation\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(S.D.N.Y.), said to be the largest federal securities class action trial in history. The plaintiff class claimed billions of dollars in damages arising from the company\u0026rsquo;s allegedly false or misleading financial statements and public disclosures. After a four-month trial, the jury found in favor of Mr. Messier on all claims.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended and favorably settled a $120 million securities fraud action against\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ea private equity firm\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;arising from the sale of a natural gas storage facility.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ethe former chairman and CEO of At Home Corporation\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in\u0026nbsp;\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eLeykin v. AT\u0026amp;T Corporation\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(S.D.N.Y.), a shareholder class action alleging securities fraud against the company\u0026rsquo;s officers, directors and controlling corporate shareholders based on alleged misrepresentations concerning the company\u0026rsquo;s proprietary technology, revenues and growth projections.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon the dismissal of multiple securities fraud class actions against\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ean investment advisor\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;arising out of $325 million in losses suffered by closed-end investment trusts investing in mortgage-backed securities and other instruments.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon the dismissal of all claims against\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ethe former CEO of Just For Feet, Inc.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003e,\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an action by purchasers of $200 million in notes (\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003esee\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eAAL High Yield Bond Fund v. Ruttenberg\u003c/em\u003e, 00-C-1404-S, 2001 WL 34372980 (N.D. Ala. Sept. 30, 2001)).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefeated an application for a TRO against\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ean internet retailer\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an action by short sellers alleging that the company was conspiring with its market maker to manipulate the market in the company\u0026rsquo;s stock.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eFavorably settled a securities fraud class action against\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ean underwriter\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;alleging fraud in the issuer\u0026rsquo;s financial statements.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eHas represented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003efinancial institutions, accounting firms and other clients\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in investigations by the SEC and other government agencies.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eHas represented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eaccounting firms\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in investigations by the SEC, the New York Attorney General and other agencies.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ean accounting firm\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a consolidated federal securities class action brought by shareholders of a Bermuda reinsurer with over 25 million shares outstanding during the class period (\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003esee\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eSchnall v. Annuity and Life Re (Holdings), Ltd.,\u003c/em\u003e3:02 CV 2133 (EBB), 2007 WL 2936242 (D. Conn. Oct. 5, 2007)).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ean accounting firm\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a New York state court action alleging fraud, conspiracy, and aiding and abetting.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon the dismissal of all claims against\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ean actuary\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a breach of fiduciary duty suit brought by trustees of major New York pension funds (\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003esee New York District Council of Carpenters Pension Fund v. Savasta\u003c/em\u003e, No. 99 CV 11362 (GBD), 2005 WL 22872 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 4, 2005)).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended and favorably settled a federal action against\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ea major U.S. bank\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;alleging breach of a standby letter of credit.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRegularly counsels\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ecommercial real estate lenders\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in connection with troubled loans, workouts, inter-creditor issues and disputes with borrowers and guarantors, often outside of litigation.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon the dismissal of all claims against global real estate company\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eMitsui Fudosan America, Inc.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in\u0026nbsp;\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eNew York City Council Member Ydanis Rodriguez et al. v. Deputy Inspector Edward Winski et al.\u003c/em\u003e, Civ. No. 12 CIV 3389 (NRB) (RLE).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully opposed a motion for a preliminary injunction against\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ea real estate investment company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in connection with the sale of a downtown Manhattan office building.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended and favorably settled a breach of contract action against\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ea Luxembourg SICAV\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;brought by a putative securities purchaser.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ea global corporate trade credit firm\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an action by a major U.S. insurance company arising out the issuance of insured corporate trade credits.\u003c/p\u003e"]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":98}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2025-11-05T05:04:06.000Z","updated_at":"2025-11-05T05:04:06.000Z","searchable_text":"Straus{{ FIELD }}Won the dismissal with prejudice of a Section 10(b) complaint against automotive transportation and logistics provider Jack Cooper Holdings and two of its officers by an alleged purchaser of $28 million of the company’s senior secured notes (see River Birch Capital, LLC v. Jack Cooper Holdings Corp. et al., 2019 WL 1099943 (S.D.N.Y. March 8, 2019){{ FIELD }}Defended Jean-Marie Messier, the former Chairman and CEO of Vivendi Universal, S.A., in the jury trial of In re Vivendi Securities Litigation (S.D.N.Y.), said to be the largest federal securities class action trial in history. The plaintiff class claimed billions of dollars in damages arising from the company’s allegedly false or misleading financial statements and public disclosures. After a four-month trial, the jury found in favor of Mr. Messier on all claims.{{ FIELD }}Defended and favorably settled a $120 million securities fraud action against a private equity firm arising from the sale of a natural gas storage facility.{{ FIELD }}Defended the former chairman and CEO of At Home Corporation in Leykin v. AT\u0026amp;T Corporation (S.D.N.Y.), a shareholder class action alleging securities fraud against the company’s officers, directors and controlling corporate shareholders based on alleged misrepresentations concerning the company’s proprietary technology, revenues and growth projections.{{ FIELD }}Won the dismissal of multiple securities fraud class actions against an investment advisor arising out of $325 million in losses suffered by closed-end investment trusts investing in mortgage-backed securities and other instruments.{{ FIELD }}Won the dismissal of all claims against the former CEO of Just For Feet, Inc., in an action by purchasers of $200 million in notes (see AAL High Yield Bond Fund v. Ruttenberg, 00-C-1404-S, 2001 WL 34372980 (N.D. Ala. Sept. 30, 2001)).{{ FIELD }}Defeated an application for a TRO against an internet retailer in an action by short sellers alleging that the company was conspiring with its market maker to manipulate the market in the company’s stock.{{ FIELD }}Favorably settled a securities fraud class action against an underwriter alleging fraud in the issuer’s financial statements.{{ FIELD }}Has represented financial institutions, accounting firms and other clients in investigations by the SEC and other government agencies.{{ FIELD }}Has represented accounting firms in investigations by the SEC, the New York Attorney General and other agencies.{{ FIELD }}Defended an accounting firm in a consolidated federal securities class action brought by shareholders of a Bermuda reinsurer with over 25 million shares outstanding during the class period (see Schnall v. Annuity and Life Re (Holdings), Ltd.,3:02 CV 2133 (EBB), 2007 WL 2936242 (D. Conn. Oct. 5, 2007)).{{ FIELD }}Defended an accounting firm in a New York state court action alleging fraud, conspiracy, and aiding and abetting.{{ FIELD }}Won the dismissal of all claims against an actuary in a breach of fiduciary duty suit brought by trustees of major New York pension funds (see New York District Council of Carpenters Pension Fund v. Savasta, No. 99 CV 11362 (GBD), 2005 WL 22872 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 4, 2005)).{{ FIELD }}Defended and favorably settled a federal action against a major U.S. bank alleging breach of a standby letter of credit.{{ FIELD }}Regularly counsels commercial real estate lenders in connection with troubled loans, workouts, inter-creditor issues and disputes with borrowers and guarantors, often outside of litigation.{{ FIELD }}Won the dismissal of all claims against global real estate company Mitsui Fudosan America, Inc. in New York City Council Member Ydanis Rodriguez et al. v. Deputy Inspector Edward Winski et al., Civ. No. 12 CIV 3389 (NRB) (RLE).{{ FIELD }}Successfully opposed a motion for a preliminary injunction against a real estate investment company in connection with the sale of a downtown Manhattan office building.{{ FIELD }}Defended and favorably settled a breach of contract action against a Luxembourg SICAV brought by a putative securities purchaser.{{ FIELD }}Defended a global corporate trade credit firm in an action by a major U.S. insurance company arising out the issuance of insured corporate trade credits.{{ FIELD }}Paul Straus specializes in defending complex securities and commercial disputes, with a particular concentration in representing financial institutions and accounting firms. A partner in our Securities and Shareholder Litigation and Securities Enforcement and Regulation practices, Paul has successfully represented clients on a wide variety of issues in federal and state courts and in investigations by the Securities and Exchange Commission and other government agencies.\nPaul has over 25 years of experience defending clients in complex securities and commercial litigation and government investigations. He has built a reputation for excellent client service by being responsive, available on demand and sensitive to clients’ business and litigation concerns. He looks to help clients manage risk and reduce costs by winning early dismissals and persuading authorities not to take action. Paul also provides practical dispute advice to financial institutions and other clients seeking to head off full-blown litigation.\nWhen trial is the right strategic approach, Paul is prepared to try cases. He second-chaired the trial defense of Jean-Marie Messier, the former Chairman and CEO of Vivendi Universal, S.A., in In re Vivendi Securities Litigation (S.D.N.Y.), said to be the largest federal securities class action trial in history. After a four-month trial, the jury found in favor of Paul's client on all claims.\nPaul has represented clients in cases pending in federal and state courts in New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Delaware, Texas, Alabama and Florida. He has represented clients in investigations by the SEC, the New York State Attorney General, the New York Inspector General and other government authorities.