{"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":"Real Estate","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":"cg-3","extra_filter_id":null,"extra_filter_type":null,"q":null,"starts_with":"D","per_page":12,"people":[{"id":447047,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":3796,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eIsrael Dahan focuses on high-stakes litigation matters. For over 25 years, Israel has represented public and private companies, financial institutions, corporate executives and other individuals involved in state and federal shareholder securities class actions and derivative actions, as well as in complex commercial litigation matters. He has extensive experience litigating cases involving the federal securities laws, the fiduciary obligations of corporate directors, fraud, tortious conduct and breach of contract.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn addition, Israel has defended debtors, secured lenders, and other creditors and individuals in bankruptcy litigation matters, including those involving claims for fraudulent conveyance, preferential transfers, equitable subordination, breach of fiduciary duty and corporate veil piercing.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHe also has represented and advised companies involved in internal investigations, and investigations and regulatory proceedings pursued by U.S. and foreign regulators.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIsrael has been recognized by\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eBenchmark Litigation\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eand Legal 500\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;for his work on high-profile litigation matters.\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"israel-dahan","email":"idahan@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":["\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eShareholder and Securities Litigation\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDefending\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eFermi Inc.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;and the individual named defendants in a federal securities class action filed in SDNY alleging claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefending\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eGAP Inc.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;and other individual named defendants in a federal securities class action filed in EDNY alleging claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934. Obtained dismissal of all claims, with prejudice, on a motion to dismiss. Dismissal ruling is on appeal before the Second Circuit.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefending\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eBoard of Directors of\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eGlobal Brokerage, Inc\u003c/strong\u003e. in a shareholder derivative action filed in SDNY alleging claims under Section 14(a) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefending\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eBoard of Directors of\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eFXCM, Inc.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a shareholder derivative action filed in Delaware Chancery Court alleging claims for breaches of fiduciary duty and corporate waste.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eGlobal Brokerage, Inc.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eand its CEO and CFO\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a federal securities class action filed in SDNY alleging claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eConduent Inc.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;and certain of its directors and officers in federal securities class action filed in DNJ alleging claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003e PricewaterhouseCoopers Auditores Independentes\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a federal securities class action and individual actions filed in SDNY alleging claims under Section 10(b) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, Section 11 of the Securities Act of 1993 and various state law claims. Obtained dismissal of the Section 10(b) and state law claims on a motion to dismiss.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ePricewaterhouseCoopers\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in shareholder derivative action filed in Delaware Court of Chancery alleging claim for aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duty. Obtained voluntary dismissal of action, with prejudice, post motion to dismiss filing.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eFXCM, Inc., its CEO and CFO\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a federal securities class action filed in SDNY alleging claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934. Obtained dismissal of all claims, with prejudice, on a motion to dismiss; affirmed by Second Circuit.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eAlliance MMA, Inc. and its CEO and CFO\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a federal securities class action filed in DNJ alleging claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eformer CEO of CTPartners\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a federal securities class action filed in SDNY alleging claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934. Obtained dismissal of all claims on a motion to dismiss.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eforeign individual\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a federal securities class action filed in DNJ alleging claims under Sections 11 and 12(a)(2) of the Securities Act of 1933.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eSino Gas International Holdings, Inc.,\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a class action filed in Utah state court alleging claims for breach of fiduciary duty and seeking to enjoin\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eSino Gas\u0026rsquo;\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;going-private merger transaction.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eDeutsche Bank Securities\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in several private securities fraud actions involving naked short selling activities.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eBear Stearns Companies, Inc.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in federal and state shareholder actions filed in NY and Delaware relating to its merger with JPMorgan Chase \u0026amp; Co.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eunderwriters of three offerings of securities,\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;aggregating in excess of $3 billion, issued by The Williams Companies in a federal securities class action filed in ND Oklahoma alleging claims under Sections 11 and 12(a)(2) of the Securities Act of 1933.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eMajesco Entertainment\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eand its officers and directors\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a federal securities class action and separate shareholder derivative action filed in DNJ.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eGroup 1 Software\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eand its Board of Directors\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a shareholder class action filed in Maryland state court seeking to enjoin Group 1\u0026rsquo;s merger with Pitney Bowes.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCommercial Litigation\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefending\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eThe Renco Group\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eand certain subsidiaries\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003ein action filed by Peruvian citizens in Missouri federal court alleging claims of negligence, civil conspiracy, absolute and strict liability and veil piercing.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefending\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eDeutsche Bank Securities Inc.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an action filed by a former investor in Texas federal court alleging claims of federal RICO violations, fraud, breach of fiduciary duty and unjust enrichment.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefending a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003elarge commercial real estate developer\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in several litigations in New Jersey and New York involving foreclosure and guaranty claims on commercial loans in excess of $300 million.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eNitya Capital LLC\u003c/strong\u003e, a commercial real estate investment and management firm in a New York state action against a Special Servicer alleging claims of breach of contract and wrongful conversion.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ePetersen Energia Inversora, S.A.U.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;and\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ePetersen Energia, S.A.U.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a SDNY action against the Argentine Republic and YPF, S.A., alleging claims for breach of contract and promissory estoppel arising from defendants\u0026rsquo; failure to comply with their tender offer requirements.\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eObtained $16 billion judgment post-trial against the Argentine Republic\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e, the largest damages award issued in NY, and now representing clients in enforcement proceedings.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eGEM Capital LLC\u003c/strong\u003e, a real estate investment and management firm, in litigations in Delaware and Pennsylvania involving distressed commercial properties and loans in excess of $50 million.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eStonerock Capital LLC\u003c/strong\u003e, a real estate investment and management firm, in a foreclosure and guaranty litigation filed in Florida state court involving distressed loans on two commercial office buildings in downtown Miami.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eNovo Nordisk Inc.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in DNJ action filed against U.S Department of Health and Human Services, CMS and others challenging the constitutionality and application of the prescription drug program established by the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eAppleby Apartments L.P.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in breach of contract action filed in New Jersey State Court arising from failed real estate purchase transaction. Obtained favorable settlement for client.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ead-hoc group of non-participating term lenders\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;(including ICG, York Capital, Ellington, OFSI, Z Capital) of Boardriders, Inc. in breach of contract action against Boardriders and ad-hoc group of participating lenders filed in New York State Court. The action arose from defendants\u0026rsquo; engagement in a no-pro-rata uptier transaction. Defeated motion to dismiss and obtained favorable settlement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eCaptain Paul Watson Foundation, Captain Paul Watson and Sea Shepherd Origins\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in trademark infringement and trade libel action filed in Vermont federal court.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eSenior Planning Services\u003c/strong\u003e, largest Medicaid application assistor company, in nationwide consumer class action filed in DNJ. Obtained dismissal of complaint with prejudice.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eThrivest Inc.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in trade secret and breach of contract action filed in New York State Court.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eFXCM Holdings LLC\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in indemnification action filed in New York State Court. Obtained dismissal of action on summary judgment.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eForex Capital Markets LLC\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in consumer class actions in SDNY alleging claims of breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, negligence and consumer fraud. Obtained voluntary dismissal of action with prejudice.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eformer owners of Major Energy LLC\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in fraudulent inducement and breach of contract action filed in SDNY.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eTF Global\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in arbitration proceeding involving claims of breach of contract.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ePorsche AG and Porsche Cars North America, Inc.\u003c/strong\u003e, in action filed by NJ Attorney General alleging consumer fraud claims.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eThe Renco Group\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eand other affiliated entities\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in action filed by Fluor Corporation in Missouri state court alleging claims of breach of contract, tortious interference and veil piercing.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003edirector of public company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in SDNY action alleging claim for tortious interference with contract.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ereal estate investment companies\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in SDNY declaratory judgment action against Bank of China.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eNY Giants quarterback, Eli Manning,\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in action filed in NJ state court alleging claims for violation of RICO and other torts.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eBank of America\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in several state and federal actions involving the repurchase of loans sold in mortgage-backed securitizations.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eseveral foreign directors and officers of a U.S. public company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in action filed in Delaware Chancery Court alleging claims for breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty and fraud related to a corporate merger.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eAmbac\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in breach of contract action concerning lease financing and credit default swap agreements.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eValue Health Care,\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;an affiliate of Omnicare, Inc., in breach of contract action filed in Connecticut state court seeking to enforce a $5 million guaranty agreement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eBankruptcy Litigation\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eCitigroup Global Markets Inc.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;and\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eCitigroup Global Markets Limited\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in adversary proceeding filed in the Thornburg Mortgage bankruptcy cases in Maryland seeking to avoid over $2 billion in transfers and other obligations that Thornburg made or assumed prior to bankruptcy. Obtained dismissal of the federal and state constructive fraudulent transfer claims asserted by the Trustee, and favorable settlement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eCitibank, N.A. and its affiliates\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e,\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;as participants in a reserve-based first lien loan facility, in connection with the Chapter 11 bankruptcy case of Sabine Oil \u0026amp; Gas Corp.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eDeutsche Bank\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in connection with litigation brought by foreign representative in the Oro Negro Chapter 15 filed in SDNY Bankruptcy Court.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eDeutsche Bank\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in connection with its role as collateral agent for in excess of $4 billion in priority guaranty notes in In re iHeartMedia bankruptcy case filed in S.D. Tex.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eGlobal Brokerage, Inc.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in connection with its prepackaged Chapter 11 bankruptcy case and subsequent out-of-court restructuring in SDNY Bankruptcy Court.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eYeshiva Chofetz Chaim Inc.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in adversary proceeding filed in SDNY Bankruptcy Court involving claims of fraudulent transfer of real property. Defeated motion to dismiss.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eVertis Inc.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in its Chapter 11 bankruptcy, including various contested matters. Successfully enjoined a third party from tortiously interfering with the debtors\u0026rsquo; existing contractual and business relationships and obstructing the sale of the debtors\u0026rsquo; businesses.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eLyondell Chemical Company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in its Chapter 11 bankruptcy. Secured approval of the largest privately-financed debtor-in-possession financing package at the time, obtained an injunction against claims against non-debtor European affiliates who guaranteed claims of the debtors, and defended the debtors in numerous contested matters filed by the unsecured creditors\u0026rsquo; committee and other individual creditors.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eApollo Health Street, Inc.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in contested involuntary bankruptcy petition filed against Apollo by certain of the company\u0026rsquo;s creditors and obtained dismissal of the case in just three weeks. Also, represented Apollo in a separate lawsuit against the petitioning creditors and obtained significant monetary recovery for Apollo.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eUS Bank, N.A\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;as indenture trustee of debt issued with respect to leveraged leases of two Dynegy power generation facilities in the Dynegy Holdings LLC bankruptcy.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eseveral major creditors and trading counterparties\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy cases and provided advice concerning the liquidation of contracts and trades involving commodities, foreign exchange, interest rate, credit default swaps and other derivative products.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eIcahn Associates\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;as secured lender defeating subordination and other claims in the Blockbuster chapter 11 cases.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eBay Harbour and affiliated funds and individuals\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in breach of fiduciary duty and veil piercing claims brought by the creditors committee in the Steve \u0026amp; Barry\u0026rsquo;s bankruptcy. Obtained dismissal of all claims, which was affirmed by the District Court.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eEnron Corp\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;as debtor-plaintiff in more than 40 separate adversary proceedings in its Chapter 11 cases seeking to recover monies owed to the\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eEnron\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;estate under swaps, forwards, and other derivative contracts. Recovered $2 billion for, and eliminated several billion dollars of claims against, the estate.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eNorthwest Airlines\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;as debtor in several adversary proceedings and contested matters related to its Chapter 11 cases, including defeating challenges to plan confirmation filed by official and ad hoc committees, achieving substantive consolidation of certain debtors, and obtaining seminal decision disallowing over $1.2 billion of claims filed by a flight attendant union on grounds that damage claims do not arise from rejection of collective bargaining agreements.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eGovernment Investigations and Regulatory Proceedings\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefending\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003emajor investment bank\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in FINRA action arising from research report disclosure issues.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefending\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eprivate company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in NJ AG investigation.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eSenior Planning Services\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in regulatory investigation by the CT AG. Secured dismissal of investigation without any finding of wrongdoing by client.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eSenior Planning Services\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in enforcement proceeding pursued by RI Unauthorized Practice of Law Committee. Secured post-hearing ruling of dismissal.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eFXCM LLC\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in regulatory proceeding filed by the CFTC in SDNY.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea public company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in investigations by the CFTC, NFA and FCA.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea Fortune 500 company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in accounting fraud investigation by the SEC.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;individua\u003c/strong\u003el in postal fraud investigation by the DOJ.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eseveral companies\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in state and federal government investigations involving late trading, market timing and market manipulation.