\nPaul also writes and speaks on various aspects of securities law, accountant liability and civil litigation. Paul A Straus Partner Cornell University Cornell Law School New York University New York University School of Law U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York New York Association of the Bar of the City of New York Won the dismissal with prejudice of a Section 10(b) complaint against automotive transportation and logistics provider Jack Cooper Holdings and two of its officers by an alleged purchaser of $28 million of the company’s senior secured notes (see River Birch Capital, LLC v. Jack Cooper Holdings Corp. et al., 2019 WL 1099943 (S.D.N.Y. March 8, 2019) Defended Jean-Marie Messier, the former Chairman and CEO of Vivendi Universal, S.A., in the jury trial of In re Vivendi Securities Litigation (S.D.N.Y.), said to be the largest federal securities class action trial in history. The plaintiff class claimed billions of dollars in damages arising from the company’s allegedly false or misleading financial statements and public disclosures. After a four-month trial, the jury found in favor of Mr. Messier on all claims. Defended and favorably settled a $120 million securities fraud action against a private equity firm arising from the sale of a natural gas storage facility. Defended the former chairman and CEO of At Home Corporation in Leykin v. AT\u0026amp;T Corporation (S.D.N.Y.), a shareholder class action alleging securities fraud against the company’s officers, directors and controlling corporate shareholders based on alleged misrepresentations concerning the company’s proprietary technology, revenues and growth projections. Won the dismissal of multiple securities fraud class actions against an investment advisor arising out of $325 million in losses suffered by closed-end investment trusts investing in mortgage-backed securities and other instruments. Won the dismissal of all claims against the former CEO of Just For Feet, Inc., in an action by purchasers of $200 million in notes (see AAL High Yield Bond Fund v. Ruttenberg, 00-C-1404-S, 2001 WL 34372980 (N.D. Ala. Sept. 30, 2001)). Defeated an application for a TRO against an internet retailer in an action by short sellers alleging that the company was conspiring with its market maker to manipulate the market in the company’s stock. Favorably settled a securities fraud class action against an underwriter alleging fraud in the issuer’s financial statements. Has represented financial institutions, accounting firms and other clients in investigations by the SEC and other government agencies. Has represented accounting firms in investigations by the SEC, the New York Attorney General and other agencies. Defended an accounting firm in a consolidated federal securities class action brought by shareholders of a Bermuda reinsurer with over 25 million shares outstanding during the class period (see Schnall v. Annuity and Life Re (Holdings), Ltd.,3:02 CV 2133 (EBB), 2007 WL 2936242 (D. Conn. Oct. 5, 2007)). Defended an accounting firm in a New York state court action alleging fraud, conspiracy, and aiding and abetting. Won the dismissal of all claims against an actuary in a breach of fiduciary duty suit brought by trustees of major New York pension funds (see New York District Council of Carpenters Pension Fund v. Savasta, No. 99 CV 11362 (GBD), 2005 WL 22872 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 4, 2005)). Defended and favorably settled a federal action against a major U.S. bank alleging breach of a standby letter of credit. Regularly counsels commercial real estate lenders in connection with troubled loans, workouts, inter-creditor issues and disputes with borrowers and guarantors, often outside of litigation. Won the dismissal of all claims against global real estate company Mitsui Fudosan America, Inc. in New York City Council Member Ydanis Rodriguez et al. v. Deputy Inspector Edward Winski et al., Civ. No. 12 CIV 3389 (NRB) (RLE). Successfully opposed a motion for a preliminary injunction against a real estate investment company in connection with the sale of a downtown Manhattan office building. Defended and favorably settled a breach of contract action against a Luxembourg SICAV brought by a putative securities purchaser. Defended a global corporate trade credit firm in an action by a major U.S. insurance company arising out the issuance of insured corporate trade credits.","searchable_name":"Paul A. Straus","is_active":true,"featured":null,"publish_date":null,"expiration_date":null,"blog_featured":null,"published_by":101,"capability_group_featured":null,"home_page_featured":null},{"id":436386,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":2856,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003ePeter A. Strotz has been litigating tort, product liability, and commercial matters for over 30 years\u0026nbsp;and has first-chaired dozens of trials in courts throughout California and the U.S.\u0026nbsp; His\u0026nbsp;cases involve\u0026nbsp;novel medical, scientific and legal issues for global manufacturing companies, including pharmaceutical, healthcare, oil, gas, engineered and specialty materials, paints, and coatings companies.\u0026nbsp; Peter has acted as national, regional and local trial counsel in a variety of commercial, antitrust, and toxic tort matters.\u0026nbsp; He is\u0026nbsp;the founding and managing partner of the firm\u0026rsquo;s Los Angeles, California office.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePeter is a senior member\u0026nbsp;of the firm\u0026rsquo;s Product Liability Practice, which was selected by\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eLaw360\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;as the Product Liability Group of the Year for seven of the last eight years.\u0026nbsp;In what was recognized as a Top Verdict of 2019 by\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eThe Daily Journal,\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003ePeter\u0026nbsp;achieved a complete defense verdict on behalf of Prime Healthcare against the California Department of Insurance (CDI) and a Relator in a major Insurance Frauds Prevention Act trial in Los Angeles County Superior Court that established a precedent for healthcare providers facing these types of allegations.\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"peter-strotz","email":"pstrotz@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":["\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePharmaceutical\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eServes as national coordinating counsel for\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea major innovator pharmaceutical company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in the defense of hundreds of claims that treatment with a widely prescribed branded statin causes diabetes, cardiovascular problems, and liver and kidney problems.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eActed as California counsel for\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea major pharmaceutical company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in the defense of product liability litigation involving a branded proton pump inhibitor.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresents\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eGlaxoSmithKline\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in product liability cases in California involving claims of birth defects.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefends\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea global pharmaceutical company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in product liability cases involving the administration of a corticosteroid.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eServed on the national trial and leadership teams representing\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea major innovator pharmaceutical company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in the defense of claims that an antipsychotic medication causes weight gain, diabetes, and pancreatitis.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ethe manufacturer of a dental anesthetic\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in product liability cases filed throughout the U.S.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eActed as California counsel representing\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea major innovator pharmaceutical company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in the defense of multiple personal injury cases which involved claims that pain pumps cause degeneration of shoulder joint cartilage.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eServed as California trial counsel for\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea global brand name pharmaceutical company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an action brought by independent pharmacies alleging a nationwide price-fixing conspiracy among the manufacturers of brand name prescription drugs.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eThe Dow Chemical Company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;as the alleged successor to the manufacturer of the Salk polio vaccine. In numerous product liability actions filed by individual plaintiffs in San Francisco, Los Angeles and Orange counties, Peter led a team that successfully formulated an end-game strategy resulting in the statewide dismissals of all plaintiffs\u0026rsquo; claims at the pleading stage.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eSmartHealth Inc.,\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in the defense of the latex glove product liability cases.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eHealthcare\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAchieved a defense verdict on behalf of a hospital and healthcare system in a\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003equi tam\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;trial involving allegations of healthcare fraud related to licensing and patient steering brought by a Relator and the California Department of Insurance.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresents\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea South American Public Health Agency\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a breach of contract action arising out of its attempted purchase of ventilators to address the Covid-19 health crisis.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eToxic Tort \u0026ndash; Benzene\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented a number of Fortune and Global 1000 companies, including\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eAkzoNobel, D Aircraft Products, Cytec Industries, Inc., Indopco, Inc.,\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eand\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eChevron U.S.A. Inc.\u003c/strong\u003e, in personal injury cases venued in Northern and Southern California, involving claims of exposure to benzene.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eToxic Tort \u0026ndash; Silica\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eLed a team that represented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eChevron U.S.A. Inc., Union Oil Company of California and Hewlett-Packard Company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in the defense of silica-related product and premises personal injury claims filed in California state court.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eToxic Tort \u0026ndash; Asbestos\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDefends Chevron U.S.A. Inc. and Texaco Inc. in cases involving claims of exposure to asbestos at the Abadan Refinery in Iran in the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s. Won summary judgments in four cases and won appellate arguments in the cases where those summary judgment wins have been appealed.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eHandled, through trial verdict, asbestos product and premises liability dockets throughout the State of California on behalf of numerous companies, including\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eChevron U.S.A. Inc., Texaco Inc., Unocal Corporation, Hewlett-Packard Company, UOP LLC, The Glidden Company, American Cyanamid Company, Fiberite Inc, Flintkote, Western MacArthur, Baxter Healthcare, The Dow Chemical Company and Rhone-Poulenc,\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;for a period of over 25 years. He obtained a defense verdict for Fiberite after a seven-week jury trial in Los Angeles County Superior Court where plaintiff claimed he developed mesothelioma as a result of exposure to a Fiberite molding compound.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eToxic Tort \u0026ndash; Agricultural Chemicals\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eActed as national counsel for\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ethe manufacturer of synthetic pyrethrin pesticides\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in product liability actions filed throughout the United States.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eServed as co-counsel on a trial team that obtained a defense verdict in an alleged Paraquat\u0026reg; exposure trial in a California state action.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eServed on a team that successfully defended\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;Rhone-Poulenc (nka Rhodia)\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003ein the personal injury claims of over 400 individuals arising out of a chemical fire at a sulfuric acid regeneration facility in Martinez, California. Lead Paint.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eLead Paint\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eAmerican Cyanamid Company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an action being prosecuted by cities and counties throughout the State of California against the manufacturers of paint pigments alleging that presence of lead in paint in commercial and residential buildings constituted a public nuisance.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMtBE\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eChevron U.S.A. Inc. and Union Oil Company of California\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether (MtBE) cases involving claims of personal injury and groundwater contamination.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eObtained a defense verdict in favor of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ea specialty ink manufacturer\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a commercial sales action.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended successfully\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ethe manufacturer of food flavoring products\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a commercial action filed in federal district court.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCommercial Design Claims.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDefending\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea process design engineering company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in professional negligence claims and recently won a nonsuit after a five-week jury trial in Los Angeles County Superior Court.\u003c/p\u003e"],"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[]},"expertise":[{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":3,"guid":"3.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":102,"guid":"102.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":107,"guid":"107.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":103,"guid":"103.capabilities","index":4,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":761,"guid":"761.smart_tags","index":5,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":17,"guid":"17.capabilities","index":6,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":16,"guid":"16.capabilities","index":7,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":24,"guid":"24.capabilities","index":8,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":1303,"guid":"1303.smart_tags","index":9,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":970,"guid":"970.smart_tags","index":10,"source":"smartTags"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Strotz","nick_name":"Peter","clerkships":[],"first_name":"Peter","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":196,"law_schools":[],"middle_name":"A.","name_suffix":"","recognitions":[{"title":"Outstanding Individual in Product Liability","detail":"Who's Who Legal 2019"},{"title":"Best Lawyers in America","detail":"2013 – 2017"},{"title":"San Francisco’s Best Lawyers","detail":"2013"},{"title":"Recommended Lawyer for Product Liability and Mass Tort Defense: Toxic Tort (Tier 1) ","detail":"U.S. Legal 500 , 2013. 2015 and 2016"},{"title":"Highest AV Rating ","detail":"Martindale-Hubbell"},{"title":"Super Lawyer ","detail":"San Francisco Magazine, 2004–2006, 2011–2013"}],"linked_in_url":null,"seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003ePeter A. Strotz has been litigating tort, product liability, and commercial matters for over 30 years\u0026nbsp;and has first-chaired dozens of trials in courts throughout California and the U.S.\u0026nbsp; His\u0026nbsp;cases involve\u0026nbsp;novel medical, scientific and legal issues for global manufacturing companies, including pharmaceutical, healthcare, oil, gas, engineered and specialty materials, paints, and coatings companies.\u0026nbsp; Peter has acted as national, regional and local trial counsel in a variety of commercial, antitrust, and toxic tort matters.\u0026nbsp; He is\u0026nbsp;the founding and managing partner of the firm\u0026rsquo;s Los Angeles, California office.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePeter is a senior member\u0026nbsp;of the firm\u0026rsquo;s Product Liability Practice, which was selected by\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eLaw360\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;as the Product Liability Group of the Year for seven of the last eight years.\u0026nbsp;In what was recognized as a Top Verdict of 2019 by\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eThe Daily Journal,\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003ePeter\u0026nbsp;achieved a complete defense verdict on behalf of Prime Healthcare against the California Department of Insurance (CDI) and a Relator in a major Insurance Frauds Prevention Act trial in Los Angeles County Superior Court that established a precedent for healthcare providers facing these types of allegations.\u003c/p\u003e","matters":["\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePharmaceutical\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eServes as national coordinating counsel for\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea major innovator pharmaceutical company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in the defense of hundreds of claims that treatment with a widely prescribed branded statin causes diabetes, cardiovascular problems, and liver and kidney problems.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eActed as California counsel for\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea major pharmaceutical company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in the defense of product liability litigation involving a branded proton pump inhibitor.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresents\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eGlaxoSmithKline\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in product liability cases in California involving claims of birth defects.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefends\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea global pharmaceutical company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in product liability cases involving the administration of a corticosteroid.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eServed on the national trial and leadership teams representing\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea major innovator pharmaceutical company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in the defense of claims that an antipsychotic medication causes weight gain, diabetes, and pancreatitis.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ethe manufacturer of a dental anesthetic\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in product liability cases filed throughout the U.S.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eActed as California counsel representing\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea major innovator pharmaceutical company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in the defense of multiple personal injury cases which involved claims that pain pumps cause degeneration of shoulder joint cartilage.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eServed as California trial counsel for\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea global brand name pharmaceutical company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an action brought by independent pharmacies alleging a nationwide price-fixing conspiracy among the manufacturers of brand name prescription drugs.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eThe Dow Chemical Company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;as the alleged successor to the manufacturer of the Salk polio vaccine. In numerous product liability actions filed by individual plaintiffs in San Francisco, Los Angeles and Orange counties, Peter led a team that successfully formulated an end-game strategy resulting in the statewide dismissals of all plaintiffs\u0026rsquo; claims at the pleading stage.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eSmartHealth Inc.,\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in the defense of the latex glove product liability cases.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eHealthcare\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAchieved a defense verdict on behalf of a hospital and healthcare system in a\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003equi tam\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;trial involving allegations of healthcare fraud related to licensing and patient steering brought by a Relator and the California Department of Insurance.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresents\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea South American Public Health Agency\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a breach of contract action arising out of its attempted purchase of ventilators to address the Covid-19 health crisis.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eToxic Tort \u0026ndash; Benzene\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented a number of Fortune and Global 1000 companies, including\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eAkzoNobel, D Aircraft Products, Cytec Industries, Inc., Indopco, Inc.,\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eand\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eChevron U.S.A. Inc.\u003c/strong\u003e, in personal injury cases venued in Northern and Southern California, involving claims of exposure to benzene.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eToxic Tort \u0026ndash; Silica\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eLed a team that represented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eChevron U.S.A. Inc., Union Oil Company of California and Hewlett-Packard Company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in the defense of silica-related product and premises personal injury claims filed in California state court.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eToxic Tort \u0026ndash; Asbestos\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDefends Chevron U.S.A. Inc. and Texaco Inc. in cases involving claims of exposure to asbestos at the Abadan Refinery in Iran in the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s. Won summary judgments in four cases and won appellate arguments in the cases where those summary judgment wins have been appealed.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eHandled, through trial verdict, asbestos product and premises liability dockets throughout the State of California on behalf of numerous companies, including\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eChevron U.S.A. Inc., Texaco Inc., Unocal Corporation, Hewlett-Packard Company, UOP LLC, The Glidden Company, American Cyanamid Company, Fiberite Inc, Flintkote, Western MacArthur, Baxter Healthcare, The Dow Chemical Company and Rhone-Poulenc,\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;for a period of over 25 years. He obtained a defense verdict for Fiberite after a seven-week jury trial in Los Angeles County Superior Court where plaintiff claimed he developed mesothelioma as a result of exposure to a Fiberite molding compound.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eToxic Tort \u0026ndash; Agricultural Chemicals\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eActed as national counsel for\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ethe manufacturer of synthetic pyrethrin pesticides\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in product liability actions filed throughout the United States.