\u003c/p\u003e"],"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[{"id":71}]},"expertise":[{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":38,"guid":"38.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":107,"guid":"107.capabilities","index":5,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":20,"guid":"20.capabilities","index":6,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":765,"guid":"765.smart_tags","index":7,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1231,"guid":"1231.smart_tags","index":8,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":766,"guid":"766.smart_tags","index":9,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1165,"guid":"1165.smart_tags","index":10,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1248,"guid":"1248.smart_tags","index":11,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1064,"guid":"1064.smart_tags","index":12,"source":"smartTags"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Dahan","nick_name":"Israel","clerkships":[],"first_name":"Israel","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":202,"law_schools":[{"id":2705,"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":"Securities Litigation Defense ","detail":"Legal 500 U.S."},{"title":"High-stakes litigation ","detail":"Benchmark Litigation"}],"linked_in_url":"https://www.linkedin.com/in/israel-dahan-08052717/","seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eIsrael Dahan focuses on high-stakes litigation matters. For over 25 years, Israel has represented public and private companies, financial institutions, corporate executives and other individuals involved in state and federal shareholder securities class actions and derivative actions, as well as in complex commercial litigation matters. He has extensive experience litigating cases involving the federal securities laws, the fiduciary obligations of corporate directors, fraud, tortious conduct and breach of contract.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn addition, Israel has defended debtors, secured lenders, and other creditors and individuals in bankruptcy litigation matters, including those involving claims for fraudulent conveyance, preferential transfers, equitable subordination, breach of fiduciary duty and corporate veil piercing.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHe also has represented and advised companies involved in internal investigations, and investigations and regulatory proceedings pursued by U.S. and foreign regulators.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIsrael has been recognized by\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eBenchmark Litigation\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eand Legal 500\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;for his work on high-profile litigation matters.\u003c/p\u003e","matters":["\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eShareholder and Securities Litigation\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDefending\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eFermi Inc.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;and the individual named defendants in a federal securities class action filed in SDNY alleging claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefending\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eGAP Inc.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;and other individual named defendants in a federal securities class action filed in EDNY alleging claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934. Obtained dismissal of all claims, with prejudice, on a motion to dismiss. Dismissal ruling is on appeal before the Second Circuit.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefending\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eBoard of Directors of\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eGlobal Brokerage, Inc\u003c/strong\u003e. in a shareholder derivative action filed in SDNY alleging claims under Section 14(a) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefending\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eBoard of Directors of\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eFXCM, Inc.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a shareholder derivative action filed in Delaware Chancery Court alleging claims for breaches of fiduciary duty and corporate waste.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eGlobal Brokerage, Inc.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eand its CEO and CFO\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a federal securities class action filed in SDNY alleging claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eConduent Inc.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;and certain of its directors and officers in federal securities class action filed in DNJ alleging claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003e PricewaterhouseCoopers Auditores Independentes\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a federal securities class action and individual actions filed in SDNY alleging claims under Section 10(b) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, Section 11 of the Securities Act of 1993 and various state law claims. Obtained dismissal of the Section 10(b) and state law claims on a motion to dismiss.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ePricewaterhouseCoopers\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in shareholder derivative action filed in Delaware Court of Chancery alleging claim for aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duty. Obtained voluntary dismissal of action, with prejudice, post motion to dismiss filing.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eFXCM, Inc., its CEO and CFO\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a federal securities class action filed in SDNY alleging claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934. Obtained dismissal of all claims, with prejudice, on a motion to dismiss; affirmed by Second Circuit.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eAlliance MMA, Inc. and its CEO and CFO\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a federal securities class action filed in DNJ alleging claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eformer CEO of CTPartners\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a federal securities class action filed in SDNY alleging claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934. Obtained dismissal of all claims on a motion to dismiss.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eforeign individual\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a federal securities class action filed in DNJ alleging claims under Sections 11 and 12(a)(2) of the Securities Act of 1933.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eSino Gas International Holdings, Inc.,\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a class action filed in Utah state court alleging claims for breach of fiduciary duty and seeking to enjoin\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eSino Gas\u0026rsquo;\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;going-private merger transaction.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eDeutsche Bank Securities\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in several private securities fraud actions involving naked short selling activities.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eBear Stearns Companies, Inc.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in federal and state shareholder actions filed in NY and Delaware relating to its merger with JPMorgan Chase \u0026amp; Co.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eunderwriters of three offerings of securities,\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;aggregating in excess of $3 billion, issued by The Williams Companies in a federal securities class action filed in ND Oklahoma alleging claims under Sections 11 and 12(a)(2) of the Securities Act of 1933.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eMajesco Entertainment\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eand its officers and directors\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a federal securities class action and separate shareholder derivative action filed in DNJ.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eGroup 1 Software\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eand its Board of Directors\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a shareholder class action filed in Maryland state court seeking to enjoin Group 1\u0026rsquo;s merger with Pitney Bowes.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCommercial Litigation\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefending\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eThe Renco Group\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eand certain subsidiaries\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003ein action filed by Peruvian citizens in Missouri federal court alleging claims of negligence, civil conspiracy, absolute and strict liability and veil piercing.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefending\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eDeutsche Bank Securities Inc.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an action filed by a former investor in Texas federal court alleging claims of federal RICO violations, fraud, breach of fiduciary duty and unjust enrichment.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefending a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003elarge commercial real estate developer\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in several litigations in New Jersey and New York involving foreclosure and guaranty claims on commercial loans in excess of $300 million.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eNitya Capital LLC\u003c/strong\u003e, a commercial real estate investment and management firm in a New York state action against a Special Servicer alleging claims of breach of contract and wrongful conversion.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ePetersen Energia Inversora, S.A.U.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;and\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ePetersen Energia, S.A.U.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a SDNY action against the Argentine Republic and YPF, S.A., alleging claims for breach of contract and promissory estoppel arising from defendants\u0026rsquo; failure to comply with their tender offer requirements.\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eObtained $16 billion judgment post-trial against the Argentine Republic\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e, the largest damages award issued in NY, and now representing clients in enforcement proceedings.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eGEM Capital LLC\u003c/strong\u003e, a real estate investment and management firm, in litigations in Delaware and Pennsylvania involving distressed commercial properties and loans in excess of $50 million.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eStonerock Capital LLC\u003c/strong\u003e, a real estate investment and management firm, in a foreclosure and guaranty litigation filed in Florida state court involving distressed loans on two commercial office buildings in downtown Miami.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eNovo Nordisk Inc.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in DNJ action filed against U.S Department of Health and Human Services, CMS and others challenging the constitutionality and application of the prescription drug program established by the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eAppleby Apartments L.P.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in breach of contract action filed in New Jersey State Court arising from failed real estate purchase transaction. Obtained favorable settlement for client.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ead-hoc group of non-participating term lenders\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;(including ICG, York Capital, Ellington, OFSI, Z Capital) of Boardriders, Inc. in breach of contract action against Boardriders and ad-hoc group of participating lenders filed in New York State Court. The action arose from defendants\u0026rsquo; engagement in a no-pro-rata uptier transaction. Defeated motion to dismiss and obtained favorable settlement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eCaptain Paul Watson Foundation, Captain Paul Watson and Sea Shepherd Origins\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in trademark infringement and trade libel action filed in Vermont federal court.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eSenior Planning Services\u003c/strong\u003e, largest Medicaid application assistor company, in nationwide consumer class action filed in DNJ. Obtained dismissal of complaint with prejudice.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eThrivest Inc.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in trade secret and breach of contract action filed in New York State Court.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eFXCM Holdings LLC\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in indemnification action filed in New York State Court. Obtained dismissal of action on summary judgment.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eForex Capital Markets LLC\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in consumer class actions in SDNY alleging claims of breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, negligence and consumer fraud. Obtained voluntary dismissal of action with prejudice.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eformer owners of Major Energy LLC\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in fraudulent inducement and breach of contract action filed in SDNY.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eTF Global\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in arbitration proceeding involving claims of breach of contract.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ePorsche AG and Porsche Cars North America, Inc.\u003c/strong\u003e, in action filed by NJ Attorney General alleging consumer fraud claims.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eThe Renco Group\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eand other affiliated entities\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in action filed by Fluor Corporation in Missouri state court alleging claims of breach of contract, tortious interference and veil piercing.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003edirector of public company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in SDNY action alleging claim for tortious interference with contract.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ereal estate investment companies\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in SDNY declaratory judgment action against Bank of China.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eNY Giants quarterback, Eli Manning,\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in action filed in NJ state court alleging claims for violation of RICO and other torts.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eBank of America\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in several state and federal actions involving the repurchase of loans sold in mortgage-backed securitizations.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eseveral foreign directors and officers of a U.S. public company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in action filed in Delaware Chancery Court alleging claims for breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty and fraud related to a corporate merger.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eAmbac\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in breach of contract action concerning lease financing and credit default swap agreements.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eValue Health Care,\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;an affiliate of Omnicare, Inc., in breach of contract action filed in Connecticut state court seeking to enforce a $5 million guaranty agreement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eBankruptcy Litigation\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eCitigroup Global Markets Inc.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;and\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eCitigroup Global Markets Limited\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in adversary proceeding filed in the Thornburg Mortgage bankruptcy cases in Maryland seeking to avoid over $2 billion in transfers and other obligations that Thornburg made or assumed prior to bankruptcy. Obtained dismissal of the federal and state constructive fraudulent transfer claims asserted by the Trustee, and favorable settlement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eCitibank, N.A. and its affiliates\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e,\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;as participants in a reserve-based first lien loan facility, in connection with the Chapter 11 bankruptcy case of Sabine Oil \u0026amp; Gas Corp.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eDeutsche Bank\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in connection with litigation brought by foreign representative in the Oro Negro Chapter 15 filed in SDNY Bankruptcy Court.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eDeutsche Bank\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in connection with its role as collateral agent for in excess of $4 billion in priority guaranty notes in In re iHeartMedia bankruptcy case filed in S.D. Tex.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eGlobal Brokerage, Inc.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in connection with its prepackaged Chapter 11 bankruptcy case and subsequent out-of-court restructuring in SDNY Bankruptcy Court.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eYeshiva Chofetz Chaim Inc.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in adversary proceeding filed in SDNY Bankruptcy Court involving claims of fraudulent transfer of real property. Defeated motion to dismiss.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eVertis Inc.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in its Chapter 11 bankruptcy, including various contested matters. Successfully enjoined a third party from tortiously interfering with the debtors\u0026rsquo; existing contractual and business relationships and obstructing the sale of the debtors\u0026rsquo; businesses.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eLyondell Chemical Company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in its Chapter 11 bankruptcy. Secured approval of the largest privately-financed debtor-in-possession financing package at the time, obtained an injunction against claims against non-debtor European affiliates who guaranteed claims of the debtors, and defended the debtors in numerous contested matters filed by the unsecured creditors\u0026rsquo; committee and other individual creditors.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eApollo Health Street, Inc.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in contested involuntary bankruptcy petition filed against Apollo by certain of the company\u0026rsquo;s creditors and obtained dismissal of the case in just three weeks. Also, represented Apollo in a separate lawsuit against the petitioning creditors and obtained significant monetary recovery for Apollo.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eUS Bank, N.A\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;as indenture trustee of debt issued with respect to leveraged leases of two Dynegy power generation facilities in the Dynegy Holdings LLC bankruptcy.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eseveral major creditors and trading counterparties\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy cases and provided advice concerning the liquidation of contracts and trades involving commodities, foreign exchange, interest rate, credit default swaps and other derivative products.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eIcahn Associates\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;as secured lender defeating subordination and other claims in the Blockbuster chapter 11 cases.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eBay Harbour and affiliated funds and individuals\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in breach of fiduciary duty and veil piercing claims brought by the creditors committee in the Steve \u0026amp; Barry\u0026rsquo;s bankruptcy. Obtained dismissal of all claims, which was affirmed by the District Court.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eEnron Corp\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;as debtor-plaintiff in more than 40 separate adversary proceedings in its Chapter 11 cases seeking to recover monies owed to the\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eEnron\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;estate under swaps, forwards, and other derivative contracts. Recovered $2 billion for, and eliminated several billion dollars of claims against, the estate.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eNorthwest Airlines\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;as debtor in several adversary proceedings and contested matters related to its Chapter 11 cases, including defeating challenges to plan confirmation filed by official and ad hoc committees, achieving substantive consolidation of certain debtors, and obtaining seminal decision disallowing over $1.2 billion of claims filed by a flight attendant union on grounds that damage claims do not arise from rejection of collective bargaining agreements.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eGovernment Investigations and Regulatory Proceedings\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefending\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003emajor investment bank\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in FINRA action arising from research report disclosure issues.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefending\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eprivate company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in NJ AG investigation.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eSenior Planning Services\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in regulatory investigation by the CT AG. Secured dismissal of investigation without any finding of wrongdoing by client.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eSenior Planning Services\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in enforcement proceeding pursued by RI Unauthorized Practice of Law Committee. Secured post-hearing ruling of dismissal.