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eServed as co-counsel on a trial team that obtained a defense verdict in an alleged Paraquat\u0026reg; exposure trial in a California state action.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eServed on a team that successfully defended\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;Rhone-Poulenc (nka Rhodia)\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003ein the personal injury claims of over 400 individuals arising out of a chemical fire at a sulfuric acid regeneration facility in Martinez, California. Lead Paint.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eLead Paint\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eAmerican Cyanamid Company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an action being prosecuted by cities and counties throughout the State of California against the manufacturers of paint pigments alleging that presence of lead in paint in commercial and residential buildings constituted a public nuisance.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMtBE\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eChevron U.S.A. Inc. and Union Oil Company of California\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether (MtBE) cases involving claims of personal injury and groundwater contamination.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eObtained a defense verdict in favor of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ea specialty ink manufacturer\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a commercial sales action.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended successfully\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ethe manufacturer of food flavoring products\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a commercial action filed in federal district court.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCommercial Design Claims.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDefending\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea process design engineering company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in professional negligence claims and recently won a nonsuit after a five-week jury trial in Los Angeles County Superior Court.\u003c/p\u003e"],"recognitions":[{"title":"Outstanding Individual in Product Liability","detail":"Who's Who Legal 2019"},{"title":"Best Lawyers in America","detail":"2013 – 2017"},{"title":"San Francisco’s Best Lawyers","detail":"2013"},{"title":"Recommended Lawyer for Product Liability and Mass Tort Defense: Toxic Tort (Tier 1) ","detail":"U.S. Legal 500 , 2013. 2015 and 2016"},{"title":"Highest AV Rating ","detail":"Martindale-Hubbell"},{"title":"Super Lawyer ","detail":"San Francisco Magazine, 2004–2006, 2011–2013"}]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":4719}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2025-09-02T04:51:37.000Z","updated_at":"2025-09-02T04:51:37.000Z","searchable_text":"Strotz{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Outstanding Individual in Product Liability\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Who's Who Legal 2019\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Best Lawyers in America\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"2013 – 2017\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"San Francisco’s Best Lawyers\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"2013\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Recommended Lawyer for Product Liability and Mass Tort Defense: Toxic Tort (Tier 1) \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"U.S. Legal 500 , 2013. 2015 and 2016\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Highest AV Rating \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Martindale-Hubbell\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Super Lawyer \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"San Francisco Magazine, 2004–2006, 2011–2013\"}{{ FIELD }}Pharmaceutical\nServes as national coordinating counsel for a major innovator pharmaceutical company in the defense of hundreds of claims that treatment with a widely prescribed branded statin causes diabetes, cardiovascular problems, and liver and kidney problems.{{ FIELD }}Acted as California counsel for a major pharmaceutical company in the defense of product liability litigation involving a branded proton pump inhibitor.{{ FIELD }}Represents GlaxoSmithKline in product liability cases in California involving claims of birth defects.{{ FIELD }}Defends a global pharmaceutical company in product liability cases involving the administration of a corticosteroid.{{ FIELD }}Served on the national trial and leadership teams representing a major innovator pharmaceutical company in the defense of claims that an antipsychotic medication causes weight gain, diabetes, and pancreatitis.{{ FIELD }}Defended the manufacturer of a dental anesthetic in product liability cases filed throughout the U.S.{{ FIELD }}Acted as California counsel representing a major innovator pharmaceutical company in the defense of multiple personal injury cases which involved claims that pain pumps cause degeneration of shoulder joint cartilage.{{ FIELD }}Served as California trial counsel for a global brand name pharmaceutical company in an action brought by independent pharmacies alleging a nationwide price-fixing conspiracy among the manufacturers of brand name prescription drugs.{{ FIELD }}Represented The Dow Chemical Company as the alleged successor to the manufacturer of the Salk polio vaccine. In numerous product liability actions filed by individual plaintiffs in San Francisco, Los Angeles and Orange counties, Peter led a team that successfully formulated an end-game strategy resulting in the statewide dismissals of all plaintiffs’ claims at the pleading stage.{{ FIELD }}Represented SmartHealth Inc., in the defense of the latex glove product liability cases.{{ FIELD }}Healthcare\nAchieved a defense verdict on behalf of a hospital and healthcare system in a qui tam trial involving allegations of healthcare fraud related to licensing and patient steering brought by a Relator and the California Department of Insurance.{{ FIELD }}Represents a South American Public Health Agency in a breach of contract action arising out of its attempted purchase of ventilators to address the Covid-19 health crisis.{{ FIELD }}Toxic Tort – Benzene\nRepresented a number of Fortune and Global 1000 companies, including AkzoNobel, D Aircraft Products, Cytec Industries, Inc., Indopco, Inc., and Chevron U.S.A. Inc., in personal injury cases venued in Northern and Southern California, involving claims of exposure to benzene.{{ FIELD }}Toxic Tort – Silica\nLed a team that represented Chevron U.S.A. Inc., Union Oil Company of California and Hewlett-Packard Company in the defense of silica-related product and premises personal injury claims filed in California state court.{{ FIELD }}Toxic Tort – Asbestos\nDefends Chevron U.S.A. Inc. and Texaco Inc. in cases involving claims of exposure to asbestos at the Abadan Refinery in Iran in the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s. Won summary judgments in four cases and won appellate arguments in the cases where those summary judgment wins have been appealed.{{ FIELD }}Handled, through trial verdict, asbestos product and premises liability dockets throughout the State of California on behalf of numerous companies, including Chevron U.S.A. Inc., Texaco Inc., Unocal Corporation, Hewlett-Packard Company, UOP LLC, The Glidden Company, American Cyanamid Company, Fiberite Inc, Flintkote, Western MacArthur, Baxter Healthcare, The Dow Chemical Company and Rhone-Poulenc, for a period of over 25 years. He obtained a defense verdict for Fiberite after a seven-week jury trial in Los Angeles County Superior Court where plaintiff claimed he developed mesothelioma as a result of exposure to a Fiberite molding compound.{{ FIELD }}Toxic Tort – Agricultural Chemicals\nActed as national counsel for the manufacturer of synthetic pyrethrin pesticides in product liability actions filed throughout the United States.{{ FIELD }}Served as co-counsel on a trial team that obtained a defense verdict in an alleged Paraquat® exposure trial in a California state action.{{ FIELD }}Served on a team that successfully defended Rhone-Poulenc (nka Rhodia) in the personal injury claims of over 400 individuals arising out of a chemical fire at a sulfuric acid regeneration facility in Martinez, California. Lead Paint.{{ FIELD }}Lead Paint\nRepresented American Cyanamid Company in an action being prosecuted by cities and counties throughout the State of California against the manufacturers of paint pigments alleging that presence of lead in paint in commercial and residential buildings constituted a public nuisance.{{ FIELD }}MtBE\nRepresented Chevron U.S.A. Inc. and Union Oil Company of California in Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether (MtBE) cases involving claims of personal injury and groundwater contamination.{{ FIELD }}Obtained a defense verdict in favor of a specialty ink manufacturer in a commercial sales action.{{ FIELD }}Defended successfully the manufacturer of food flavoring products in a commercial action filed in federal district court.{{ FIELD }}Commercial Design Claims.\nDefending a process design engineering company in professional negligence claims and recently won a nonsuit after a five-week jury trial in Los Angeles County Superior Court.{{ FIELD }}Peter A. Strotz has been litigating tort, product liability, and commercial matters for over 30 years and has first-chaired dozens of trials in courts throughout California and the U.S.  His cases involve novel medical, scientific and legal issues for global manufacturing companies, including pharmaceutical, healthcare, oil, gas, engineered and specialty materials, paints, and coatings companies.  Peter has acted as national, regional and local trial counsel in a variety of commercial, antitrust, and toxic tort matters.  He is the founding and managing partner of the firm’s Los Angeles, California office.\nPeter is a senior member of the firm’s Product Liability Practice, which was selected by Law360 as the Product Liability Group of the Year for seven of the last eight years. In what was recognized as a Top Verdict of 2019 by The Daily Journal, Peter achieved a complete defense verdict on behalf of Prime Healthcare against the California Department of Insurance (CDI) and a Relator in a major Insurance Frauds Prevention Act trial in Los Angeles County Superior Court that established a precedent for healthcare providers facing these types of allegations. Partner Outstanding Individual in Product Liability Who's Who Legal 2019 Best Lawyers in America 2013 – 2017 San Francisco’s Best Lawyers 2013 Recommended Lawyer for Product Liability and Mass Tort Defense: Toxic Tort (Tier 1)  U.S. Legal 500 , 2013. 2015 and 2016 Highest AV Rating  Martindale-Hubbell Super Lawyer  San Francisco Magazine, 2004–2006, 2011–2013 University of California, Berkeley University of California, Berkeley, School of Law University of San Francisco University of San Francisco School of Law U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California California State Bar of California Bar Association of San Francisco USF Inns of Court Swiss American Chamber of Commerce International Association of Defense Counsel American Bar Association (Environmental, Product Liability and Mass Tort sections) Alameda County Bar Association Bar Association of San Francisco Defense Research Institute (Drug and Medical Device, Product Liability and Toxic Tort committees) Association of Defense Counsel Pharmaceutical\nServes as national coordinating counsel for a major innovator pharmaceutical company in the defense of hundreds of claims that treatment with a widely prescribed branded statin causes diabetes, cardiovascular problems, and liver and kidney problems. Acted as California counsel for a major pharmaceutical company in the defense of product liability litigation involving a branded proton pump inhibitor. Represents GlaxoSmithKline in product liability cases in California involving claims of birth defects. Defends a global pharmaceutical company in product liability cases involving the administration of a corticosteroid. Served on the national trial and leadership teams representing a major innovator pharmaceutical company in the defense of claims that an antipsychotic medication causes weight gain, diabetes, and pancreatitis. Defended the manufacturer of a dental anesthetic in product liability cases filed throughout the U.S. Acted as California counsel representing a major innovator pharmaceutical company in the defense of multiple personal injury cases which involved claims that pain pumps cause degeneration of shoulder joint cartilage. Served as California trial counsel for a global brand name pharmaceutical company in an action brought by independent pharmacies alleging a nationwide price-fixing conspiracy among the manufacturers of brand name prescription drugs. Represented The Dow Chemical Company as the alleged successor to the manufacturer of the Salk polio vaccine. In numerous product liability actions filed by individual plaintiffs in San Francisco, Los Angeles and Orange counties, Peter led a team that successfully formulated an end-game strategy resulting in the statewide dismissals of all plaintiffs’ claims at the pleading stage. Represented SmartHealth Inc., in the defense of the latex glove product liability cases. Healthcare\nAchieved a defense verdict on behalf of a hospital and healthcare system in a qui tam trial involving allegations of healthcare fraud related to licensing and patient steering brought by a Relator and the California Department of Insurance. Represents a South American Public Health Agency in a breach of contract action arising out of its attempted purchase of ventilators to address the Covid-19 health crisis. Toxic Tort – Benzene\nRepresented a number of Fortune and Global 1000 companies, including AkzoNobel, D Aircraft Products, Cytec Industries, Inc., Indopco, Inc., and Chevron U.S.A. Inc., in personal injury cases venued in Northern and Southern California, involving claims of exposure to benzene. Toxic Tort – Silica\nLed a team that represented Chevron U.S.A. Inc., Union Oil Company of California and Hewlett-Packard Company in the defense of silica-related product and premises personal injury claims filed in California state court. Toxic Tort – Asbestos\nDefends Chevron U.S.A. Inc. and Texaco Inc. in cases involving claims of exposure to asbestos at the Abadan Refinery in Iran in the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s. Won summary judgments in four cases and won appellate arguments in the cases where those summary judgment wins have been appealed. Handled, through trial verdict, asbestos product and premises liability dockets throughout the State of California on behalf of numerous companies, including Chevron U.S.A. Inc., Texaco Inc., Unocal Corporation, Hewlett-Packard Company, UOP LLC, The Glidden Company, American Cyanamid Company, Fiberite Inc, Flintkote, Western MacArthur, Baxter Healthcare, The Dow Chemical Company and Rhone-Poulenc, for a period of over 25 years. He obtained a defense verdict for Fiberite after a seven-week jury trial in Los Angeles County Superior Court where plaintiff claimed he developed mesothelioma as a result of exposure to a Fiberite molding compound. Toxic Tort – Agricultural Chemicals\nActed as national counsel for the manufacturer of synthetic pyrethrin pesticides in product liability actions filed throughout the United States. Served as co-counsel on a trial team that obtained a defense verdict in an alleged Paraquat® exposure trial in a California state action. Served on a team that successfully defended Rhone-Poulenc (nka Rhodia) in the personal injury claims of over 400 individuals arising out of a chemical fire at a sulfuric acid regeneration facility in Martinez, California. Lead Paint. Lead Paint\nRepresented American Cyanamid Company in an action being prosecuted by cities and counties throughout the State of California against the manufacturers of paint pigments alleging that presence of lead in paint in commercial and residential buildings constituted a public nuisance. MtBE\nRepresented Chevron U.S.A. Inc. and Union Oil Company of California in Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether (MtBE) cases involving claims of personal injury and groundwater contamination. Obtained a defense verdict in favor of a specialty ink manufacturer in a commercial sales action. Defended successfully the manufacturer of food flavoring products in a commercial action filed in federal district court. Commercial Design Claims.\nDefending a process design engineering company in professional negligence claims and recently won a nonsuit after a five-week jury trial in Los Angeles County Superior Court.","searchable_name":"Peter A. Strotz","is_active":true,"featured":null,"publish_date":null,"expiration_date":null,"blog_featured":null,"published_by":196,"capability_group_featured":null,"home_page_featured":null},{"id":444323,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":6837,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eWill Stute is a nationally recognized first-chair trial lawyer who represents companies in their most consequential, high-stakes litigation across the United States. He is known for trying\u0026mdash;and winning\u0026mdash;cases others resolve short of trial, and for guiding clients through complex disputes where reputational, financial, and operational risks are at their highest.\u0026nbsp;[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWill has led numerous jury trials involving mass tort, personal injury, antitrust, False Claims Act, securities fraud, and residential mortgage-backed securities (RMBS) claims, as well as matters at the intersection of technology, finance, and life sciences. Will served as lead trial counsel in three separate jury trials for the NCAA, including the first two cases to test claims that the NCAA is responsible for concussions and chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE) in college football. The defense verdicts in those matters were widely recognized as landmark results.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWill has also served as first-chair trial counsel in a series of the most closely watched product liability trials in the country, defending a global consumer products manufacturer against allegations that legacy talc-based products caused asbestos-related disease, including mesothelioma. These cases required juries to assess decades of science, regulatory oversight, and historical manufacturing practices under intense public and media scrutiny. Will achieved highly favorable results in these cases in some of the most difficult jurisdictions in the United States, including Portland, Oregon; Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; and New Orleans, Louisiana.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWill\u0026rsquo;s trial successes have earned significant national recognition. He has been named the \u003cem\u003eNational Law Journal\u0026rsquo;s \u003c/em\u003eWinning Litigator of the Year, was a finalist for \u003cem\u003eThe American Lawyer\u0026rsquo;s \u003c/em\u003eLitigator of the Year, and received honors including \u003cem\u003eCourtroom View Network\u0026rsquo;s \u003c/em\u003eMost Impressive Defense Verdict, \u003cem\u003eThe American Lawyer\u0026rsquo;s \u003c/em\u003eLitigator of the Week, the \u003cem\u003eDaily Journal\u0026rsquo;s \u003c/em\u003eDefense Verdict of the Year, and was recognized by \u003cem\u003eForbes\u003c/em\u003e as one the 100 best lawyers in the United States. Commentators have described his results as \u0026ldquo;incredible victories\u0026rdquo; and praised his courtroom approach as that of a trial lawyer \u0026ldquo;playing to win.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eClients value Will\u0026rsquo;s strategic judgment, command of the courtroom, and ability to distill complex factual and scientific issues into compelling narratives that juries understand. He is frequently called upon to step into matters at critical inflection points\u0026mdash;when trial is imminent, settlement leverage must be reset, or a decisive courtroom strategy is required.\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"will-stute","email":"wstute@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":["\u003cp\u003eTrial counsel for \u003cstrong\u003eZynga\u003c/strong\u003e in patent ligation brought by gambling technology company IGT, securing a complete defense win.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead trial counsel for the \u003cstrong\u003eNCAA\u003c/strong\u003e in dozens of concussion/CTE cases across the United States.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead trial counsel for the \u003cstrong\u003eNCAA \u003c/strong\u003ein \u003cem\u003eGee v. NCAA\u003c/em\u003e, securing defense verdict in first concussion case to reach a full trial in the U.S.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead trial counsel for the \u003cstrong\u003eNCAA\u003c/strong\u003e in \u003cem\u003eFinnerty v. NCAA\u003c/em\u003e, securing defense verdict in second concussion case to go to trial in the U.S.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead trial counsel for the \u003cstrong\u003eNCAA\u003c/strong\u003e in \u003cem\u003eBrenner v. NCAA\u003c/em\u003e, securing defense verdict in $150 million personal injury case involving former University of Oregon football player.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented \u003cstrong\u003eone of the world\u0026rsquo;s largest life sciences companies\u003c/strong\u003e in the successful resolution of major False Claims Act litigation.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a \u003cstrong\u003epioneering gig economy company\u003c/strong\u003e in litigation and regulatory matters brought by state attorneys general, successfully resolving the matter for the company.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for \u003cstrong\u003eDHL Holdings\u003c/strong\u003e in a case against United Airlines, successfully resolving an antitrust and price-fixing class action on the eve of trial.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a \u003cstrong\u003eleading tech company\u003c/strong\u003e in high-profile antitrust litigation, playing an instrumental role in securing a preliminary injunction for the client after a bench trial.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead trial counsel for \u003cstrong\u003eGlobal Linguist Solutions LLC\u003c/strong\u003e, in a civil Qui Tam action in Maryland alleging False Claims Act violations in connection with intelligence activities in Kuwait during the Iraq War.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead trial counsel for a \u003cstrong\u003eleading biopharmaceutical company\u003c/strong\u003e in a federal court case in Pennsylvania involving False Claims Act and Anti-Kickback Statutes.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eMember of trial team for \u003cstrong\u003eCredit Suisse\u003c/strong\u003e in high-stakes RMBS case brought by the FDIC as receiver for a failed bank in Alabama state court, successfully settling prior to trial.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented \u003cstrong\u003emajor institutional investors\u003c/strong\u003e victimized in several of the largest Ponzi schemes in U.S. history, securing the recovery of tens of millions of dollars for clients.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a \u003cstrong\u003emajor food producer\u003c/strong\u003e in obtaining early dismissal of a highly publicized class action with industry-wide implications for food manufacturers.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting \u003cstrong\u003eJohnson \u0026amp; Johnson\u003c/strong\u003e as Trial counsel in two recent talc litigation matters.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting \u003cstrong\u003eRoblox\u003c/strong\u003e as lead counsel in national litigation alleging gaming causes addiction in adolescents.\u003c/p\u003e"],"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[]},"expertise":[{"id":17,"guid":"17.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":3,"guid":"3.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":129,"guid":"129.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":19,"guid":"19.