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eFXCM LLC\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in regulatory proceeding filed by the CFTC in SDNY.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea public company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in investigations by the CFTC, NFA and FCA.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea Fortune 500 company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in accounting fraud investigation by the SEC.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;individua\u003c/strong\u003el in postal fraud investigation by the DOJ.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eseveral companies\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in state and federal government investigations involving late trading, market timing and market manipulation.\u003c/p\u003e"],"recognitions":[{"title":"Securities Litigation Defense ","detail":"Legal 500 U.S."},{"title":"High-stakes litigation ","detail":"Benchmark Litigation"}]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":4203}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2026-03-26T20:46:14.000Z","updated_at":"2026-03-26T20:46:14.000Z","searchable_text":"Dahan{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Securities Litigation Defense \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500 U.S.\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"High-stakes litigation \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Benchmark Litigation\"}{{ FIELD }}Shareholder and Securities Litigation\nDefending Fermi Inc. and the individual named defendants in a federal securities class action filed in SDNY alleging claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934.{{ FIELD }}Defending GAP Inc. and other individual named defendants in a federal securities class action filed in EDNY alleging claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934. Obtained dismissal of all claims, with prejudice, on a motion to dismiss. Dismissal ruling is on appeal before the Second Circuit.{{ FIELD }}Defending Board of Directors of Global Brokerage, Inc. in a shareholder derivative action filed in SDNY alleging claims under Section 14(a) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934.{{ FIELD }}Defending Board of Directors of FXCM, Inc. in a shareholder derivative action filed in Delaware Chancery Court alleging claims for breaches of fiduciary duty and corporate waste.{{ FIELD }}Defended Global Brokerage, Inc. and its CEO and CFO in a federal securities class action filed in SDNY alleging claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934.{{ FIELD }}Defended Conduent Inc. and certain of its directors and officers in federal securities class action filed in DNJ alleging claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934.{{ FIELD }}Represented PricewaterhouseCoopers Auditores Independentes in a federal securities class action and individual actions filed in SDNY alleging claims under Section 10(b) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, Section 11 of the Securities Act of 1993 and various state law claims. Obtained dismissal of the Section 10(b) and state law claims on a motion to dismiss.{{ FIELD }}Defended PricewaterhouseCoopers in shareholder derivative action filed in Delaware Court of Chancery alleging claim for aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duty. Obtained voluntary dismissal of action, with prejudice, post motion to dismiss filing.{{ FIELD }}Defended FXCM, Inc., its CEO and CFO in a federal securities class action filed in SDNY alleging claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934. Obtained dismissal of all claims, with prejudice, on a motion to dismiss; affirmed by Second Circuit.{{ FIELD }}Defended Alliance MMA, Inc. and its CEO and CFO in a federal securities class action filed in DNJ alleging claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934.{{ FIELD }}Defended former CEO of CTPartners in a federal securities class action filed in SDNY alleging claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934. Obtained dismissal of all claims on a motion to dismiss.{{ FIELD }}Defended foreign individual in a federal securities class action filed in DNJ alleging claims under Sections 11 and 12(a)(2) of the Securities Act of 1933.{{ FIELD }}Defended Sino Gas International Holdings, Inc., in a class action filed in Utah state court alleging claims for breach of fiduciary duty and seeking to enjoin Sino Gas’ going-private merger transaction.{{ FIELD }}Defended Deutsche Bank Securities in several private securities fraud actions involving naked short selling activities.{{ FIELD }}Defended Bear Stearns Companies, Inc. in federal and state shareholder actions filed in NY and Delaware relating to its merger with JPMorgan Chase \u0026amp; Co.{{ FIELD }}Defended underwriters of three offerings of securities, aggregating in excess of $3 billion, issued by The Williams Companies in a federal securities class action filed in ND Oklahoma alleging claims under Sections 11 and 12(a)(2) of the Securities Act of 1933.{{ FIELD }}Defended Majesco Entertainment and its officers and directors in a federal securities class action and separate shareholder derivative action filed in DNJ.{{ FIELD }}Defended Group 1 Software and its Board of Directors in a shareholder class action filed in Maryland state court seeking to enjoin Group 1’s merger with Pitney Bowes.{{ FIELD }}Commercial Litigation{{ FIELD }}Defending The Renco Group and certain subsidiaries in action filed by Peruvian citizens in Missouri federal court alleging claims of negligence, civil conspiracy, absolute and strict liability and veil piercing.{{ FIELD }}Defending Deutsche Bank Securities Inc. in an action filed by a former investor in Texas federal court alleging claims of federal RICO violations, fraud, breach of fiduciary duty and unjust enrichment.{{ FIELD }}Defending a large commercial real estate developer in several litigations in New Jersey and New York involving foreclosure and guaranty claims on commercial loans in excess of $300 million.{{ FIELD }}Representing Nitya Capital LLC, a commercial real estate investment and management firm in a New York state action against a Special Servicer alleging claims of breach of contract and wrongful conversion.{{ FIELD }}Representing Petersen Energia Inversora, S.A.U. and Petersen Energia, S.A.U. in a SDNY action against the Argentine Republic and YPF, S.A., alleging claims for breach of contract and promissory estoppel arising from defendants’ failure to comply with their tender offer requirements. Obtained $16 billion judgment post-trial against the Argentine Republic, the largest damages award issued in NY, and now representing clients in enforcement proceedings.{{ FIELD }}Represented GEM Capital LLC, a real estate investment and management firm, in litigations in Delaware and Pennsylvania involving distressed commercial properties and loans in excess of $50 million.{{ FIELD }}Represented Stonerock Capital LLC, a real estate investment and management firm, in a foreclosure and guaranty litigation filed in Florida state court involving distressed loans on two commercial office buildings in downtown Miami.{{ FIELD }}Represented Novo Nordisk Inc. in DNJ action filed against U.S Department of Health and Human Services, CMS and others challenging the constitutionality and application of the prescription drug program established by the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022.{{ FIELD }}Represented Appleby Apartments L.P. in breach of contract action filed in New Jersey State Court arising from failed real estate purchase transaction. Obtained favorable settlement for client.{{ FIELD }}Represented ad-hoc group of non-participating term lenders (including ICG, York Capital, Ellington, OFSI, Z Capital) of Boardriders, Inc. in breach of contract action against Boardriders and ad-hoc group of participating lenders filed in New York State Court. The action arose from defendants’ engagement in a no-pro-rata uptier transaction. Defeated motion to dismiss and obtained favorable settlement.{{ FIELD }}Defended Captain Paul Watson Foundation, Captain Paul Watson and Sea Shepherd Origins in trademark infringement and trade libel action filed in Vermont federal court.{{ FIELD }}Defended Senior Planning Services, largest Medicaid application assistor company, in nationwide consumer class action filed in DNJ. Obtained dismissal of complaint with prejudice.{{ FIELD }}Defended Thrivest Inc. in trade secret and breach of contract action filed in New York State Court.{{ FIELD }}Defended FXCM Holdings LLC in indemnification action filed in New York State Court. Obtained dismissal of action on summary judgment.{{ FIELD }}Defended Forex Capital Markets LLC in consumer class actions in SDNY alleging claims of breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, negligence and consumer fraud. Obtained voluntary dismissal of action with prejudice.{{ FIELD }}Represented former owners of Major Energy LLC in fraudulent inducement and breach of contract action filed in SDNY.{{ FIELD }}Defended TF Global in arbitration proceeding involving claims of breach of contract.{{ FIELD }}Defended Porsche AG and Porsche Cars North America, Inc., in action filed by NJ Attorney General alleging consumer fraud claims.{{ FIELD }}Defended The Renco Group and other affiliated entities in action filed by Fluor Corporation in Missouri state court alleging claims of breach of contract, tortious interference and veil piercing.{{ FIELD }}Defended director of public company in SDNY action alleging claim for tortious interference with contract.{{ FIELD }}Represented real estate investment companies in SDNY declaratory judgment action against Bank of China.{{ FIELD }}Defended NY Giants quarterback, Eli Manning, in action filed in NJ state court alleging claims for violation of RICO and other torts.{{ FIELD }}Defended Bank of America in several state and federal actions involving the repurchase of loans sold in mortgage-backed securitizations.{{ FIELD }}Defended several foreign directors and officers of a U.S. public company in action filed in Delaware Chancery Court alleging claims for breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty and fraud related to a corporate merger.{{ FIELD }}Defended Ambac in breach of contract action concerning lease financing and credit default swap agreements.{{ FIELD }}Represented Value Health Care, an affiliate of Omnicare, Inc., in breach of contract action filed in Connecticut state court seeking to enforce a $5 million guaranty agreement.{{ FIELD }}Bankruptcy Litigation{{ FIELD }}Defended Citigroup Global Markets Inc. and Citigroup Global Markets Limited in adversary proceeding filed in the Thornburg Mortgage bankruptcy cases in Maryland seeking to avoid over $2 billion in transfers and other obligations that Thornburg made or assumed prior to bankruptcy. Obtained dismissal of the federal and state constructive fraudulent transfer claims asserted by the Trustee, and favorable settlement.{{ FIELD }}Defended Citibank, N.A. and its affiliates, as participants in a reserve-based first lien loan facility, in connection with the Chapter 11 bankruptcy case of Sabine Oil \u0026amp; Gas Corp.{{ FIELD }}Defended Deutsche Bank in connection with litigation brought by foreign representative in the Oro Negro Chapter 15 filed in SDNY Bankruptcy Court.{{ FIELD }}Represented Deutsche Bank in connection with its role as collateral agent for in excess of $4 billion in priority guaranty notes in In re iHeartMedia bankruptcy case filed in S.D. Tex.{{ FIELD }}Represented Global Brokerage, Inc. in connection with its prepackaged Chapter 11 bankruptcy case and subsequent out-of-court restructuring in SDNY Bankruptcy Court.{{ FIELD }}Represented Yeshiva Chofetz Chaim Inc. in adversary proceeding filed in SDNY Bankruptcy Court involving claims of fraudulent transfer of real property. Defeated motion to dismiss.{{ FIELD }}Represented Vertis Inc. in its Chapter 11 bankruptcy, including various contested matters. Successfully enjoined a third party from tortiously interfering with the debtors’ existing contractual and business relationships and obstructing the sale of the debtors’ businesses.{{ FIELD }}Represented Lyondell Chemical Company in its Chapter 11 bankruptcy. Secured approval of the largest privately-financed debtor-in-possession financing package at the time, obtained an injunction against claims against non-debtor European affiliates who guaranteed claims of the debtors, and defended the debtors in numerous contested matters filed by the unsecured creditors’ committee and other individual creditors.{{ FIELD }}Represented Apollo Health Street, Inc. in contested involuntary bankruptcy petition filed against Apollo by certain of the company’s creditors and obtained dismissal of the case in just three weeks. Also, represented Apollo in a separate lawsuit against the petitioning creditors and obtained significant monetary recovery for Apollo.{{ FIELD }}Represented US Bank, N.A. as indenture trustee of debt issued with respect to leveraged leases of two Dynegy power generation facilities in the Dynegy Holdings LLC bankruptcy.{{ FIELD }}Represented several major creditors and trading counterparties in the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy cases and provided advice concerning the liquidation of contracts and trades involving commodities, foreign exchange, interest rate, credit default swaps and other derivative products.{{ FIELD }}Defended Icahn Associates as secured lender defeating subordination and other claims in the Blockbuster chapter 11 cases.{{ FIELD }}Defended Bay Harbour and affiliated funds and individuals in breach of fiduciary duty and veil piercing claims brought by the creditors committee in the Steve \u0026amp; Barry’s bankruptcy. Obtained dismissal of all claims, which was affirmed by the District Court.{{ FIELD }}Represented Enron Corp. as debtor-plaintiff in more than 40 separate adversary proceedings in its Chapter 11 cases seeking to recover monies owed to the Enron estate under swaps, forwards, and other derivative contracts. Recovered $2 billion for, and eliminated several billion dollars of claims against, the estate.{{ FIELD }}Represented Northwest Airlines as debtor in several adversary proceedings and contested matters related to its Chapter 11 cases, including defeating challenges to plan confirmation filed by official and ad hoc committees, achieving substantive consolidation of certain debtors, and obtaining seminal decision disallowing over $1.2 billion of claims filed by a flight attendant union on grounds that damage claims do not arise from rejection of collective bargaining agreements.{{ FIELD }}Government Investigations and Regulatory Proceedings{{ FIELD }}Defending major investment bank in FINRA action arising from research report disclosure issues.{{ FIELD }}Defending private company in NJ AG investigation.{{ FIELD }}Defended Senior Planning Services in regulatory investigation by the CT AG. Secured dismissal of investigation without any finding of wrongdoing by client.{{ FIELD }}Defended Senior Planning Services in enforcement proceeding pursued by RI Unauthorized Practice of Law Committee. Secured post-hearing ruling of dismissal.{{ FIELD }}Defended FXCM LLC in regulatory proceeding filed by the CFTC in SDNY.{{ FIELD }}Defended a public company in investigations by the CFTC, NFA and FCA.{{ FIELD }}Defended a Fortune 500 company in accounting fraud investigation by the SEC.{{ FIELD }}Defended individual in postal fraud investigation by the DOJ.{{ FIELD }}Defended several companies in state and federal government investigations involving late trading, market timing and market manipulation.{{ FIELD }}Israel Dahan focuses on high-stakes litigation matters. For over 25 years, Israel has represented public and private companies, financial institutions, corporate executives and other individuals involved in state and federal shareholder securities class actions and derivative actions, as well as in complex commercial litigation matters. He has extensive experience litigating cases involving the federal securities laws, the fiduciary obligations of corporate directors, fraud, tortious conduct and breach of contract.\nIn addition, Israel has defended debtors, secured lenders, and other creditors and individuals in bankruptcy litigation matters, including those involving claims for fraudulent conveyance, preferential transfers, equitable subordination, breach of fiduciary duty and corporate veil piercing.\nHe also has represented and advised companies involved in internal investigations, and investigations and regulatory proceedings pursued by U.S. and foreign regulators.\nIsrael has been recognized by Benchmark Litigation and Legal 500 for his work on high-profile litigation matters. Israel Dahan Partner Securities Litigation Defense  Legal 500 U.S. High-stakes litigation  Benchmark Litigation Touro College Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center Brooklyn Law School Brooklyn Law School Supreme Court of the United States 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 District of New Jersey New Jersey New York Shareholder and Securities Litigation\nDefending Fermi Inc. and the individual named defendants in a federal securities class action filed in SDNY alleging claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934. Defending GAP Inc. and other individual named defendants in a federal securities class action filed in EDNY alleging claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934. Obtained dismissal of all claims, with prejudice, on a motion to dismiss. Dismissal ruling is on appeal before the Second Circuit. Defending Board of Directors of Global Brokerage, Inc. in a shareholder derivative action filed in SDNY alleging claims under Section 14(a) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934. Defending Board of Directors of FXCM, Inc. in a shareholder derivative action filed in Delaware Chancery Court alleging claims for breaches of fiduciary duty and corporate waste. Defended Global Brokerage, Inc. and its CEO and CFO in a federal securities class action filed in SDNY alleging claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934. Defended Conduent Inc. and certain of its directors and officers in federal securities class action filed in DNJ alleging claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934. Represented PricewaterhouseCoopers Auditores Independentes in a federal securities class action and individual actions filed in SDNY alleging claims under Section 10(b) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, Section 11 of the Securities Act of 1993 and various state law claims. Obtained dismissal of the Section 10(b) and state law claims on a motion to dismiss. Defended PricewaterhouseCoopers in shareholder derivative action filed in Delaware Court of Chancery alleging claim for aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duty. Obtained voluntary dismissal of action, with prejudice, post motion to dismiss filing. Defended FXCM, Inc., its CEO and CFO in a federal securities class action filed in SDNY alleging claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934. Obtained dismissal of all claims, with prejudice, on a motion to dismiss; affirmed by Second Circuit. Defended Alliance MMA, Inc. and its CEO and CFO in a federal securities class action filed in DNJ alleging claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934. Defended former CEO of CTPartners in a federal securities class action filed in SDNY alleging claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934. Obtained dismissal of all claims on a motion to dismiss. Defended foreign individual in a federal securities class action filed in DNJ alleging claims under Sections 11 and 12(a)(2) of the Securities Act of 1933. Defended Sino Gas International Holdings, Inc., in a class action filed in Utah state court alleging claims for breach of fiduciary duty and seeking to enjoin Sino Gas’ going-private merger transaction. Defended Deutsche Bank Securities in several private securities fraud actions involving naked short selling activities. Defended Bear Stearns Companies, Inc. in federal and state shareholder actions filed in NY and Delaware relating to its merger with JPMorgan Chase \u0026amp; Co. Defended underwriters of three offerings of securities, aggregating in excess of $3 billion, issued by The Williams Companies in a federal securities class action filed in ND Oklahoma alleging claims under Sections 11 and 12(a)(2) of the Securities Act of 1933. Defended Majesco Entertainment and its officers and directors in a federal securities class action and separate shareholder derivative action filed in DNJ. Defended Group 1 Software and its Board of Directors in a shareholder class action filed in Maryland state court seeking to enjoin Group 1’s merger with Pitney Bowes. Commercial Litigation Defending The Renco Group and certain subsidiaries in action filed by Peruvian citizens in Missouri federal court alleging claims of negligence, civil conspiracy, absolute and strict liability and veil piercing. Defending Deutsche Bank Securities Inc. in an action filed by a former investor in Texas federal court alleging claims of federal RICO violations, fraud, breach of fiduciary duty and unjust enrichment. Defending a large commercial real estate developer in several litigations in New Jersey and New York involving foreclosure and guaranty claims on commercial loans in excess of $300 million. Representing Nitya Capital LLC, a commercial real estate investment and management firm in a New York state action against a Special Servicer alleging claims of breach of contract and wrongful conversion. Representing Petersen Energia Inversora, S.A.U. and Petersen Energia, S.A.U. in a SDNY action against the Argentine Republic and YPF, S.A., alleging claims for breach of contract and promissory estoppel arising from defendants’ failure to comply with their tender offer requirements. Obtained $16 billion judgment post-trial against the Argentine Republic, the largest damages award issued in NY, and now representing clients in enforcement proceedings. Represented GEM Capital LLC, a real estate investment and management firm, in litigations in Delaware and Pennsylvania involving distressed commercial properties and loans in excess of $50 million. Represented Stonerock Capital LLC, a real estate investment and management firm, in a foreclosure and guaranty litigation filed in Florida state court involving distressed loans on two commercial office buildings in downtown Miami. Represented Novo Nordisk Inc. in DNJ action filed against U.S Department of Health and Human Services, CMS and others challenging the constitutionality and application of the prescription drug program established by the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022. Represented Appleby Apartments L.P. in breach of contract action filed in New Jersey State Court arising from failed real estate purchase transaction. Obtained favorable settlement for client. Represented ad-hoc group of non-participating term lenders (including ICG, York Capital, Ellington, OFSI, Z Capital) of Boardriders, Inc. in breach of contract action against Boardriders and ad-hoc group of participating lenders filed in New York State Court. The action arose from defendants’ engagement in a no-pro-rata uptier transaction. Defeated motion to dismiss and obtained favorable settlement. Defended Captain Paul Watson Foundation, Captain Paul Watson and Sea Shepherd Origins in trademark infringement and trade libel action filed in Vermont federal court. Defended Senior Planning Services, largest Medicaid application assistor company, in nationwide consumer class action filed in DNJ. Obtained dismissal of complaint with prejudice. Defended Thrivest Inc. in trade secret and breach of contract action filed in New York State Court. Defended FXCM Holdings LLC in indemnification action filed in New York State Court. Obtained dismissal of action on summary judgment. Defended Forex Capital Markets LLC in consumer class actions in SDNY alleging claims of breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, negligence and consumer fraud. Obtained voluntary dismissal of action with prejudice. Represented former owners of Major Energy LLC in fraudulent inducement and breach of contract action filed in SDNY. Defended TF Global in arbitration proceeding involving claims of breach of contract. Defended Porsche AG and Porsche Cars North America, Inc., in action filed by NJ Attorney General alleging consumer fraud claims. Defended The Renco Group and other affiliated entities in action filed by Fluor Corporation in Missouri state court alleging claims of breach of contract, tortious interference and veil piercing. Defended director of public company in SDNY action alleging claim for tortious interference with contract. Represented real estate investment companies in SDNY declaratory judgment action against Bank of China. Defended NY Giants quarterback, Eli Manning, in action filed in NJ state court alleging claims for violation of RICO and other torts. Defended Bank of America in several state and federal actions involving the repurchase of loans sold in mortgage-backed securitizations. Defended several foreign directors and officers of a U.S. public company in action filed in Delaware Chancery Court alleging claims for breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty and fraud related to a corporate merger. Defended Ambac in breach of contract action concerning lease financing and credit default swap agreements. Represented Value Health Care, an affiliate of Omnicare, Inc., in breach of contract action filed in Connecticut state court seeking to enforce a $5 million guaranty agreement. Bankruptcy Litigation Defended Citigroup Global Markets Inc. and Citigroup Global Markets Limited in adversary proceeding filed in the Thornburg Mortgage bankruptcy cases in Maryland seeking to avoid over $2 billion in transfers and other obligations that Thornburg made or assumed prior to bankruptcy. Obtained dismissal of the federal and state constructive fraudulent transfer claims asserted by the Trustee, and favorable settlement. Defended Citibank, N.A. and its affiliates, as participants in a reserve-based first lien loan facility, in connection with the Chapter 11 bankruptcy case of Sabine Oil \u0026amp; Gas Corp. Defended Deutsche Bank in connection with litigation brought by foreign representative in the Oro Negro Chapter 15 filed in SDNY Bankruptcy Court. Represented Deutsche Bank in connection with its role as collateral agent for in excess of $4 billion in priority guaranty notes in In re iHeartMedia bankruptcy case filed in S.D. Tex. Represented Global Brokerage, Inc. in connection with its prepackaged Chapter 11 bankruptcy case and subsequent out-of-court restructuring in SDNY Bankruptcy Court. Represented Yeshiva Chofetz Chaim Inc. in adversary proceeding filed in SDNY Bankruptcy Court involving claims of fraudulent transfer of real property. Defeated motion to dismiss. Represented Vertis Inc. in its Chapter 11 bankruptcy, including various contested matters. Successfully enjoined a third party from tortiously interfering with the debtors’ existing contractual and business relationships and obstructing the sale of the debtors’ businesses. Represented Lyondell Chemical Company in its Chapter 11 bankruptcy. Secured approval of the largest privately-financed debtor-in-possession financing package at the time, obtained an injunction against claims against non-debtor European affiliates who guaranteed claims of the debtors, and defended the debtors in numerous contested matters filed by the unsecured creditors’ committee and other individual creditors. Represented Apollo Health Street, Inc. in contested involuntary bankruptcy petition filed against Apollo by certain of the company’s creditors and obtained dismissal of the case in just three weeks. Also, represented Apollo in a separate lawsuit against the petitioning creditors and obtained significant monetary recovery for Apollo. Represented US Bank, N.A. as indenture trustee of debt issued with respect to leveraged leases of two Dynegy power generation facilities in the Dynegy Holdings LLC bankruptcy. Represented several major creditors and trading counterparties in the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy cases and provided advice concerning the liquidation of contracts and trades involving commodities, foreign exchange, interest rate, credit default swaps and other derivative products. Defended Icahn Associates as secured lender defeating subordination and other claims in the Blockbuster chapter 11 cases. Defended Bay Harbour and affiliated funds and individuals in breach of fiduciary duty and veil piercing claims brought by the creditors committee in the Steve \u0026amp; Barry’s bankruptcy. Obtained dismissal of all claims, which was affirmed by the District Court. Represented Enron Corp. as debtor-plaintiff in more than 40 separate adversary proceedings in its Chapter 11 cases seeking to recover monies owed to the Enron estate under swaps, forwards, and other derivative contracts. Recovered $2 billion for, and eliminated several billion dollars of claims against, the estate. Represented Northwest Airlines as debtor in several adversary proceedings and contested matters related to its Chapter 11 cases, including defeating challenges to plan confirmation filed by official and ad hoc committees, achieving substantive consolidation of certain debtors, and obtaining seminal decision disallowing over $1.2 billion of claims filed by a flight attendant union on grounds that damage claims do not arise from rejection of collective bargaining agreements. Government Investigations and Regulatory Proceedings Defending major investment bank in FINRA action arising from research report disclosure issues. Defending private company in NJ AG investigation. Defended Senior Planning Services in regulatory investigation by the CT AG. Secured dismissal of investigation without any finding of wrongdoing by client. Defended Senior Planning Services in enforcement proceeding pursued by RI Unauthorized Practice of Law Committee. Secured post-hearing ruling of dismissal. Defended FXCM LLC in regulatory proceeding filed by the CFTC in SDNY. Defended a public company in investigations by the CFTC, NFA and FCA. Defended a Fortune 500 company in accounting fraud investigation by the SEC. Defended individual in postal fraud investigation by the DOJ. Defended several companies in state and federal government investigations involving late trading, market timing and market manipulation.","searchable_name":"Israel Dahan","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":445859,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":7310,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eAhtoosa Dale is a trial lawyer with a focus on patent litigation and complex disputes. She combines her technical and legal training to focus on\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003eIP litigation\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003espanning multiple technologies and business disputes spanning various industries.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAhtoosa focuses her practice on complex commercial litigation in various industries and IP litigation across differing technologies. She advises industry-leading clients on intricate business matters and IP-related issues across a broad spectrum of technologies, such as computer systems and architectures, virtual systems, mobile applications, networking, and medical devices. She also has experience representing corporations and individuals in business matters including intellectual property, employment and business disputes, class actions, consumer privacy, and product liability.\u0026nbsp;[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAhtoosa has been a team member in several trials. Her courtroom and stand-up experience span multiple venues, as she has significant experience arguing hearings in both trial court and arbitration settings, taking and defending witnesses at depositions, preparing witnesses to give testimony at trials and hearings, drafting substantive briefs in both trial and appellate court, and putting on and cross-examining witnesses at trial. She also spent three months on loan as an assistant district attorney in Dallas County, where she tried numerous criminal jury trials to verdict. Early in her career, she served as second chair in a civil pro bono trial in federal court, representing and successfully obtaining all requested relief on behalf of an inmate in Texas state prison related to his ability to practice certain religious tenets while imprisoned.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePrior to joining the firm, Ahtoosa served as a Judicial Clerk for the Honorable Kimberly Priest Johnson for the U.S. District Court Eastern District of Texas. She has undergraduate degrees in computer engineering and mathematics and has experience as a software developer for hospital e-documentation applications. Ahtoosa has a working knowledge of C++, Java, C#, and XML.\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"ahtoosa-dale","email":"adale@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":["\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePatent, Trade Secret, and Other Intellectual Property Litigation\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eTMT Systems, Inc. v. Medtronic, Inc.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(W.D. Tex.) Trial counsel for defendant Medtronic in a patent infringement suit relating to a patent on a design for an abdominal aortic aneurysm stent graft. The trial resulted in a mistrial due to a hung jury, but post-trial, Ahtoosa and her team at Winston were able to get a new favorable claim construction ruling that resulted in a stipulation of noninfringement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eHardin et al. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(E.D. Tex.) Trial counsel for Ryan Hardin and Andrew Hill, inventors on a patent related to geofencing technology, in a patent infringement suit brought against Samsung. After prevailing for the inventors on key claim construction, summary judgment, and\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eDaubert\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;issues, the case settled days before trial.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eFreshworks v. LiveHelpNow, LLC\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(D. Del.) Counsel for Freshworks in a declaratory judgment action filed against LiveHelpNow, LLC involving patents related to chat software. After extensive disputes relating to venue, including a parallel action filed in the Western District of Texas, the case settled.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSieler v. Atieva Inc.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(N.D. Cal.) Counsel for Atieva Inc. in a patent inventorship dispute with a former employee, which also included counterclaims for breach of contract, among others. Case settled shortly before trial after summary judgment motions filed by Atieva.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eMatch Group v. Muzmatch Limited\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(W.D. Tex.) Counsel for defendant in a case involving claims of trademark infringement, patent infringement, trade dress infringement, trademark dilution, and unfair competition. After extensive motion to dismiss briefing, the parties reached a resolution.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCommercial Litigation and Other Matters\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eUnbnd Group Pty Ltd. v. Park Lane, LLC et al.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(FINRA Arbitration and S.D.N.Y.) Trial counsel in a FINRA arbitration involving contractual and business tort claims, where opposing party sought approximately US$3 million in damages from client Unbnd and sought significant equitable relief in the form of equity in the company. After a six-day evidentiary hearing, the FINRA arbitration panel rejected the opposing party\u0026rsquo;s request for more than US$3M and agreed with Unbnd\u0026rsquo;s position on equity in the company. The Southern District of New York confirmed the award on appeal, and awarded attorney\u0026rsquo;s fees to Unbnd for the appeal.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eRanieri et al. v. AdvoCare International LP et al.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(N.D. Tex.) Counsel for defendant AdvoCare in a class action lawsuit involving pyramid scheme allegations and claims of RICO violations, securities laws violations, and others. Hundreds of millions of dollars were at issue. Won multiple motions to dismiss, including getting the RICO claims dismissed. Class settlement was reached during class discovery.\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":5,"guid":"5.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":3,"guid":"3.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":6,"guid":"6.capabilities","index":4,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":118,"guid":"118.capabilities","index":5,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":107,"guid":"107.capabilities","index":6,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":762,"guid":"762.smart_tags","index":7,"source":"smartTags"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Dale","nick_name":"Ahtoosa","clerkships":[{"name":"Judicial Clerk, Honorable Kimberly Priest Johnson, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas","years_held":"2016 - 2017"}],"first_name":"Ahtoosa","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":34,"law_schools":[{"id":181,"meta":{"degree":"J.D.","honors":"","is_law_school":"1","graduation_date":"2016-01-01 00:00:00"},"order":1,"pin_order":null,"pin_expiration":null}],"middle_name":"A.","name_suffix":"","recognitions":[{"title":"Intellectual Property Law","detail":"Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch®, 2026"},{"title":"Patent Litigation","detail":"Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch®, 2026"},{"title":"Intellectual Property – Litigation","detail":"Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch®, 2026"},{"title":"40 \u0026 Under","detail":"Benchmark Litigation, 2026"},{"title":"“Best Lawyers Under 40”","detail":"D Magazine, 2025"},{"title":"Recognized within the Top 250","detail":"Patexia’s Patent Litigation Report, 2025"}],"linked_in_url":null,"seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eAhtoosa Dale is a trial lawyer with a focus on patent litigation and complex disputes. She combines her technical and legal training to focus on\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003eIP litigation\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003espanning multiple technologies and business disputes spanning various industries.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAhtoosa focuses her practice on complex commercial litigation in various industries and IP litigation across differing technologies. She advises industry-leading clients on intricate business matters and IP-related issues across a broad spectrum of technologies, such as computer systems and architectures, virtual systems, mobile applications, networking, and medical devices. She also has experience representing corporations and individuals in business matters including intellectual property, employment and business disputes, class actions, consumer privacy, and product liability.\u0026nbsp;[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAhtoosa has been a team member in several trials. Her courtroom and stand-up experience span multiple venues, as she has significant experience arguing hearings in both trial court and arbitration settings, taking and defending witnesses at depositions, preparing witnesses to give testimony at trials and hearings, drafting substantive briefs in both trial and appellate court, and putting on and cross-examining witnesses at trial. She also spent three months on loan as an assistant district attorney in Dallas County, where she tried numerous criminal jury trials to verdict. Early in her career, she served as second chair in a civil pro bono trial in federal court, representing and successfully obtaining all requested relief on behalf of an inmate in Texas state prison related to his ability to practice certain religious tenets while imprisoned.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePrior to joining the firm, Ahtoosa served as a Judicial Clerk for the Honorable Kimberly Priest Johnson for the U.S. District Court Eastern District of Texas. She has undergraduate degrees in computer engineering and mathematics and has experience as a software developer for hospital e-documentation applications. Ahtoosa has a working knowledge of C++, Java, C#, and XML.\u003c/p\u003e","matters":["\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePatent, Trade Secret, and Other Intellectual Property Litigation\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eTMT Systems, Inc. v. Medtronic, Inc.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(W.D. Tex.) Trial counsel for defendant Medtronic in a patent infringement suit relating to a patent on a design for an abdominal aortic aneurysm stent graft. The trial resulted in a mistrial due to a hung jury, but post-trial, Ahtoosa and her team at Winston were able to get a new favorable claim construction ruling that resulted in a stipulation of noninfringement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eHardin et al. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(E.D. Tex.) Trial counsel for Ryan Hardin and Andrew Hill, inventors on a patent related to geofencing technology, in a patent infringement suit brought against Samsung. After prevailing for the inventors on key claim construction, summary judgment, and\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eDaubert\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;issues, the case settled days before trial.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eFreshworks v. LiveHelpNow, LLC\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(D. Del.) Counsel for Freshworks in a declaratory judgment action filed against LiveHelpNow, LLC involving patents related to chat software. After extensive disputes relating to venue, including a parallel action filed in the Western District of Texas, the case settled.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSieler v. Atieva Inc.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(N.D. Cal.) Counsel for Atieva Inc. in a patent inventorship dispute with a former employee, which also included counterclaims for breach of contract, among others. Case settled shortly before trial after summary judgment motions filed by Atieva.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eMatch Group v. Muzmatch Limited\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(W.D. Tex.) Counsel for defendant in a case involving claims of trademark infringement, patent infringement, trade dress infringement, trademark dilution, and unfair competition. After extensive motion to dismiss briefing, the parties reached a resolution.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCommercial Litigation and Other Matters\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eUnbnd Group Pty Ltd. v. Park Lane, LLC et al.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(FINRA Arbitration and S.D.N.Y.) Trial counsel in a FINRA arbitration involving contractual and business tort claims, where opposing party sought approximately US$3 million in damages from client Unbnd and sought significant equitable relief in the form of equity in the company. After a six-day evidentiary hearing, the FINRA arbitration panel rejected the opposing party\u0026rsquo;s request for more than US$3M and agreed with Unbnd\u0026rsquo;s position on equity in the company. The Southern District of New York confirmed the award on appeal, and awarded attorney\u0026rsquo;s fees to Unbnd for the appeal.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eRanieri et al. v. AdvoCare International LP et al.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(N.D. Tex.) Counsel for defendant AdvoCare in a class action lawsuit involving pyramid scheme allegations and claims of RICO violations, securities laws violations, and others. Hundreds of millions of dollars were at issue. Won multiple motions to dismiss, including getting the RICO claims dismissed. Class settlement was reached during class discovery.\u003c/p\u003e"],"recognitions":[{"title":"Intellectual Property Law","detail":"Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch®, 2026"},{"title":"Patent Litigation","detail":"Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch®, 2026"},{"title":"Intellectual Property – Litigation","detail":"Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch®, 2026"},{"title":"40 \u0026 Under","detail":"Benchmark Litigation, 2026"},{"title":"“Best Lawyers Under 40”","detail":"D Magazine, 2025"},{"title":"Recognized within the Top 250","detail":"Patexia’s Patent Litigation Report, 2025"}]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":13342}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2026-02-16T15:51:41.000Z","updated_at":"2026-02-16T15:51:41.000Z","searchable_text":"Dale{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Intellectual Property Law\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch®, 2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Patent Litigation\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch®, 2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Intellectual Property – Litigation\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch®, 2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"40 \u0026amp; Under\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Benchmark Litigation, 2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“Best Lawyers Under 40”\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"D Magazine, 2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Recognized within the Top 250\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Patexia’s Patent Litigation Report, 2025\"}{{ FIELD }}Patent, Trade Secret, and Other Intellectual Property Litigation\nTMT Systems, Inc. v. Medtronic, Inc. (W.D. Tex.) Trial counsel for defendant Medtronic in a patent infringement suit relating to a patent on a design for an abdominal aortic aneurysm stent graft. The trial resulted in a mistrial due to a hung jury, but post-trial, Ahtoosa and her team at Winston were able to get a new favorable claim construction ruling that resulted in a stipulation of noninfringement.