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":103,"guid":"103.capabilities","index":4,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":118,"guid":"118.capabilities","index":5,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":109,"guid":"109.capabilities","index":6,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":952,"guid":"952.smart_tags","index":7,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1165,"guid":"1165.smart_tags","index":8,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":750,"guid":"750.smart_tags","index":9,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":10,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":1,"guid":"1.capabilities","index":11,"source":"capabilities"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Stute","nick_name":"Will","clerkships":[],"first_name":"Will","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":202,"law_schools":[{"id":2758,"meta":{"degree":"J.D.","honors":"cum laude","is_law_school":"1","graduation_date":"1997-01-01 00:00:00"},"order":1,"pin_order":null,"pin_expiration":null}],"middle_name":"","name_suffix":"","recognitions":[{"title":"American Lawyer Litigator of the Year Finalist","detail":"2023"},{"title":"Most Impressive Defense Verdict","detail":"CVN, 2022"},{"title":"Named as one of the 100 most influential lawyers","detail":"Savoy Magazine, 2024"},{"title":"Named as \"Top 200 Lawyer\" ","detail":"Forbes, 2024"},{"title":"Named Litigator of the Year","detail":"National Law Journal, 2023"},{"title":"Named Leading Commercial Litigator","detail":"Daily Journal, 2023"},{"title":"Named Litigator of the Week","detail":"The American Lawyer, 2022"},{"title":"Named Client Service All- Star","detail":"BTI Consulting Group, 2017"},{"title":"Stars Rated Lawyer","detail":"Acritas, 2020"},{"title":"Super Lawyers List","detail":"Washington DC, 2019"},{"title":"Sports Editorial Advisory Board Member","detail":"Law360, 2019"}],"linked_in_url":"https://www.linkedin.com/in/willstute/","seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eWill Stute is a nationally recognized first-chair trial lawyer who represents companies in their most consequential, high-stakes litigation across the United States. He is known for trying\u0026mdash;and winning\u0026mdash;cases others resolve short of trial, and for guiding clients through complex disputes where reputational, financial, and operational risks are at their highest.\u0026nbsp;[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWill has led numerous jury trials involving mass tort, personal injury, antitrust, False Claims Act, securities fraud, and residential mortgage-backed securities (RMBS) claims, as well as matters at the intersection of technology, finance, and life sciences. Will served as lead trial counsel in three separate jury trials for the NCAA, including the first two cases to test claims that the NCAA is responsible for concussions and chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE) in college football. The defense verdicts in those matters were widely recognized as landmark results.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWill has also served as first-chair trial counsel in a series of the most closely watched product liability trials in the country, defending a global consumer products manufacturer against allegations that legacy talc-based products caused asbestos-related disease, including mesothelioma. These cases required juries to assess decades of science, regulatory oversight, and historical manufacturing practices under intense public and media scrutiny. Will achieved highly favorable results in these cases in some of the most difficult jurisdictions in the United States, including Portland, Oregon; Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; and New Orleans, Louisiana.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWill\u0026rsquo;s trial successes have earned significant national recognition. He has been named the \u003cem\u003eNational Law Journal\u0026rsquo;s \u003c/em\u003eWinning Litigator of the Year, was a finalist for \u003cem\u003eThe American Lawyer\u0026rsquo;s \u003c/em\u003eLitigator of the Year, and received honors including \u003cem\u003eCourtroom View Network\u0026rsquo;s \u003c/em\u003eMost Impressive Defense Verdict, \u003cem\u003eThe American Lawyer\u0026rsquo;s \u003c/em\u003eLitigator of the Week, the \u003cem\u003eDaily Journal\u0026rsquo;s \u003c/em\u003eDefense Verdict of the Year, and was recognized by \u003cem\u003eForbes\u003c/em\u003e as one the 100 best lawyers in the United States. Commentators have described his results as \u0026ldquo;incredible victories\u0026rdquo; and praised his courtroom approach as that of a trial lawyer \u0026ldquo;playing to win.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eClients value Will\u0026rsquo;s strategic judgment, command of the courtroom, and ability to distill complex factual and scientific issues into compelling narratives that juries understand. He is frequently called upon to step into matters at critical inflection points\u0026mdash;when trial is imminent, settlement leverage must be reset, or a decisive courtroom strategy is required.\u003c/p\u003e","matters":["\u003cp\u003eTrial counsel for \u003cstrong\u003eZynga\u003c/strong\u003e in patent ligation brought by gambling technology company IGT, securing a complete defense win.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead trial counsel for the \u003cstrong\u003eNCAA\u003c/strong\u003e in dozens of concussion/CTE cases across the United States.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead trial counsel for the \u003cstrong\u003eNCAA \u003c/strong\u003ein \u003cem\u003eGee v. NCAA\u003c/em\u003e, securing defense verdict in first concussion case to reach a full trial in the U.S.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead trial counsel for the \u003cstrong\u003eNCAA\u003c/strong\u003e in \u003cem\u003eFinnerty v. NCAA\u003c/em\u003e, securing defense verdict in second concussion case to go to trial in the U.S.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead trial counsel for the \u003cstrong\u003eNCAA\u003c/strong\u003e in \u003cem\u003eBrenner v. NCAA\u003c/em\u003e, securing defense verdict in $150 million personal injury case involving former University of Oregon football player.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented \u003cstrong\u003eone of the world\u0026rsquo;s largest life sciences companies\u003c/strong\u003e in the successful resolution of major False Claims Act litigation.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a \u003cstrong\u003epioneering gig economy company\u003c/strong\u003e in litigation and regulatory matters brought by state attorneys general, successfully resolving the matter for the company.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for \u003cstrong\u003eDHL Holdings\u003c/strong\u003e in a case against United Airlines, successfully resolving an antitrust and price-fixing class action on the eve of trial.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a \u003cstrong\u003eleading tech company\u003c/strong\u003e in high-profile antitrust litigation, playing an instrumental role in securing a preliminary injunction for the client after a bench trial.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead trial counsel for \u003cstrong\u003eGlobal Linguist Solutions LLC\u003c/strong\u003e, in a civil Qui Tam action in Maryland alleging False Claims Act violations in connection with intelligence activities in Kuwait during the Iraq War.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead trial counsel for a \u003cstrong\u003eleading biopharmaceutical company\u003c/strong\u003e in a federal court case in Pennsylvania involving False Claims Act and Anti-Kickback Statutes.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eMember of trial team for \u003cstrong\u003eCredit Suisse\u003c/strong\u003e in high-stakes RMBS case brought by the FDIC as receiver for a failed bank in Alabama state court, successfully settling prior to trial.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented \u003cstrong\u003emajor institutional investors\u003c/strong\u003e victimized in several of the largest Ponzi schemes in U.S. history, securing the recovery of tens of millions of dollars for clients.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a \u003cstrong\u003emajor food producer\u003c/strong\u003e in obtaining early dismissal of a highly publicized class action with industry-wide implications for food manufacturers.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting \u003cstrong\u003eJohnson \u0026amp; Johnson\u003c/strong\u003e as Trial counsel in two recent talc litigation matters.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting \u003cstrong\u003eRoblox\u003c/strong\u003e as lead counsel in national litigation alleging gaming causes addiction in adolescents.\u003c/p\u003e"],"recognitions":[{"title":"American Lawyer Litigator of the Year Finalist","detail":"2023"},{"title":"Most Impressive Defense Verdict","detail":"CVN, 2022"},{"title":"Named as one of the 100 most influential lawyers","detail":"Savoy Magazine, 2024"},{"title":"Named as \"Top 200 Lawyer\" ","detail":"Forbes, 2024"},{"title":"Named Litigator of the Year","detail":"National Law Journal, 2023"},{"title":"Named Leading Commercial Litigator","detail":"Daily Journal, 2023"},{"title":"Named Litigator of the Week","detail":"The American Lawyer, 2022"},{"title":"Named Client Service All- Star","detail":"BTI Consulting Group, 2017"},{"title":"Stars Rated Lawyer","detail":"Acritas, 2020"},{"title":"Super Lawyers List","detail":"Washington DC, 2019"},{"title":"Sports Editorial Advisory Board Member","detail":"Law360, 2019"}]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":12079}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2025-12-16T15:45:08.000Z","updated_at":"2025-12-16T15:45:08.000Z","searchable_text":"Stute{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"American Lawyer Litigator of the Year Finalist\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"2023\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Most Impressive Defense Verdict\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"CVN, 2022\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named as one of the 100 most influential lawyers\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Savoy Magazine, 2024\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named as \\\"Top 200 Lawyer\\\" \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Forbes, 2024\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named Litigator of the Year\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"National Law Journal, 2023\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named Leading Commercial Litigator\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Daily Journal, 2023\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named Litigator of the Week\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"The American Lawyer, 2022\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named Client Service All- Star\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"BTI Consulting Group, 2017\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Stars Rated Lawyer\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Acritas, 2020\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Super Lawyers List\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Washington DC, 2019\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Sports Editorial Advisory Board Member\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Law360, 2019\"}{{ FIELD }}Trial counsel for Zynga in patent ligation brought by gambling technology company IGT, securing a complete defense win.{{ FIELD }}Lead trial counsel for the NCAA in dozens of concussion/CTE cases across the United States.{{ FIELD }}Lead trial counsel for the NCAA in Gee v. NCAA, securing defense verdict in first concussion case to reach a full trial in the U.S.{{ FIELD }}Lead trial counsel for the NCAA in Finnerty v. NCAA, securing defense verdict in second concussion case to go to trial in the U.S.{{ FIELD }}Lead trial counsel for the NCAA in Brenner v. NCAA, securing defense verdict in $150 million personal injury case involving former University of Oregon football player.{{ FIELD }}Represented one of the world’s largest life sciences companies in the successful resolution of major False Claims Act litigation.{{ FIELD }}Represented a pioneering gig economy company in litigation and regulatory matters brought by state attorneys general, successfully resolving the matter for the company.{{ FIELD }}Lead counsel for DHL Holdings in a case against United Airlines, successfully resolving an antitrust and price-fixing class action on the eve of trial.{{ FIELD }}Represented a leading tech company in high-profile antitrust litigation, playing an instrumental role in securing a preliminary injunction for the client after a bench trial.{{ FIELD }}Lead trial counsel for Global Linguist Solutions LLC, in a civil Qui Tam action in Maryland alleging False Claims Act violations in connection with intelligence activities in Kuwait during the Iraq War.{{ FIELD }}Lead trial counsel for a leading biopharmaceutical company in a federal court case in Pennsylvania involving False Claims Act and Anti-Kickback Statutes.{{ FIELD }}Member of trial team for Credit Suisse in high-stakes RMBS case brought by the FDIC as receiver for a failed bank in Alabama state court, successfully settling prior to trial.