{{ FIELD }}Hardin et al. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (E.D. Tex.) Trial counsel for Ryan Hardin and Andrew Hill, inventors on a patent related to geofencing technology, in a patent infringement suit brought against Samsung. After prevailing for the inventors on key claim construction, summary judgment, and Daubert issues, the case settled days before trial.{{ FIELD }}Freshworks v. LiveHelpNow, LLC (D. Del.) Counsel for Freshworks in a declaratory judgment action filed against LiveHelpNow, LLC involving patents related to chat software. After extensive disputes relating to venue, including a parallel action filed in the Western District of Texas, the case settled.{{ FIELD }}Sieler v. Atieva Inc. (N.D. Cal.) Counsel for Atieva Inc. in a patent inventorship dispute with a former employee, which also included counterclaims for breach of contract, among others. Case settled shortly before trial after summary judgment motions filed by Atieva.{{ FIELD }}Match Group v. Muzmatch Limited (W.D. Tex.) Counsel for defendant in a case involving claims of trademark infringement, patent infringement, trade dress infringement, trademark dilution, and unfair competition. After extensive motion to dismiss briefing, the parties reached a resolution.{{ FIELD }}Commercial Litigation and Other Matters\nUnbnd Group Pty Ltd. v. Park Lane, LLC et al. (FINRA Arbitration and S.D.N.Y.) Trial counsel in a FINRA arbitration involving contractual and business tort claims, where opposing party sought approximately US$3 million in damages from client Unbnd and sought significant equitable relief in the form of equity in the company. After a six-day evidentiary hearing, the FINRA arbitration panel rejected the opposing party’s request for more than US$3M and agreed with Unbnd’s position on equity in the company. The Southern District of New York confirmed the award on appeal, and awarded attorney’s fees to Unbnd for the appeal.{{ FIELD }}Ranieri et al. v. AdvoCare International LP et al. (N.D. Tex.) Counsel for defendant AdvoCare in a class action lawsuit involving pyramid scheme allegations and claims of RICO violations, securities laws violations, and others. Hundreds of millions of dollars were at issue. Won multiple motions to dismiss, including getting the RICO claims dismissed. Class settlement was reached during class discovery.{{ FIELD }}Ahtoosa Dale is a trial lawyer with a focus on patent litigation and complex disputes. She combines her technical and legal training to focus on IP litigation spanning multiple technologies and business disputes spanning various industries. \nAhtoosa focuses her practice on complex commercial litigation in various industries and IP litigation across differing technologies. She advises industry-leading clients on intricate business matters and IP-related issues across a broad spectrum of technologies, such as computer systems and architectures, virtual systems, mobile applications, networking, and medical devices. She also has experience representing corporations and individuals in business matters including intellectual property, employment and business disputes, class actions, consumer privacy, and product liability. \nAhtoosa has been a team member in several trials. Her courtroom and stand-up experience span multiple venues, as she has significant experience arguing hearings in both trial court and arbitration settings, taking and defending witnesses at depositions, preparing witnesses to give testimony at trials and hearings, drafting substantive briefs in both trial and appellate court, and putting on and cross-examining witnesses at trial. She also spent three months on loan as an assistant district attorney in Dallas County, where she tried numerous criminal jury trials to verdict. Early in her career, she served as second chair in a civil pro bono trial in federal court, representing and successfully obtaining all requested relief on behalf of an inmate in Texas state prison related to his ability to practice certain religious tenets while imprisoned.\nPrior to joining the firm, Ahtoosa served as a Judicial Clerk for the Honorable Kimberly Priest Johnson for the U.S. District Court Eastern District of Texas. She has undergraduate degrees in computer engineering and mathematics and has experience as a software developer for hospital e-documentation applications. Ahtoosa has a working knowledge of C++, Java, C#, and XML. Partner Intellectual Property Law Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch®, 2026 Patent Litigation Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch®, 2026 Intellectual Property – Litigation Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch®, 2026 40 \u0026amp; Under Benchmark Litigation, 2026 “Best Lawyers Under 40” D Magazine, 2025 Recognized within the Top 250 Patexia’s Patent Litigation Report, 2025 Southern Methodist University Southern Methodist University Dedman School of Law Baylor University Baylor University School of Law Texas Member, Dallas Bar Association Programming Co-Chair, ChIPs USPTO Chapter Member, Honorable Barbara M. G. Lynn American Inn of Court, 2022-2024 Member, Texas Association Against Sexual Assault Judicial Clerk, Honorable Kimberly Priest Johnson, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas Patent, Trade Secret, and Other Intellectual Property Litigation\nTMT Systems, Inc. v. Medtronic, Inc. (W.D. Tex.) Trial counsel for defendant Medtronic in a patent infringement suit relating to a patent on a design for an abdominal aortic aneurysm stent graft. The trial resulted in a mistrial due to a hung jury, but post-trial, Ahtoosa and her team at Winston were able to get a new favorable claim construction ruling that resulted in a stipulation of noninfringement. Hardin et al. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (E.D. Tex.) Trial counsel for Ryan Hardin and Andrew Hill, inventors on a patent related to geofencing technology, in a patent infringement suit brought against Samsung. After prevailing for the inventors on key claim construction, summary judgment, and Daubert issues, the case settled days before trial. Freshworks v. LiveHelpNow, LLC (D. Del.) Counsel for Freshworks in a declaratory judgment action filed against LiveHelpNow, LLC involving patents related to chat software. After extensive disputes relating to venue, including a parallel action filed in the Western District of Texas, the case settled. Sieler v. Atieva Inc. (N.D. Cal.) Counsel for Atieva Inc. in a patent inventorship dispute with a former employee, which also included counterclaims for breach of contract, among others. Case settled shortly before trial after summary judgment motions filed by Atieva. Match Group v. Muzmatch Limited (W.D. Tex.) Counsel for defendant in a case involving claims of trademark infringement, patent infringement, trade dress infringement, trademark dilution, and unfair competition. After extensive motion to dismiss briefing, the parties reached a resolution. Commercial Litigation and Other Matters\nUnbnd Group Pty Ltd. v. Park Lane, LLC et al. (FINRA Arbitration and S.D.N.Y.) Trial counsel in a FINRA arbitration involving contractual and business tort claims, where opposing party sought approximately US$3 million in damages from client Unbnd and sought significant equitable relief in the form of equity in the company. After a six-day evidentiary hearing, the FINRA arbitration panel rejected the opposing party’s request for more than US$3M and agreed with Unbnd’s position on equity in the company. The Southern District of New York confirmed the award on appeal, and awarded attorney’s fees to Unbnd for the appeal. Ranieri et al. v. AdvoCare International LP et al. (N.D. Tex.) Counsel for defendant AdvoCare in a class action lawsuit involving pyramid scheme allegations and claims of RICO violations, securities laws violations, and others. Hundreds of millions of dollars were at issue. Won multiple motions to dismiss, including getting the RICO claims dismissed. Class settlement was reached during class discovery.","searchable_name":"Ahtoosa A. Dale","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":442361,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":853,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eTodd Davis is a partner with King \u0026amp; Spalding's Trial \u0026amp; Global Disputes practice group. For the last twenty-eight years, Mr. Davis' practice has been devoted to trying high-stakes products liability cases, including those involving medications, medical devices and consumer products.\u0026nbsp; His involvement includes cross-examining plaintiffs\u0026rsquo; key causation and medical expert witnesses at trial and in deposition. \u0026nbsp;Mr. Davis\u0026rsquo; practice\u0026nbsp;involves representing pharmaceutical and medical device companies, as well as other product manufacturers, in mass tort, consumer fraud and class action litigation.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMr. Davis has been recognized in Legal 500\u0026rsquo;s Product Liability and Mass Tort Defense in the Pharma and Medical Device category.\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"todd-davis","email":"tdavis@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":["\u003cp\u003eTrying three cases for\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eGlaxoSmithKline\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas, Pennsylvania, alleging that Paxil causes birth defects (2016, 2010, 2009). In two trials, the courts dismissed plaintiffs' claims because plaintiffs could not prove proximate causation. In the third, which was plaintiffs' No. 1 pick for trial, plaintiffs were awarded compensatory damages less than the actual medical expenses incurred and no punitive damages.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eTrying the first \u0026ldquo;innovator liability\u0026rdquo; prescription drug case to go to trial (\u003cem\u003eDolin v. GSK,\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e2017\u003cem\u003e).\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eTrying cases for R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company as part of the\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eEngle\u003c/em\u003e-progeny litigation in Florida (2013, 2014, 2018, 2019 and 2020).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003emedical device and pharmaceutical companies\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in federal multi-district litigation and state consolidated proceedings. Defeating efforts to certify a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003enationwide class\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;of Paxil users under personal injury and consumer fraud theories.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eIn re Paxil,\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;212 F.R.D. 539 (C.D. Cal. 2003). This decision has been referred to as one of the \u0026ldquo;Big Four\u0026rdquo; federal court rulings denying class certification in pharmaceutical cases.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eSee\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eIn\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003ere\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003ePrempro\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eProds. Liab. Lit.\u003c/em\u003e, 230 F.R.D. 555 (E.D. Ark. 2005).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefeating efforts to certify\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea statewide claim\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;of Paxil users under California\u0026rsquo;s Unfair Competition Law, \u0026sect; 17200\u003cem\u003e.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eIn re Paxil,\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;218 F.R.D. 242 (C.D. Cal. 2003).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefeating efforts to certify a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003enationwide class\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;of pediatric patients who were prescribed a medication not approved by the FDA to treat patients under 18.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003ePamela Blain, et al. v. SmithKline Beecham Corp\u003c/em\u003e., 240 F.R.D. 179 (E.D. Pa. 2007).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eObtaining summary judgments based on federal preemption of state law\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003efailure-to-warn claims\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in cases involving a prescription medication.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eE.g., O\u0026rsquo;Neal v. SmithKline Beecham Corp.\u003c/em\u003e, 551 F.Supp.2d 993 (E.D. Cal. 2008);\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eCandace Miller et al v. SmithKline Beecham Corporation, d/b/a GlaxoSmithKline\u003c/em\u003e, slip op., 2008 WL 510449 (N.D. Okla).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully excluding plaintiff\u0026rsquo;s experts\u0026rsquo; opinions that breast implants cause systemic illness on\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eDaubert\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;grounds\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in the first breast implant case set for trial in Georgia. Mr. Davis successfully defended that decision on appeal in the first federal appellate decision in the country addressing\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eDaubert\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;issues in the breast implant litigation.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eAllison v. McGhan Medical Corp.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;184 F.3d 1300 (11th Cir. 1999).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully defending\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea product liability lawsuit\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;filed in the \u0026ldquo;rocket-docket\u0026rdquo; of the U.S.D.C., Eastern District of Virginia that involved allegations that a uniformed officer of the Secret Service committed murder and then suicide because of a prescription medication. After an intensive 2-1/2 month discovery period, plaintiff dismissed his lawsuit on the eve of trial. The defendant paid nothing in settlement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully defending on appeal summary judgment for\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea pharmaceutical manufacturer\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;based upon the learned intermediary doctrine.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eAllgood v. SmithKline Beecham Corp. d/b/a GlaxoSmithKline\u003c/em\u003e, No. 06-cv-3506, 2008 WL 483574 (E.D. La. Feb. 20, 2008),\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eaff\u0026rsquo;d by\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;No. 08- 30329, 2009 WL 646285 (5th Cir. Mar. 13, 2009),\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003ereh\u0026rsquo;g denied by\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;No. 08-30329 (5th Cir. May 6, 2009).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eObtaining summary judgment in\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea product liability lawsuit\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;involving a prescription medication within four months after plaintiff filed his lawsuit,\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eHoward v. GlaxoSmithKline\u003c/em\u003e, Case No. 05-1525 (U.S.D.C., E.D. Cal.)\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eaff\u0026rsquo;d\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(9th Cir. 2007), and obtaining summary judgments in two product liability wrongful death lawsuits when plaintiffs\u0026rsquo; claimed they did not timely file their lawsuit because of the defendant\u0026rsquo;s \u0026ldquo;fraudulent concealment.\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003ePamela Blain, et al., v. SmithKline Beecham Corporation d/b/a GlaxoSmithKline\u003c/em\u003e, Civil Action No. 07-1157- MLB-DWB (U.S.D.C., D. Kan.);\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eCollins v. SmithKlineBeecham Corp.,\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas, Pennsylvania,\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eaff'd\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;on appeal.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eManaging massive electronic discovery and hard copy productions and coordinating discovery of plaintiffs\u0026rsquo; claims.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully defending against motions to compel that sought thousands of privileged documents in\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003epersonal injury lawsuits\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;involving prescription medications.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eMajor responsibility in\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eseveral hundred breast implant cases\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Tennessee, South Carolina, North Carolina, Virginia and the District of Columbia. Mr. Davis second-chaired the trial of the first breast implant case tried in Tennessee. The trial lasted five-and-a-half weeks and included claims of both local and systemic injury. The jury returned a defense verdict.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully arguing for\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003etransfer of a host of cases\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;to the plaintiffs\u0026rsquo; home states under 28 U.S.C. \u0026sect; 1404. (Plaintiffs attempted to bring their lawsuits in the state of the pharmaceutical company\u0026rsquo;s business office as opposed to the states of their residence.)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefending\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ehigh-ranking company executives\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in depositions.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea manufacturer\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an emergency appeal of an order allowing plaintiffs to depose the manufacturer\u0026rsquo;s in-house litigation counsel. In an appeal to the Kentucky Supreme Court, Mr. Davis successfully argued for reversal of the trial court\u0026rsquo;s order.\u003c/p\u003e"],"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[{"id":63}]},"expertise":[{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":17,"guid":"17.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":761,"guid":"761.smart_tags","index":2,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":764,"guid":"764.smart_tags","index":3,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":3,"guid":"3.capabilities","index":4,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":21,"guid":"21.capabilities","index":5,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":24,"guid":"24.capabilities","index":6,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":103,"guid":"103.capabilities","index":7,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":16,"guid":"16.capabilities","index":8,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":112,"guid":"112.capabilities","index":9,"source":"capabilities"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Davis","nick_name":"Todd","clerkships":[],"first_name":"Todd","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":101,"law_schools":[],"middle_name":"P.","name_suffix":"","recognitions":null,"linked_in_url":null,"seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eTodd Davis is a partner with King \u0026amp; Spalding's Trial \u0026amp; Global Disputes practice group. For the last twenty-eight years, Mr. Davis' practice has been devoted to trying high-stakes products liability cases, including those involving medications, medical devices and consumer products.\u0026nbsp; His involvement includes cross-examining plaintiffs\u0026rsquo; key causation and medical expert witnesses at trial and in deposition. \u0026nbsp;Mr. Davis\u0026rsquo; practice\u0026nbsp;involves representing pharmaceutical and medical device companies, as well as other product manufacturers, in mass tort, consumer fraud and class action litigation.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMr. Davis has been recognized in Legal 500\u0026rsquo;s Product Liability and Mass Tort Defense in the Pharma and Medical Device category.\u003c/p\u003e","matters":["\u003cp\u003eTrying three cases for\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eGlaxoSmithKline\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas, Pennsylvania, alleging that Paxil causes birth defects (2016, 2010, 2009). In two trials, the courts dismissed plaintiffs' claims because plaintiffs could not prove proximate causation. In the third, which was plaintiffs' No. 1 pick for trial, plaintiffs were awarded compensatory damages less than the actual medical expenses incurred and no punitive damages.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eTrying the first \u0026ldquo;innovator liability\u0026rdquo; prescription drug case to go to trial (\u003cem\u003eDolin v. GSK,\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e2017\u003cem\u003e).\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eTrying cases for R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company as part of the\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eEngle\u003c/em\u003e-progeny litigation in Florida (2013, 2014, 2018, 2019 and 2020).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003emedical device and pharmaceutical companies\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in federal multi-district litigation and state consolidated proceedings. Defeating efforts to certify a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003enationwide class\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;of Paxil users under personal injury and consumer fraud theories.