{{ FIELD }}Represented major institutional investors victimized in several of the largest Ponzi schemes in U.S. history, securing the recovery of tens of millions of dollars for clients.{{ FIELD }}Represented a major food producer in obtaining early dismissal of a highly publicized class action with industry-wide implications for food manufacturers.{{ FIELD }}Representing Johnson \u0026amp; Johnson as Trial counsel in two recent talc litigation matters.{{ FIELD }}Representing Roblox as lead counsel in national litigation alleging gaming causes addiction in adolescents.{{ FIELD }}Will Stute is a nationally recognized first-chair trial lawyer who represents companies in their most consequential, high-stakes litigation across the United States. He is known for trying—and winning—cases others resolve short of trial, and for guiding clients through complex disputes where reputational, financial, and operational risks are at their highest. \nWill has led numerous jury trials involving mass tort, personal injury, antitrust, False Claims Act, securities fraud, and residential mortgage-backed securities (RMBS) claims, as well as matters at the intersection of technology, finance, and life sciences. Will served as lead trial counsel in three separate jury trials for the NCAA, including the first two cases to test claims that the NCAA is responsible for concussions and chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE) in college football. The defense verdicts in those matters were widely recognized as landmark results.\nWill has also served as first-chair trial counsel in a series of the most closely watched product liability trials in the country, defending a global consumer products manufacturer against allegations that legacy talc-based products caused asbestos-related disease, including mesothelioma. These cases required juries to assess decades of science, regulatory oversight, and historical manufacturing practices under intense public and media scrutiny. Will achieved highly favorable results in these cases in some of the most difficult jurisdictions in the United States, including Portland, Oregon; Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; and New Orleans, Louisiana.\nWill’s trial successes have earned significant national recognition. He has been named the National Law Journal’s Winning Litigator of the Year, was a finalist for The American Lawyer’s Litigator of the Year, and received honors including Courtroom View Network’s Most Impressive Defense Verdict, The American Lawyer’s Litigator of the Week, the Daily Journal’s Defense Verdict of the Year, and was recognized by Forbes as one the 100 best lawyers in the United States. Commentators have described his results as “incredible victories” and praised his courtroom approach as that of a trial lawyer “playing to win.”\nClients value Will’s strategic judgment, command of the courtroom, and ability to distill complex factual and scientific issues into compelling narratives that juries understand. He is frequently called upon to step into matters at critical inflection points—when trial is imminent, settlement leverage must be reset, or a decisive courtroom strategy is required. Partner American Lawyer Litigator of the Year Finalist 2023 Most Impressive Defense Verdict CVN, 2022 Named as one of the 100 most influential lawyers Savoy Magazine, 2024 Named as \"Top 200 Lawyer\"  Forbes, 2024 Named Litigator of the Year National Law Journal, 2023 Named Leading Commercial Litigator Daily Journal, 2023 Named Litigator of the Week The American Lawyer, 2022 Named Client Service All- Star BTI Consulting Group, 2017 Stars Rated Lawyer Acritas, 2020 Super Lawyers List Washington DC, 2019 Sports Editorial Advisory Board Member Law360, 2019 Augsburg College  William Mitchell College of Law William Mitchell College of Law District of Columbia Florida Minnesota American Bar Association, Securities Litigation and Minority Attorney sections National Bar Association, Commercial Litigation and Corporate Law sections U.S. Congressional Awards, board member Twin Cities Diversity in Practice, former president William Mitchell College of Law, former member of the board of trustees Teaching faculty at Harvard Law School’s Trial Advocacy Workshop, member LCLD Fellow, 2010 Trial counsel for Zynga in patent ligation brought by gambling technology company IGT, securing a complete defense win. Lead trial counsel for the NCAA in dozens of concussion/CTE cases across the United States. Lead trial counsel for the NCAA in Gee v. NCAA, securing defense verdict in first concussion case to reach a full trial in the U.S. Lead trial counsel for the NCAA in Finnerty v. NCAA, securing defense verdict in second concussion case to go to trial in the U.S. Lead trial counsel for the NCAA in Brenner v. NCAA, securing defense verdict in $150 million personal injury case involving former University of Oregon football player. Represented one of the world’s largest life sciences companies in the successful resolution of major False Claims Act litigation. Represented a pioneering gig economy company in litigation and regulatory matters brought by state attorneys general, successfully resolving the matter for the company. Lead counsel for DHL Holdings in a case against United Airlines, successfully resolving an antitrust and price-fixing class action on the eve of trial. Represented a leading tech company in high-profile antitrust litigation, playing an instrumental role in securing a preliminary injunction for the client after a bench trial. Lead trial counsel for Global Linguist Solutions LLC, in a civil Qui Tam action in Maryland alleging False Claims Act violations in connection with intelligence activities in Kuwait during the Iraq War. Lead trial counsel for a leading biopharmaceutical company in a federal court case in Pennsylvania involving False Claims Act and Anti-Kickback Statutes. Member of trial team for Credit Suisse in high-stakes RMBS case brought by the FDIC as receiver for a failed bank in Alabama state court, successfully settling prior to trial. Represented major institutional investors victimized in several of the largest Ponzi schemes in U.S. history, securing the recovery of tens of millions of dollars for clients. Represented a major food producer in obtaining early dismissal of a highly publicized class action with industry-wide implications for food manufacturers. Representing Johnson \u0026amp; Johnson as Trial counsel in two recent talc litigation matters. Representing Roblox as lead counsel in national litigation alleging gaming causes addiction in adolescents.","searchable_name":"Will Stute","is_active":true,"featured":null,"publish_date":null,"expiration_date":null,"blog_featured":null,"published_by":202,"capability_group_featured":null,"home_page_featured":null},{"id":446394,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":7343,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eJohn is a trial lawyer with significant courtroom experience in both federal and state courts (including the Texas Business Court), as well as arbitrations. His practice focuses on complex commercial litigation for corporations and individuals across a wide variety of industries, as well as internal investigations and white-collar criminal defense.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eJohn represents clients at all stages of litigation and has extensive dispositive motion, deposition, oral argument, and trial experience, and works closely with witnesses to prepare them for deposition and trial testimony. John has served as a key member of multiple trial teams, including obtaining injunctive relief, second chair experience, opening statements, and examining witnesses. John frequently represents clients in matters involving breach of contract, fraud, trade secrets, fiduciary duties, class actions, the False Claims Act, and other business disputes and regulatory matters. His experience also includes providing pre-litigation and regulatory counseling, engaging in alternative dispute resolution proceedings, and obtaining favorable settlements.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eJohn was previously selected to serve as an Assistant District Attorney at the Dallas County District Attorney\u0026rsquo;s Office through its lawyer on loan program where he tried multiple criminal jury trials to verdict, handling everything from voir dire through closing argument. John maintains an active pro bono practice with a variety of commercial and civil rights matters, and during law school served as an intern to the Honorable Robert E. Gerber, United States Bankruptcy Judge for the Southern District of New York.\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"john-sullivan","email":"jsullivan@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":["\u003cp\u003eDefended three major financial institutions against False Claims Act allegations, obtaining dismissal in the District Court, which was upheld on appeal, with millions of dollars of alleged damages and potential debarment at stake.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a Canadian private equity company in Travis County District Court, obtaining dismissal of claims alleging breaches of representations in an asset purchase agreement where plaintiff sought more than US$19 million in damages.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a technology company in a dispute involving alleged breaches of contract, fraud, tortious interference, unfair competition, and trade secret misappropriation.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eUnited States of America ex rel. Magee v. Texas Heart Hospital of the Southwest LLP et al. \u003c/em\u003e(E.D. Tex.). Counsel for relators in a kickback case, wherein relators brought claims under the False Claims Act. Shortly before trial, the defendants settled for US$48 million to resolve allegations that they violated the False Claims Act.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eU.S.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cem\u003eex rel. Hernandez v. Team Health LLC et al.\u003c/em\u003e (E.D. Tex). Counsel for one of the largest emergency room staffing companies in the U.S. defending claims under the False Claims Act.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended a private equity fund against claims of negligent misrepresentation, breach of contract, and a declaratory action regarding a restrictive covenant in connection with an a multi-million dollar transaction. Obtained dismissal of all claims and was awarded attorneys\u0026rsquo; fees in the Trial Court.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented multiple businesses in bringing claims relating to departing employees and misappropriation of confidential information and trade secrets, including successfully obtaining injunctive relief.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a defense contractor in a confidential internal investigation.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented an oil and gas company in a confidential dispute involving a wild well incident, obtaining a favorable settlement prior to trial.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a financial institution in a case involving a breach of contract.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented international construction companies in a dispute involving alleged fraudulent transfers and breach of fiduciary duties, obtaining favorable settlement prior to trial.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eObtained a temporary restraining order for a retail business in a real estate dispute.\u003c/p\u003e"],"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[]},"expertise":[{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":13,"guid":"13.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":3,"guid":"3.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":5,"guid":"5.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":19,"guid":"19.capabilities","index":4,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":6,"guid":"6.capabilities","index":5,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":102,"guid":"102.capabilities","index":6,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":107,"guid":"107.capabilities","index":7,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":11,"guid":"11.capabilities","index":8,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":952,"guid":"952.smart_tags","index":9,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1409,"guid":"1409.smart_tags","index":10,"source":"smartTags"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Sullivan","nick_name":"John","clerkships":[{"name":"Intern, Honorable Robert E. Gerber, United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York","years_held":"2013 - 2013"}],"first_name":"John","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":34,"law_schools":[{"id":2282,"meta":{"degree":"J.D.","honors":"Executive Editor - Journal of Business Law","is_law_school":"1","graduation_date":"2015-01-01 00:00:00"},"order":1,"pin_order":null,"pin_expiration":null}],"middle_name":"T.","name_suffix":"","recognitions":[{"title":"Ones to Watch in America – Commercial Litigation","detail":"Best Lawyers, 2023-2026"},{"title":"Ones to Watch in America – Criminal Defense: White Collar","detail":"Best Lawyers, 2024-2026"}],"linked_in_url":"https://www.linkedin.com/in/john-sullivan-23a74312/","seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eJohn is a trial lawyer with significant courtroom experience in both federal and state courts (including the Texas Business Court), as well as arbitrations. His practice focuses on complex commercial litigation for corporations and individuals across a wide variety of industries, as well as internal investigations and white-collar criminal defense.