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eIn re Paxil,\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;212 F.R.D. 539 (C.D. Cal. 2003). This decision has been referred to as one of the \u0026ldquo;Big Four\u0026rdquo; federal court rulings denying class certification in pharmaceutical cases.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eSee\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eIn\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003ere\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003ePrempro\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eProds. Liab. Lit.\u003c/em\u003e, 230 F.R.D. 555 (E.D. Ark. 2005).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefeating efforts to certify\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea statewide claim\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;of Paxil users under California\u0026rsquo;s Unfair Competition Law, \u0026sect; 17200\u003cem\u003e.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eIn re Paxil,\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;218 F.R.D. 242 (C.D. Cal. 2003).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefeating efforts to certify a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003enationwide class\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;of pediatric patients who were prescribed a medication not approved by the FDA to treat patients under 18.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003ePamela Blain, et al. v. SmithKline Beecham Corp\u003c/em\u003e., 240 F.R.D. 179 (E.D. Pa. 2007).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eObtaining summary judgments based on federal preemption of state law\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003efailure-to-warn claims\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in cases involving a prescription medication.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eE.g., O\u0026rsquo;Neal v. SmithKline Beecham Corp.\u003c/em\u003e, 551 F.Supp.2d 993 (E.D. Cal. 2008);\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eCandace Miller et al v. SmithKline Beecham Corporation, d/b/a GlaxoSmithKline\u003c/em\u003e, slip op., 2008 WL 510449 (N.D. Okla).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully excluding plaintiff\u0026rsquo;s experts\u0026rsquo; opinions that breast implants cause systemic illness on\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eDaubert\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;grounds\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in the first breast implant case set for trial in Georgia. Mr. Davis successfully defended that decision on appeal in the first federal appellate decision in the country addressing\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eDaubert\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;issues in the breast implant litigation.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eAllison v. McGhan Medical Corp.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;184 F.3d 1300 (11th Cir. 1999).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully defending\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea product liability lawsuit\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;filed in the \u0026ldquo;rocket-docket\u0026rdquo; of the U.S.D.C., Eastern District of Virginia that involved allegations that a uniformed officer of the Secret Service committed murder and then suicide because of a prescription medication. After an intensive 2-1/2 month discovery period, plaintiff dismissed his lawsuit on the eve of trial. The defendant paid nothing in settlement.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully defending on appeal summary judgment for\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea pharmaceutical manufacturer\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;based upon the learned intermediary doctrine.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eAllgood v. SmithKline Beecham Corp. d/b/a GlaxoSmithKline\u003c/em\u003e, No. 06-cv-3506, 2008 WL 483574 (E.D. La. Feb. 20, 2008),\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eaff\u0026rsquo;d by\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;No. 08- 30329, 2009 WL 646285 (5th Cir. Mar. 13, 2009),\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003ereh\u0026rsquo;g denied by\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;No. 08-30329 (5th Cir. May 6, 2009).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eObtaining summary judgment in\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea product liability lawsuit\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;involving a prescription medication within four months after plaintiff filed his lawsuit,\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eHoward v. GlaxoSmithKline\u003c/em\u003e, Case No. 05-1525 (U.S.D.C., E.D. Cal.)\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eaff\u0026rsquo;d\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(9th Cir. 2007), and obtaining summary judgments in two product liability wrongful death lawsuits when plaintiffs\u0026rsquo; claimed they did not timely file their lawsuit because of the defendant\u0026rsquo;s \u0026ldquo;fraudulent concealment.\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003ePamela Blain, et al., v. SmithKline Beecham Corporation d/b/a GlaxoSmithKline\u003c/em\u003e, Civil Action No. 07-1157- MLB-DWB (U.S.D.C., D. Kan.);\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eCollins v. SmithKlineBeecham Corp.,\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas, Pennsylvania,\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eaff'd\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;on appeal.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eManaging massive electronic discovery and hard copy productions and coordinating discovery of plaintiffs\u0026rsquo; claims.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully defending against motions to compel that sought thousands of privileged documents in\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003epersonal injury lawsuits\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;involving prescription medications.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eMajor responsibility in\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eseveral hundred breast implant cases\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Tennessee, South Carolina, North Carolina, Virginia and the District of Columbia. Mr. Davis second-chaired the trial of the first breast implant case tried in Tennessee. The trial lasted five-and-a-half weeks and included claims of both local and systemic injury. The jury returned a defense verdict.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully arguing for\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003etransfer of a host of cases\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;to the plaintiffs\u0026rsquo; home states under 28 U.S.C. \u0026sect; 1404. (Plaintiffs attempted to bring their lawsuits in the state of the pharmaceutical company\u0026rsquo;s business office as opposed to the states of their residence.)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefending\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ehigh-ranking company executives\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in depositions.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea manufacturer\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an emergency appeal of an order allowing plaintiffs to depose the manufacturer\u0026rsquo;s in-house litigation counsel. In an appeal to the Kentucky Supreme Court, Mr. Davis successfully argued for reversal of the trial court\u0026rsquo;s order.\u003c/p\u003e"]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":805}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2025-11-05T05:03:30.000Z","updated_at":"2025-11-05T05:03:30.000Z","searchable_text":"Davis{{ FIELD }}Trying three cases for GlaxoSmithKline in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas, Pennsylvania, alleging that Paxil causes birth defects (2016, 2010, 2009). In two trials, the courts dismissed plaintiffs' claims because plaintiffs could not prove proximate causation. In the third, which was plaintiffs' No. 1 pick for trial, plaintiffs were awarded compensatory damages less than the actual medical expenses incurred and no punitive damages.{{ FIELD }}Trying the first “innovator liability” prescription drug case to go to trial (Dolin v. GSK, 2017).{{ FIELD }}Trying cases for R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company as part of the Engle-progeny litigation in Florida (2013, 2014, 2018, 2019 and 2020).{{ FIELD }}Representing medical device and pharmaceutical companies in federal multi-district litigation and state consolidated proceedings. Defeating efforts to certify a nationwide class of Paxil users under personal injury and consumer fraud theories. In re Paxil, 212 F.R.D. 539 (C.D. Cal. 2003). This decision has been referred to as one of the “Big Four” federal court rulings denying class certification in pharmaceutical cases. See In re Prempro Prods. Liab. Lit., 230 F.R.D. 555 (E.D. Ark. 2005).{{ FIELD }}Defeating efforts to certify a statewide claim of Paxil users under California’s Unfair Competition Law, § 17200. In re Paxil, 218 F.R.D. 242 (C.D. Cal. 2003).{{ FIELD }}Defeating efforts to certify a nationwide class of pediatric patients who were prescribed a medication not approved by the FDA to treat patients under 18. Pamela Blain, et al. v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 240 F.R.D. 179 (E.D. Pa. 2007).{{ FIELD }}Obtaining summary judgments based on federal preemption of state law failure-to-warn claims in cases involving a prescription medication. E.g., O’Neal v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 551 F.Supp.2d 993 (E.D. Cal. 2008); Candace Miller et al v. SmithKline Beecham Corporation, d/b/a GlaxoSmithKline, slip op., 2008 WL 510449 (N.D. Okla).{{ FIELD }}Successfully excluding plaintiff’s experts’ opinions that breast implants cause systemic illness on Daubert grounds in the first breast implant case set for trial in Georgia. Mr. Davis successfully defended that decision on appeal in the first federal appellate decision in the country addressing Daubert issues in the breast implant litigation. Allison v. McGhan Medical Corp. 184 F.3d 1300 (11th Cir. 1999).{{ FIELD }}Successfully defending a product liability lawsuit filed in the “rocket-docket” of the U.S.D.C., Eastern District of Virginia that involved allegations that a uniformed officer of the Secret Service committed murder and then suicide because of a prescription medication. After an intensive 2-1/2 month discovery period, plaintiff dismissed his lawsuit on the eve of trial. The defendant paid nothing in settlement.{{ FIELD }}Successfully defending on appeal summary judgment for a pharmaceutical manufacturer based upon the learned intermediary doctrine. Allgood v. SmithKline Beecham Corp. d/b/a GlaxoSmithKline, No. 06-cv-3506, 2008 WL 483574 (E.D. La. Feb. 20, 2008), aff’d by No. 08- 30329, 2009 WL 646285 (5th Cir. Mar. 13, 2009), reh’g denied by No. 08-30329 (5th Cir. May 6, 2009).{{ FIELD }}Obtaining summary judgment in a product liability lawsuit involving a prescription medication within four months after plaintiff filed his lawsuit, Howard v. GlaxoSmithKline, Case No. 05-1525 (U.S.D.C., E.D. Cal.) aff’d (9th Cir. 2007), and obtaining summary judgments in two product liability wrongful death lawsuits when plaintiffs’ claimed they did not timely file their lawsuit because of the defendant’s “fraudulent concealment.” Pamela Blain, et al., v. SmithKline Beecham Corporation d/b/a GlaxoSmithKline, Civil Action No. 07-1157- MLB-DWB (U.S.D.C., D. Kan.); Collins v. SmithKlineBeecham Corp., Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas, Pennsylvania, aff'd on appeal.{{ FIELD }}Managing massive electronic discovery and hard copy productions and coordinating discovery of plaintiffs’ claims.{{ FIELD }}Successfully defending against motions to compel that sought thousands of privileged documents in personal injury lawsuits involving prescription medications.{{ FIELD }}Major responsibility in several hundred breast implant cases in Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Tennessee, South Carolina, North Carolina, Virginia and the District of Columbia. Mr. Davis second-chaired the trial of the first breast implant case tried in Tennessee. The trial lasted five-and-a-half weeks and included claims of both local and systemic injury. The jury returned a defense verdict.{{ FIELD }}Successfully arguing for transfer of a host of cases to the plaintiffs’ home states under 28 U.S.C. § 1404. (Plaintiffs attempted to bring their lawsuits in the state of the pharmaceutical company’s business office as opposed to the states of their residence.){{ FIELD }}Defending high-ranking company executives in depositions.{{ FIELD }}Representing a manufacturer in an emergency appeal of an order allowing plaintiffs to depose the manufacturer’s in-house litigation counsel. In an appeal to the Kentucky Supreme Court, Mr. Davis successfully argued for reversal of the trial court’s order.{{ FIELD }}Todd Davis is a partner with King \u0026amp; Spalding's Trial \u0026amp; Global Disputes practice group. For the last twenty-eight years, Mr. Davis' practice has been devoted to trying high-stakes products liability cases, including those involving medications, medical devices and consumer products.  His involvement includes cross-examining plaintiffs’ key causation and medical expert witnesses at trial and in deposition.  Mr. Davis’ practice involves representing pharmaceutical and medical device companies, as well as other product manufacturers, in mass tort, consumer fraud and class action litigation.\nMr. Davis has been recognized in Legal 500’s Product Liability and Mass Tort Defense in the Pharma and Medical Device category. Todd P Davis Partner Stetson University Stetson University College of Law Mercer University Mercer University Walter F. George School of Law U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Georgia U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Georgia Florida Georgia American Bar Association State Bar of Georgia Atlanta Bar Association The Florida Bar Sixth and Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals Trying three cases for GlaxoSmithKline in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas, Pennsylvania, alleging that Paxil causes birth defects (2016, 2010, 2009). In two trials, the courts dismissed plaintiffs' claims because plaintiffs could not prove proximate causation. In the third, which was plaintiffs' No. 1 pick for trial, plaintiffs were awarded compensatory damages less than the actual medical expenses incurred and no punitive damages. Trying the first “innovator liability” prescription drug case to go to trial (Dolin v. GSK, 2017). Trying cases for R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company as part of the Engle-progeny litigation in Florida (2013, 2014, 2018, 2019 and 2020). Representing medical device and pharmaceutical companies in federal multi-district litigation and state consolidated proceedings. Defeating efforts to certify a nationwide class of Paxil users under personal injury and consumer fraud theories. In re Paxil, 212 F.R.D. 539 (C.D. Cal. 2003). This decision has been referred to as one of the “Big Four” federal court rulings denying class certification in pharmaceutical cases. See In re Prempro Prods. Liab. Lit., 230 F.R.D. 555 (E.D. Ark. 2005). Defeating efforts to certify a statewide claim of Paxil users under California’s Unfair Competition Law, § 17200. In re Paxil, 218 F.R.D. 242 (C.D. Cal. 2003). Defeating efforts to certify a nationwide class of pediatric patients who were prescribed a medication not approved by the FDA to treat patients under 18. Pamela Blain, et al. v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 240 F.R.D. 179 (E.D. Pa. 2007). Obtaining summary judgments based on federal preemption of state law failure-to-warn claims in cases involving a prescription medication. E.g., O’Neal v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 551 F.Supp.2d 993 (E.D. Cal. 2008); Candace Miller et al v. SmithKline Beecham Corporation, d/b/a GlaxoSmithKline, slip op., 2008 WL 510449 (N.D. Okla). Successfully excluding plaintiff’s experts’ opinions that breast implants cause systemic illness on Daubert grounds in the first breast implant case set for trial in Georgia. Mr. Davis successfully defended that decision on appeal in the first federal appellate decision in the country addressing Daubert issues in the breast implant litigation. Allison v. McGhan Medical Corp. 184 F.3d 1300 (11th Cir. 1999). Successfully defending a product liability lawsuit filed in the “rocket-docket” of the U.S.D.C., Eastern District of Virginia that involved allegations that a uniformed officer of the Secret Service committed murder and then suicide because of a prescription medication. After an intensive 2-1/2 month discovery period, plaintiff dismissed his lawsuit on the eve of trial. The defendant paid nothing in settlement. Successfully defending on appeal summary judgment for a pharmaceutical manufacturer based upon the learned intermediary doctrine. Allgood v. SmithKline Beecham Corp. d/b/a GlaxoSmithKline, No. 06-cv-3506, 2008 WL 483574 (E.D. La. Feb. 20, 2008), aff’d by No. 08- 30329, 2009 WL 646285 (5th Cir. Mar. 13, 2009), reh’g denied by No. 08-30329 (5th Cir. May 6, 2009). Obtaining summary judgment in a product liability lawsuit involving a prescription medication within four months after plaintiff filed his lawsuit, Howard v. GlaxoSmithKline, Case No. 05-1525 (U.S.D.C., E.D. Cal.) aff’d (9th Cir. 2007), and obtaining summary judgments in two product liability wrongful death lawsuits when plaintiffs’ claimed they did not timely file their lawsuit because of the defendant’s “fraudulent concealment.” Pamela Blain, et al., v. SmithKline Beecham Corporation d/b/a GlaxoSmithKline, Civil Action No. 07-1157- MLB-DWB (U.S.D.C., D. Kan.); Collins v. SmithKlineBeecham Corp., Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas, Pennsylvania, aff'd on appeal. Managing massive electronic discovery and hard copy productions and coordinating discovery of plaintiffs’ claims. Successfully defending against motions to compel that sought thousands of privileged documents in personal injury lawsuits involving prescription medications. Major responsibility in several hundred breast implant cases in Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Tennessee, South Carolina, North Carolina, Virginia and the District of Columbia. Mr. Davis second-chaired the trial of the first breast implant case tried in Tennessee. The trial lasted five-and-a-half weeks and included claims of both local and systemic injury. The jury returned a defense verdict. Successfully arguing for transfer of a host of cases to the plaintiffs’ home states under 28 U.S.C. § 1404. (Plaintiffs attempted to bring their lawsuits in the state of the pharmaceutical company’s business office as opposed to the states of their residence.) Defending high-ranking company executives in depositions. Representing a manufacturer in an emergency appeal of an order allowing plaintiffs to depose the manufacturer’s in-house litigation counsel. In an appeal to the Kentucky Supreme Court, Mr. Davis successfully argued for reversal of the trial court’s order.","searchable_name":"Todd P. Davis","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":431252,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":3550,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eMr. Dawson focuses on complex commercial litigation, including matters involving contract and technology licensing disputes, misappropriation of trade secrets, fraud, and related commercial torts.\u0026nbsp; He has substantial experience defending class actions and multi-plaintiff mass actions.\u0026nbsp; Mr. Dawson represents both early-stage ventures and Fortune 500 companies in the healthcare, pharmaceutical, biotechnology, and medical-device industries.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePrior to joining King \u0026amp; Spalding, Mr. Dawson served as law clerk to the Honorable John T. Copenhaver, Jr. in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePublications\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cul\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eThe Intractable Obscenity Problem 2.0: The Emerging Circuit Split as to the Constitutionality of \"Local Community Standards\" Online, 60 Cath. U. L. Rev. 719 (2011).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ul\u003e","slug":"matthew-dawson","email":"mdawson@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":null,"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[]},"expertise":[{"id":5,"guid":"5.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":15,"guid":"15.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":103,"guid":"103.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Dawson","nick_name":"Matthew","clerkships":[{"name":"Judicial Clerk, The Honorable John T. Copenhaver, Jr., U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia","years_held":"2012-2013"},{"name":"Intern, The Honorable Ricardo M. Urbina, U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia","years_held":"2011"}],"first_name":"Matthew","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":101,"law_schools":[{"id":350,"meta":{"degree":"J.D.","honors":"magna cum laude","is_law_school":1,"graduation_date":"2012-01-01 00:00:00 UTC"},"order":1,"pin_order":null,"pin_expiration":null}],"middle_name":"H.","name_suffix":"","recognitions":[{"title":"Editor in Chief, Volume 61","detail":"Catholic University Law Review"}],"linked_in_url":null,"seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eMr. Dawson focuses on complex commercial litigation, including matters involving contract and technology licensing disputes, misappropriation of trade secrets, fraud, and related commercial torts.\u0026nbsp; He has substantial experience defending class actions and multi-plaintiff mass actions.\u0026nbsp; Mr. Dawson represents both early-stage ventures and Fortune 500 companies in the healthcare, pharmaceutical, biotechnology, and medical-device industries.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePrior to joining King \u0026amp; Spalding, Mr. Dawson served as law clerk to the Honorable John T. Copenhaver, Jr. in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePublications\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cul\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eThe Intractable Obscenity Problem 2.0: The Emerging Circuit Split as to the Constitutionality of \"Local Community Standards\" Online, 60 Cath. U. L. Rev. 719 (2011).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ul\u003e","recognitions":[{"title":"Editor in Chief, Volume 61","detail":"Catholic University Law Review"}]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":10342}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2025-07-03T04:53:44.000Z","updated_at":"2025-07-03T04:53:44.000Z","searchable_text":"Dawson{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Editor in Chief, Volume 61\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Catholic University Law Review\"}{{ FIELD }}Mr. Dawson focuses on complex commercial litigation, including matters involving contract and technology licensing disputes, misappropriation of trade secrets, fraud, and related commercial torts.  He has substantial experience defending class actions and multi-plaintiff mass actions.  Mr. Dawson represents both early-stage ventures and Fortune 500 companies in the healthcare, pharmaceutical, biotechnology, and medical-device industries.\nPrior to joining King \u0026amp; Spalding, Mr. Dawson served as law clerk to the Honorable John T. Copenhaver, Jr. in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia.\nPublications\n\nThe Intractable Obscenity Problem 2.0: The Emerging Circuit Split as to the Constitutionality of \"Local Community Standards\" Online, 60 Cath. U. L. Rev. 719 (2011).\n Partner Editor in Chief, Volume 61 Catholic University Law Review Davidson College  Catholic University of America Columbus School of Law 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 Maryland Judicial Clerk, The Honorable John T. Copenhaver, Jr., U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia Intern, The Honorable Ricardo M. Urbina, U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia","searchable_name":"Matthew H. Dawson","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":426474,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":3794,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eSam Diamant\u0026nbsp;represents\u0026nbsp;companies in high-stakes commercial disputes, including matters involving technology license disputes, false advertising, misappropriation of trade secrets, breach of fiduciary duty and various other business torts. \u0026nbsp;He has represented Fortune 500 and emerging companies alike in the technology, life sciences, financial services, and energy\u0026nbsp;industries.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBefore joining King \u0026amp; Spalding, Sam served as law clerk to United States Bankruptcy Judge William J. Lafferty in the Northern District of California. \u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"samuel-diamant","email":"sdiamant@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":null,"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[]},"expertise":[{"id":38,"guid":"38.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":5,"guid":"5.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":103,"guid":"103.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":502,"guid":"502.smart_tags","index":4,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1409,"guid":"1409.smart_tags","index":5,"source":"smartTags"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Diamant","nick_name":"Sam","clerkships":[{"name":"Law Clerk, William J. Lafferty, U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of California","years_held":"2012-2014"}],"first_name":"Samuel","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":202,"law_schools":[{"id":2266,"meta":{"degree":"J.D.","honors":null,"is_law_school":1,"graduation_date":"2012-01-01 00:00:00 UTC"},"order":1,"pin_order":null,"pin_expiration":null}],"middle_name":"R.","name_suffix":"","recognitions":[{"title":"Top 40 Under 40","detail":"Daily Journal, 2024"},{"title":"Northern California Rising Star","detail":"Super Lawyers, 2021-2025"}],"linked_in_url":null,"seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eSam Diamant\u0026nbsp;represents\u0026nbsp;companies in high-stakes commercial disputes, including matters involving technology license disputes, false advertising, misappropriation of trade secrets, breach of fiduciary duty and various other business torts. \u0026nbsp;He has represented Fortune 500 and emerging companies alike in the technology, life sciences, financial services, and energy\u0026nbsp;industries.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBefore joining King \u0026amp; Spalding, Sam served as law clerk to United States Bankruptcy Judge William J. Lafferty in the Northern District of California. \u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e","recognitions":[{"title":"Top 40 Under 40","detail":"Daily Journal, 2024"},{"title":"Northern California Rising Star","detail":"Super Lawyers, 2021-2025"}]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":819}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2025-05-26T04:53:36.000Z","updated_at":"2025-05-26T04:53:36.000Z","searchable_text":"Diamant{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Top 40 Under 40\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Daily Journal, 2024\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Northern California Rising Star\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Super Lawyers, 2021-2025\"}{{ FIELD }}Sam Diamant represents companies in high-stakes commercial disputes, including matters involving technology license disputes, false advertising, misappropriation of trade secrets, breach of fiduciary duty and various other business torts.  He has represented Fortune 500 and emerging companies alike in the technology, life sciences, financial services, and energy industries.\nBefore joining King \u0026amp; Spalding, Sam served as law clerk to United States Bankruptcy Judge William J. Lafferty in the Northern District of California.   Partner Top 40 Under 40 Daily Journal, 2024 Northern California Rising Star Super Lawyers, 2021-2025 Davidson College  University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill University of North Carolina School of Law U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois 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 California U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of California Law Clerk, William J. Lafferty, U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of California","searchable_name":"Samuel R. Diamant (Sam)","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":445683,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":7313,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eAs a seasoned first-chair trial lawyer and former federal prosecutor, Tinos Diamantatos is a Fellow of the American College of Trial Lawyers, one of the premier, invitation-only legal associations in North America. He is ranked in \u003cem\u003eChambers USA\u003c/em\u003e and noted as \u0026ldquo;an outstanding trial lawyer\u0026rdquo; who is \u0026ldquo;a creative, forceful and tireless advocate\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo;tremendous for clients and a good counselor.\u0026rdquo; He is listed in 2026 \u003cem\u003eLawdragon\u003c/em\u003e 500 Leading Litigators in America, is listed in \u003cem\u003eThe Best Lawyers in America\u003c/em\u003e for White-Collar Criminal Defense, and is recognized and recommended for dispute resolution, corporate investigations, and white-collar defense by the \u003cem\u003eLegal 500\u003c/em\u003e \u003cem\u003eUS\u003c/em\u003e.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTinos is a premier courtroom advocate and trusted strategic advisor to corporations, boards, C-suites, senior executives, and individuals in their most consequential criminal, regulatory, and complex business litigation. This includes general litigation matters related to government investigations, \u003cem\u003equi tam\u003c/em\u003e litigation, government and internal investigations, and securities enforcement proceedings. He is recognized for leading high-stakes white-collar government enforcement, and complex commercial matters where the margin for error is zero and the cost of failure is existential.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eListed as one of \u003cem\u003eCrain\u0026rsquo;s Chicago Business\u003c/em\u003e \u0026ldquo;Notable Litigators and Trial Attorneys\u0026rdquo; for 2023, Tinos has tried more than 20 cases and achieved an outstanding record of success at trial. Tinos\u0026rsquo; trial representations span jurisdictions in both federal and state courts throughout the United States and have involved complex civil and criminal matters. Included among his trial successes are two separate trial wins for a Fortune 10 company.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTinos\u0026rsquo; representations span several industry sectors, including the retail, pharmaceutical, healthcare, pharmacy, medical device, and financial services industries. He has handled investigations, the defense, and prosecutions of matters involving alleged healthcare fraud, commodities fraud, mortgage fraud, money laundering, bank fraud, wire fraud, mail fraud, and tax evasion. He has also handled other complex matters involving terrorism, racketeering, extortion, corruption, obstruction, and civil rights violations.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTinos has been trusted by Fortune 500 companies, industry-leading pharmaceutical and healthcare companies, retail pharmacy chains, financial institutions, privately held businesses, and individuals in matters of utmost importance. He helps clients navigate government investigations, regulatory minefields, and related white collar litigation throughout the United States and around the world.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePrior to joining King \u0026amp; Spalding, Tinos was a partner at an AmLaw 25 firm where he served as the Chicago office managing partner and as co-head of that firm\u0026rsquo;s global white collar and government investigations practice group. Before joining private practice, Tinos served as a federal prosecutor at the U.S. Attorney\u0026rsquo;s Office in Chicago where he successfully handled high-profile cases and trials that received national and international media attention. He also successfully served as lead appellate counsel representing the government on nine appeals before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second and Seventh Circuits. He served in a number of sections within the Chicago U.S. Attorney\u0026rsquo;s Office, including the Financial Crimes and Special Prosecutions Section, and the office\u0026rsquo;s Public Corruption and Organized Crime Section, where he completed his career as a prosecutor.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTinos is also a former federal judicial law clerk and a former president of the prestigious Chicago Inn of Court.\u0026nbsp;He maintains an active pro bono practice and is involved in multiple mentoring initiatives.\u0026nbsp;He is a former member of the John Marshall Law School Board of Trustees and has served as an adjunct trial advocacy professor for the law school, where he has coached many successful trial teams competing at the national level. He teaches, by invitation, law enforcement courses on trial techniques and investigative tactics to federal agents at their national training centers.\u0026nbsp;In 2025, the Hellenic Bar Association recognized him with its \u0026ldquo;Lawyer of the Year\u0026rdquo; Award.\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"tinos-diamantatos","email":"tdiamantatos@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":["\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCommercial Litigation\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefending a major financial institution in a class action involving allegations related to purported violations of state statutes.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefending a publicly traded corporation in the managed services industry against allegations of contract fraud.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFalse Claims Act/Qui Tam Litigation\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefending pharmaceutical companies in federal district court and state court in an action brought by a government entity alleging improper marketing of opioids. Recently successfully obtained dismissal of action.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefending ongoing FCA litigation for a national healthcare provider in federal district court following Department of Justice intervention on allegations related to improper physician billing.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended pharmaceutical companies in multiple government investigations involving allegations related to off-label promotion and marketing practices.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCriminal Investigations\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a large financial institution in connection with a Department of Justice inquiry.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting multiple individual physicians in connection with various federal investigations of alleged healthcare fraud and improper billing practices.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting an individual in a Department of Justice investigation into allegations of fraud and corruption.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSecurities Fraud\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a medical device manufacturer in connection with a Securities and Exchange Commission enforcement proceeding.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented individual under investigation for alleged insider trading. Matter recently closed by the Securities and Exchange Commission with no adverse action taken.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eInternal Investigations\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eConducted an internal investigation for multi-national corporation stemming from alleged violations of money laundering, structuring, and related financial reporting requirements.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eConducted a variety of internal investigations of potential abuse and procurement fraud.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eCounseled clients on FCPA issues and compliance programs.\u003c/p\u003e"],"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[]},"expertise":[{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":5,"guid":"5.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":2,"guid":"2.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":19,"guid":"19.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":27,"guid":"27.capabilities","index":4,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":24,"guid":"24.capabilities","index":5,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":20,"guid":"20.capabilities","index":6,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":11,"guid":"11.capabilities","index":7,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":107,"guid":"107.capabilities","index":8,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":103,"guid":"103.capabilities","index":9,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":1142,"guid":"1142.smart_tags","index":10,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":764,"guid":"764.smart_tags","index":11,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":952,"guid":"952.smart_tags","index":12,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":780,"guid":"780.smart_tags","index":13,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1248,"guid":"1248.smart_tags","index":14,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1715,"guid":"1715.smart_tags","index":15,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":750,"guid":"750.smart_tags","index":16,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":762,"guid":"762.smart_tags","index":17,"source":"smartTags"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Diamantatos","nick_name":"Tinos","clerkships":[{"name":"Law Clerk, Judge Charles P. Kocoras, Northern District of Illinois","years_held":"2004 - 2005"}],"first_name":"Tinos","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":176,"law_schools":[],"middle_name":" ","name_suffix":"","recognitions":[{"title":"Fellow","detail":"American College of Trial Lawyers"},{"title":"500 Leading Litigators in America","detail":"Lawdragon, 2026"},{"title":"Illinois Lawyer of the Year","detail":"Hellenic Bar Association, 2025"},{"title":"Notable Litigators and Trial Attorneys","detail":"Crain’s Chicago Business (2023)"},{"title":"Recognized for Criminal Defense: White-Collar, Chicago","detail":"The Best Lawyers in America, (2023–2025)"},{"title":"Litigation: White-Collar Crime \u0026 Government Investigations – Illinois","detail":"Chambers USA (2021–2025)"},{"title":"Up and Coming, Litigation: White-Collar Crime \u0026 Government Investigations – Illinois","detail":"Chambers USA (2020)"},{"title":"Dispute resolution: Corporate investigations and white-collar criminal defense","detail":"The Legal 500 US (2016, 2018–2025)"}],"linked_in_url":null,"seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eAs a seasoned first-chair trial lawyer and former federal prosecutor, Tinos Diamantatos is a Fellow of the American College of Trial Lawyers, one of the premier, invitation-only legal associations in North America. He is ranked in \u003cem\u003eChambers USA\u003c/em\u003e and noted as \u0026ldquo;an outstanding trial lawyer\u0026rdquo; who is \u0026ldquo;a creative, forceful and tireless advocate\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo;tremendous for clients and a good counselor.\u0026rdquo; He is listed in 2026 \u003cem\u003eLawdragon\u003c/em\u003e 500 Leading Litigators in America, is listed in \u003cem\u003eThe Best Lawyers in America\u003c/em\u003e for White-Collar Criminal Defense, and is recognized and recommended for dispute resolution, corporate investigations, and white-collar defense by the \u003cem\u003eLegal 500\u003c/em\u003e \u003cem\u003eUS\u003c/em\u003e.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTinos is a premier courtroom advocate and trusted strategic advisor to corporations, boards, C-suites, senior executives, and individuals in their most consequential criminal, regulatory, and complex business litigation. This includes general litigation matters related to government investigations, \u003cem\u003equi tam\u003c/em\u003e litigation, government and internal investigations, and securities enforcement proceedings. He is recognized for leading high-stakes white-collar government enforcement, and complex commercial matters where the margin for error is zero and the cost of failure is existential.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eListed as one of \u003cem\u003eCrain\u0026rsquo;s Chicago Business\u003c/em\u003e \u0026ldquo;Notable Litigators and Trial Attorneys\u0026rdquo; for 2023, Tinos has tried more than 20 cases and achieved an outstanding record of success at trial. Tinos\u0026rsquo; trial representations span jurisdictions in both federal and state courts throughout the United States and have involved complex civil and criminal matters. Included among his trial successes are two separate trial wins for a Fortune 10 company.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTinos\u0026rsquo; representations span several industry sectors, including the retail, pharmaceutical, healthcare, pharmacy, medical device, and financial services industries. He has handled investigations, the defense, and prosecutions of matters involving alleged healthcare fraud, commodities fraud, mortgage fraud, money laundering, bank fraud, wire fraud, mail fraud, and tax evasion. He has also handled other complex matters involving terrorism, racketeering, extortion, corruption, obstruction, and civil rights violations.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTinos has been trusted by Fortune 500 companies, industry-leading pharmaceutical and healthcare companies, retail pharmacy chains, financial institutions, privately held businesses, and individuals in matters of utmost importance. He helps clients navigate government investigations, regulatory minefields, and related white collar litigation throughout the United States and around the world.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePrior to joining King \u0026amp; Spalding, Tinos was a partner at an AmLaw 25 firm where he served as the Chicago office managing partner and as co-head of that firm\u0026rsquo;s global white collar and government investigations practice group. Before joining private practice, Tinos served as a federal prosecutor at the U.S. Attorney\u0026rsquo;s Office in Chicago where he successfully handled high-profile cases and trials that received national and international media attention. He also successfully served as lead appellate counsel representing the government on nine appeals before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second and Seventh Circuits. He served in a number of sections within the Chicago U.S. Attorney\u0026rsquo;s Office, including the Financial Crimes and Special Prosecutions Section, and the office\u0026rsquo;s Public Corruption and Organized Crime Section, where he completed his career as a prosecutor.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTinos is also a former federal judicial law clerk and a former president of the prestigious Chicago Inn of Court.\u0026nbsp;He maintains an active pro bono practice and is involved in multiple mentoring initiatives.\u0026nbsp;He is a former member of the John Marshall Law School Board of Trustees and has served as an adjunct trial advocacy professor for the law school, where he has coached many successful trial teams competing at the national level. He teaches, by invitation, law enforcement courses on trial techniques and investigative tactics to federal agents at their national training centers.\u0026nbsp;In 2025, the Hellenic Bar Association recognized him with its \u0026ldquo;Lawyer of the Year\u0026rdquo; Award.\u003c/p\u003e","matters":["\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCommercial Litigation\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefending a major financial institution in a class action involving allegations related to purported violations of state statutes.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefending a publicly traded corporation in the managed services industry against allegations of contract fraud.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFalse Claims Act/Qui Tam Litigation\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefending pharmaceutical companies in federal district court and state court in an action brought by a government entity alleging improper marketing of opioids. Recently successfully obtained dismissal of action.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefending ongoing FCA litigation for a national healthcare provider in federal district court following Department of Justice intervention on allegations related to improper physician billing.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended pharmaceutical companies in multiple government investigations involving allegations related to off-label promotion and marketing practices.