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eJohn represents clients at all stages of litigation and has extensive dispositive motion, deposition, oral argument, and trial experience, and works closely with witnesses to prepare them for deposition and trial testimony. John has served as a key member of multiple trial teams, including obtaining injunctive relief, second chair experience, opening statements, and examining witnesses. John frequently represents clients in matters involving breach of contract, fraud, trade secrets, fiduciary duties, class actions, the False Claims Act, and other business disputes and regulatory matters. His experience also includes providing pre-litigation and regulatory counseling, engaging in alternative dispute resolution proceedings, and obtaining favorable settlements.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eJohn was previously selected to serve as an Assistant District Attorney at the Dallas County District Attorney\u0026rsquo;s Office through its lawyer on loan program where he tried multiple criminal jury trials to verdict, handling everything from voir dire through closing argument. John maintains an active pro bono practice with a variety of commercial and civil rights matters, and during law school served as an intern to the Honorable Robert E. Gerber, United States Bankruptcy Judge for the Southern District of New York.\u003c/p\u003e","matters":["\u003cp\u003eDefended three major financial institutions against False Claims Act allegations, obtaining dismissal in the District Court, which was upheld on appeal, with millions of dollars of alleged damages and potential debarment at stake.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a Canadian private equity company in Travis County District Court, obtaining dismissal of claims alleging breaches of representations in an asset purchase agreement where plaintiff sought more than US$19 million in damages.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a technology company in a dispute involving alleged breaches of contract, fraud, tortious interference, unfair competition, and trade secret misappropriation.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eUnited States of America ex rel. Magee v. Texas Heart Hospital of the Southwest LLP et al. \u003c/em\u003e(E.D. Tex.). Counsel for relators in a kickback case, wherein relators brought claims under the False Claims Act. Shortly before trial, the defendants settled for US$48 million to resolve allegations that they violated the False Claims Act.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eU.S.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cem\u003eex rel. Hernandez v. Team Health LLC et al.\u003c/em\u003e (E.D. Tex). Counsel for one of the largest emergency room staffing companies in the U.S. defending claims under the False Claims Act.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended a private equity fund against claims of negligent misrepresentation, breach of contract, and a declaratory action regarding a restrictive covenant in connection with an a multi-million dollar transaction. Obtained dismissal of all claims and was awarded attorneys\u0026rsquo; fees in the Trial Court.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented multiple businesses in bringing claims relating to departing employees and misappropriation of confidential information and trade secrets, including successfully obtaining injunctive relief.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a defense contractor in a confidential internal investigation.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented an oil and gas company in a confidential dispute involving a wild well incident, obtaining a favorable settlement prior to trial.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented a financial institution in a case involving a breach of contract.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented international construction companies in a dispute involving alleged fraudulent transfers and breach of fiduciary duties, obtaining favorable settlement prior to trial.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eObtained a temporary restraining order for a retail business in a real estate dispute.\u003c/p\u003e"],"recognitions":[{"title":"Ones to Watch in America – Commercial Litigation","detail":"Best Lawyers, 2023-2026"},{"title":"Ones to Watch in America – Criminal Defense: White Collar","detail":"Best Lawyers, 2024-2026"}]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":13386}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2026-03-03T18:39:51.000Z","updated_at":"2026-03-03T18:39:51.000Z","searchable_text":"Sullivan{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Ones to Watch in America – Commercial Litigation\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Best Lawyers, 2023-2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Ones to Watch in America – Criminal Defense: White Collar\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Best Lawyers, 2024-2026\"}{{ FIELD }}Defended three major financial institutions against False Claims Act allegations, obtaining dismissal in the District Court, which was upheld on appeal, with millions of dollars of alleged damages and potential debarment at stake.{{ FIELD }}Represented a Canadian private equity company in Travis County District Court, obtaining dismissal of claims alleging breaches of representations in an asset purchase agreement where plaintiff sought more than US$19 million in damages.{{ FIELD }}Represented a technology company in a dispute involving alleged breaches of contract, fraud, tortious interference, unfair competition, and trade secret misappropriation.{{ FIELD }}United States of America ex rel. Magee v. Texas Heart Hospital of the Southwest LLP et al. (E.D. Tex.). Counsel for relators in a kickback case, wherein relators brought claims under the False Claims Act. Shortly before trial, the defendants settled for US$48 million to resolve allegations that they violated the False Claims Act.{{ FIELD }}U.S. ex rel. Hernandez v. Team Health LLC et al. (E.D. Tex). Counsel for one of the largest emergency room staffing companies in the U.S. defending claims under the False Claims Act.{{ FIELD }}Defended a private equity fund against claims of negligent misrepresentation, breach of contract, and a declaratory action regarding a restrictive covenant in connection with an a multi-million dollar transaction. Obtained dismissal of all claims and was awarded attorneys’ fees in the Trial Court.{{ FIELD }}Represented multiple businesses in bringing claims relating to departing employees and misappropriation of confidential information and trade secrets, including successfully obtaining injunctive relief.{{ FIELD }}Represented a defense contractor in a confidential internal investigation.{{ FIELD }}Represented an oil and gas company in a confidential dispute involving a wild well incident, obtaining a favorable settlement prior to trial.{{ FIELD }}Represented a financial institution in a case involving a breach of contract.{{ FIELD }}Represented international construction companies in a dispute involving alleged fraudulent transfers and breach of fiduciary duties, obtaining favorable settlement prior to trial.{{ FIELD }}Obtained a temporary restraining order for a retail business in a real estate dispute.{{ FIELD }}John is a trial lawyer with significant courtroom experience in both federal and state courts (including the Texas Business Court), as well as arbitrations. His practice focuses on complex commercial litigation for corporations and individuals across a wide variety of industries, as well as internal investigations and white-collar criminal defense.\nJohn represents clients at all stages of litigation and has extensive dispositive motion, deposition, oral argument, and trial experience, and works closely with witnesses to prepare them for deposition and trial testimony. John has served as a key member of multiple trial teams, including obtaining injunctive relief, second chair experience, opening statements, and examining witnesses. John frequently represents clients in matters involving breach of contract, fraud, trade secrets, fiduciary duties, class actions, the False Claims Act, and other business disputes and regulatory matters. His experience also includes providing pre-litigation and regulatory counseling, engaging in alternative dispute resolution proceedings, and obtaining favorable settlements.\nJohn was previously selected to serve as an Assistant District Attorney at the Dallas County District Attorney’s Office through its lawyer on loan program where he tried multiple criminal jury trials to verdict, handling everything from voir dire through closing argument. John maintains an active pro bono practice with a variety of commercial and civil rights matters, and during law school served as an intern to the Honorable Robert E. Gerber, United States Bankruptcy Judge for the Southern District of New York. Partner Ones to Watch in America – Commercial Litigation Best Lawyers, 2023-2026 Ones to Watch in America – Criminal Defense: White Collar Best Lawyers, 2024-2026 University of Notre Dame Notre Dame Law School University of Pennsylvania University of Pennsylvania Law School Texas Member, Dallas Association of Young Lawyers, 2015 - Present Intern, Honorable Robert E. Gerber, United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York Defended three major financial institutions against False Claims Act allegations, obtaining dismissal in the District Court, which was upheld on appeal, with millions of dollars of alleged damages and potential debarment at stake. Represented a Canadian private equity company in Travis County District Court, obtaining dismissal of claims alleging breaches of representations in an asset purchase agreement where plaintiff sought more than US$19 million in damages. Represented a technology company in a dispute involving alleged breaches of contract, fraud, tortious interference, unfair competition, and trade secret misappropriation. United States of America ex rel. Magee v. Texas Heart Hospital of the Southwest LLP et al. (E.D. Tex.). Counsel for relators in a kickback case, wherein relators brought claims under the False Claims Act. Shortly before trial, the defendants settled for US$48 million to resolve allegations that they violated the False Claims Act. U.S. ex rel. Hernandez v. Team Health LLC et al. (E.D. Tex). Counsel for one of the largest emergency room staffing companies in the U.S. defending claims under the False Claims Act. Defended a private equity fund against claims of negligent misrepresentation, breach of contract, and a declaratory action regarding a restrictive covenant in connection with an a multi-million dollar transaction. Obtained dismissal of all claims and was awarded attorneys’ fees in the Trial Court. Represented multiple businesses in bringing claims relating to departing employees and misappropriation of confidential information and trade secrets, including successfully obtaining injunctive relief. Represented a defense contractor in a confidential internal investigation. Represented an oil and gas company in a confidential dispute involving a wild well incident, obtaining a favorable settlement prior to trial. Represented a financial institution in a case involving a breach of contract. Represented international construction companies in a dispute involving alleged fraudulent transfers and breach of fiduciary duties, obtaining favorable settlement prior to trial. Obtained a temporary restraining order for a retail business in a real estate dispute.","searchable_name":"John T. Sullivan","is_active":true,"featured":null,"publish_date":null,"expiration_date":null,"blog_featured":null,"published_by":34,"capability_group_featured":null,"home_page_featured":null}]}}