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCriminal Investigations\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a large financial institution in connection with a Department of Justice inquiry.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting multiple individual physicians in connection with various federal investigations of alleged healthcare fraud and improper billing practices.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting an individual in a Department of Justice investigation into allegations of fraud and corruption.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSecurities Fraud\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a medical device manufacturer in connection with a Securities and Exchange Commission enforcement proceeding.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented individual under investigation for alleged insider trading. Matter recently closed by the Securities and Exchange Commission with no adverse action taken.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eInternal Investigations\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eConducted an internal investigation for multi-national corporation stemming from alleged violations of money laundering, structuring, and related financial reporting requirements.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eConducted a variety of internal investigations of potential abuse and procurement fraud.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eCounseled clients on FCPA issues and compliance programs.\u003c/p\u003e"],"recognitions":[{"title":"Fellow","detail":"American College of Trial Lawyers"},{"title":"500 Leading Litigators in America","detail":"Lawdragon, 2026"},{"title":"Illinois Lawyer of the Year","detail":"Hellenic Bar Association, 2025"},{"title":"Notable Litigators and Trial Attorneys","detail":"Crain’s Chicago Business (2023)"},{"title":"Recognized for Criminal Defense: White-Collar, Chicago","detail":"The Best Lawyers in America, (2023–2025)"},{"title":"Litigation: White-Collar Crime \u0026 Government Investigations – Illinois","detail":"Chambers USA (2021–2025)"},{"title":"Up and Coming, Litigation: White-Collar Crime \u0026 Government Investigations – Illinois","detail":"Chambers USA (2020)"},{"title":"Dispute resolution: Corporate investigations and white-collar criminal defense","detail":"The Legal 500 US (2016, 2018–2025)"}]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":13354}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2026-02-09T16:03:46.000Z","updated_at":"2026-02-09T16:03:46.000Z","searchable_text":"Diamantatos{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Fellow\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"American College of Trial Lawyers\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"500 Leading Litigators in America\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Lawdragon, 2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Illinois Lawyer of the Year\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Hellenic Bar Association, 2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Notable Litigators and Trial Attorneys\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Crain’s Chicago Business (2023)\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Recognized for Criminal Defense: White-Collar, Chicago\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"The Best Lawyers in America, (2023–2025)\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Litigation: White-Collar Crime \u0026amp; Government Investigations – Illinois\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers USA (2021–2025)\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Up and Coming, Litigation: White-Collar Crime \u0026amp; Government Investigations – Illinois\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers USA (2020)\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Dispute resolution: Corporate investigations and white-collar criminal defense\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"The Legal 500 US (2016, 2018–2025)\"}{{ FIELD }}Commercial Litigation{{ FIELD }}Defending a major financial institution in a class action involving allegations related to purported violations of state statutes.{{ FIELD }}Defending a publicly traded corporation in the managed services industry against allegations of contract fraud.{{ FIELD }}False Claims Act/Qui Tam Litigation{{ FIELD }}Defending pharmaceutical companies in federal district court and state court in an action brought by a government entity alleging improper marketing of opioids. Recently successfully obtained dismissal of action.{{ FIELD }}Defending ongoing FCA litigation for a national healthcare provider in federal district court following Department of Justice intervention on allegations related to improper physician billing.{{ FIELD }}Defended pharmaceutical companies in multiple government investigations involving allegations related to off-label promotion and marketing practices.{{ FIELD }}Criminal Investigations{{ FIELD }}Representing a large financial institution in connection with a Department of Justice inquiry.{{ FIELD }}Representing multiple individual physicians in connection with various federal investigations of alleged healthcare fraud and improper billing practices.{{ FIELD }}Representing an individual in a Department of Justice investigation into allegations of fraud and corruption.{{ FIELD }}Securities Fraud{{ FIELD }}Representing a medical device manufacturer in connection with a Securities and Exchange Commission enforcement proceeding.{{ FIELD }}Represented individual under investigation for alleged insider trading. Matter recently closed by the Securities and Exchange Commission with no adverse action taken.{{ FIELD }}Internal Investigations{{ FIELD }}Conducted an internal investigation for multi-national corporation stemming from alleged violations of money laundering, structuring, and related financial reporting requirements.{{ FIELD }}Conducted a variety of internal investigations of potential abuse and procurement fraud.{{ FIELD }}Counseled clients on FCPA issues and compliance programs.{{ FIELD }}As a seasoned first-chair trial lawyer and former federal prosecutor, Tinos Diamantatos is a Fellow of the American College of Trial Lawyers, one of the premier, invitation-only legal associations in North America. He is ranked in Chambers USA and noted as “an outstanding trial lawyer” who is “a creative, forceful and tireless advocate” and “tremendous for clients and a good counselor.” He is listed in 2026 Lawdragon 500 Leading Litigators in America, is listed in The Best Lawyers in America for White-Collar Criminal Defense, and is recognized and recommended for dispute resolution, corporate investigations, and white-collar defense by the Legal 500 US.\nTinos is a premier courtroom advocate and trusted strategic advisor to corporations, boards, C-suites, senior executives, and individuals in their most consequential criminal, regulatory, and complex business litigation. This includes general litigation matters related to government investigations, qui tam litigation, government and internal investigations, and securities enforcement proceedings. He is recognized for leading high-stakes white-collar government enforcement, and complex commercial matters where the margin for error is zero and the cost of failure is existential. \nListed as one of Crain’s Chicago Business “Notable Litigators and Trial Attorneys” for 2023, Tinos has tried more than 20 cases and achieved an outstanding record of success at trial. Tinos’ trial representations span jurisdictions in both federal and state courts throughout the United States and have involved complex civil and criminal matters. Included among his trial successes are two separate trial wins for a Fortune 10 company.\nTinos’ representations span several industry sectors, including the retail, pharmaceutical, healthcare, pharmacy, medical device, and financial services industries. He has handled investigations, the defense, and prosecutions of matters involving alleged healthcare fraud, commodities fraud, mortgage fraud, money laundering, bank fraud, wire fraud, mail fraud, and tax evasion. He has also handled other complex matters involving terrorism, racketeering, extortion, corruption, obstruction, and civil rights violations.\nTinos has been trusted by Fortune 500 companies, industry-leading pharmaceutical and healthcare companies, retail pharmacy chains, financial institutions, privately held businesses, and individuals in matters of utmost importance. He helps clients navigate government investigations, regulatory minefields, and related white collar litigation throughout the United States and around the world.\nPrior to joining King \u0026amp; Spalding, Tinos was a partner at an AmLaw 25 firm where he served as the Chicago office managing partner and as co-head of that firm’s global white collar and government investigations practice group. Before joining private practice, Tinos served as a federal prosecutor at the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Chicago where he successfully handled high-profile cases and trials that received national and international media attention. He also successfully served as lead appellate counsel representing the government on nine appeals before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second and Seventh Circuits. He served in a number of sections within the Chicago U.S. Attorney’s Office, including the Financial Crimes and Special Prosecutions Section, and the office’s Public Corruption and Organized Crime Section, where he completed his career as a prosecutor.\nTinos is also a former federal judicial law clerk and a former president of the prestigious Chicago Inn of Court. He maintains an active pro bono practice and is involved in multiple mentoring initiatives. He is a former member of the John Marshall Law School Board of Trustees and has served as an adjunct trial advocacy professor for the law school, where he has coached many successful trial teams competing at the national level. He teaches, by invitation, law enforcement courses on trial techniques and investigative tactics to federal agents at their national training centers. In 2025, the Hellenic Bar Association recognized him with its “Lawyer of the Year” Award. Partner Fellow American College of Trial Lawyers 500 Leading Litigators in America Lawdragon, 2026 Illinois Lawyer of the Year Hellenic Bar Association, 2025 Notable Litigators and Trial Attorneys Crain’s Chicago Business (2023) Recognized for Criminal Defense: White-Collar, Chicago The Best Lawyers in America, (2023–2025) Litigation: White-Collar Crime \u0026amp; Government Investigations – Illinois Chambers USA (2021–2025) Up and Coming, Litigation: White-Collar Crime \u0026amp; Government Investigations – Illinois Chambers USA (2020) Dispute resolution: Corporate investigations and white-collar criminal defense The Legal 500 US (2016, 2018–2025) DePaul University DePaul University College of Law The John Marshall Law School The John Marshall Law School U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit Illinois Member, American Bar Association Member, Federal Bar Association Member, Chicago Bar Association President, Chicago Inn of Court (2017–2018) Member, Seventh Circuit Bar Association Member, Hellenic Bar Association Member, The John Marshall Law School Board of Trustees Member, Order of John Marshall Law Clerk, Judge Charles P. Kocoras, Northern District of Illinois Commercial Litigation Defending a major financial institution in a class action involving allegations related to purported violations of state statutes. Defending a publicly traded corporation in the managed services industry against allegations of contract fraud. False Claims Act/Qui Tam Litigation Defending pharmaceutical companies in federal district court and state court in an action brought by a government entity alleging improper marketing of opioids. Recently successfully obtained dismissal of action. Defending ongoing FCA litigation for a national healthcare provider in federal district court following Department of Justice intervention on allegations related to improper physician billing. Defended pharmaceutical companies in multiple government investigations involving allegations related to off-label promotion and marketing practices. Criminal Investigations Representing a large financial institution in connection with a Department of Justice inquiry. Representing multiple individual physicians in connection with various federal investigations of alleged healthcare fraud and improper billing practices. Representing an individual in a Department of Justice investigation into allegations of fraud and corruption. Securities Fraud Representing a medical device manufacturer in connection with a Securities and Exchange Commission enforcement proceeding. Represented individual under investigation for alleged insider trading. Matter recently closed by the Securities and Exchange Commission with no adverse action taken. Internal Investigations Conducted an internal investigation for multi-national corporation stemming from alleged violations of money laundering, structuring, and related financial reporting requirements. Conducted a variety of internal investigations of potential abuse and procurement fraud. Counseled clients on FCPA issues and compliance programs.","searchable_name":"Tinos Diamantatos","is_active":true,"featured":null,"publish_date":null,"expiration_date":null,"blog_featured":null,"published_by":176,"capability_group_featured":null,"home_page_featured":null},{"id":444013,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":7224,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eWith 15 years of experience, Amadou\u0026rsquo;s practice focusses on patent and trade secret litigation matters for innovative technology companies. Amadou\u0026rsquo;s clients span numerous industries in the technology sector including data analytics, AI, cloud computing, cryptocurrency, search engine, web accessibility, wireless networking, finance, consumer products, and apparel. Amadou\u0026rsquo;s clients span the full spectrum of the corporate lifecycle from Fortune 100 companies to C-suite executives to individual founders and startups. Amadou is acutely aware of the unique needs of clients at different stages of their corporate trajectory and tailors his approach to each matter with this in mind.\u0026nbsp;[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAmadou\u0026rsquo;s experience spans all stages of litigation, arbitration, and mediation through trial and other contested proceeding. He has extensive experience in numerous jurisdictions across the country including federal district courts, the International Trade Commission, the PTAB, and various arbitration tribunals. Amadou leverages his deep experience across numerous jurisdictions to develop holistic approaches for clients involved in complex multi-faceted litigations.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFor startup and earlier stage clients, Amadou serves as a strategic advisor on key intellectual property issues like freedom to operate, brand protection, patent portfolio development, trade secret protection, and licensing matters.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAmadou also counsels clients on a range of strategic IP dispute issues related to risk avoidance, mergers and acquisitions and other transactional matters.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAmadou routinely presents continuing legal education programs to clients on a broad array of issues related to IP, equity and inclusion in the legal profession and welcomes the opportunity to interface with clients through this programming. He is committed to civic engagement and has over a decade of experience serving on non-profit boards.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn recognition of his dedication to client service, the National Law Journal recognized Amadou as a Rising Star in 2024. In 2024, Amadou was also recognized by the Legal 500 US as recommended Lawyer for his work in Patent Litigation: Full Coverage. Super Lawyers has recognized Amadou as a Rising Star and Top-Rated Intellectual Property Litigator each year since 2017.\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"amadou-diaw","email":"adiaw@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":["\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ePRCM Advisers LLC, et al. v. Two Harbors Investment Corp., \u003c/em\u003eCase No. 20-cv-5649 (S.D.N.Y.) Representing Two Harbors Investment Corporation in a multi-faceted dispute involving claims for trade secret misappropriation.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eAudioEye, Inc. v. accessiBe Ltd.\u003c/em\u003e, Case No. 6:20-cv-997 (W.D. Tex.) Represented accessiBe in patent infringement litigation related to web accessibility technology.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eIn the Matter of Certain Computing Devices Utilizing Indexed Search Systems and Components Thereof\u003c/em\u003e, case number 337-TA-1389 represented the complainant X1 Discovery in a patent infringement litigation related to the use of certain index-based search technology.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eTQ Delta, LLC v. CommScope Holding Company, Inc. et al\u003c/em\u003e., Case No. 2:21-cv-310 (E.D. Tex.) Represented CommScope in patent infringement litigation related to certain signal impulse noise control and modulation technology.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eWeb 2.0 Technologies LLC v. Zendesk Inc.\u003c/em\u003e, Case No. 1:23-cv-00105 (D. Del.) Represented Zendesk in a patent infringement litigation related to cybersecurity techniques used in connection with online document collaboration.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eWeb 2.0 Technologies, LLC v. 37signals LLC., d/b/a Basecamp\u003c/em\u003e, Case No. 1:23-cv-230 (N.D. Ill.) Represented Basecamp in a patent infringement litigation related to cybersecurity techniques used in connection with online document collaboration.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eEasyweb Innovations LLC v. Bitpay Inc.\u003c/em\u003e, Case No. 1:24-cv-8582 (S.D.N.Y.) Represented BitPay in patent infringement litigation related to two-factor authentication technology.\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":5,"guid":"5.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":118,"guid":"118.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":103,"guid":"103.capabilities","index":4,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":107,"guid":"107.capabilities","index":5,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":133,"guid":"133.capabilities","index":6,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":106,"guid":"106.capabilities","index":7,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":102,"guid":"102.capabilities","index":8,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":105,"guid":"105.capabilities","index":9,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":763,"guid":"763.smart_tags","index":10,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1409,"guid":"1409.smart_tags","index":11,"source":"smartTags"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Diaw","nick_name":"Amadou","clerkships":[],"first_name":"Amadou","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":202,"law_schools":[{"id":2410,"meta":{"degree":"J.D.","honors":"","is_law_school":"1","graduation_date":"2009-01-01 00:00:00"},"order":1,"pin_order":null,"pin_expiration":null}],"middle_name":"Kilkenny","name_suffix":"","recognitions":[{"title":"Rising Star in DC","detail":"National Law Journal, 2024"},{"title":"Recognized Amadou as a recommended Lawyer for his work in Patent Litigation: Full Coverage ","detail":"Legal 500 US, 2024"},{"title":"Rising Star and Top-Rated Intellectual Property Attorney in DC","detail":"Super Lawyers, 2017-Present"},{"title":"Outstanding Achievement Award","detail":"Washington Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights and Urban Affairs"}],"linked_in_url":"https://www.linkedin.com/in/akd44/","seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eWith 15 years of experience, Amadou\u0026rsquo;s practice focusses on patent and trade secret litigation matters for innovative technology companies. Amadou\u0026rsquo;s clients span numerous industries in the technology sector including data analytics, AI, cloud computing, cryptocurrency, search engine, web accessibility, wireless networking, finance, consumer products, and apparel. Amadou\u0026rsquo;s clients span the full spectrum of the corporate lifecycle from Fortune 100 companies to C-suite executives to individual founders and startups. Amadou is acutely aware of the unique needs of clients at different stages of their corporate trajectory and tailors his approach to each matter with this in mind.\u0026nbsp;[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAmadou\u0026rsquo;s experience spans all stages of litigation, arbitration, and mediation through trial and other contested proceeding. He has extensive experience in numerous jurisdictions across the country including federal district courts, the International Trade Commission, the PTAB, and various arbitration tribunals. Amadou leverages his deep experience across numerous jurisdictions to develop holistic approaches for clients involved in complex multi-faceted litigations.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFor startup and earlier stage clients, Amadou serves as a strategic advisor on key intellectual property issues like freedom to operate, brand protection, patent portfolio development, trade secret protection, and licensing matters.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAmadou also counsels clients on a range of strategic IP dispute issues related to risk avoidance, mergers and acquisitions and other transactional matters.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAmadou routinely presents continuing legal education programs to clients on a broad array of issues related to IP, equity and inclusion in the legal profession and welcomes the opportunity to interface with clients through this programming. He is committed to civic engagement and has over a decade of experience serving on non-profit boards.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn recognition of his dedication to client service, the National Law Journal recognized Amadou as a Rising Star in 2024. In 2024, Amadou was also recognized by the Legal 500 US as recommended Lawyer for his work in Patent Litigation: Full Coverage. Super Lawyers has recognized Amadou as a Rising Star and Top-Rated Intellectual Property Litigator each year since 2017.\u003c/p\u003e","matters":["\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ePRCM Advisers LLC, et al. v. Two Harbors Investment Corp., \u003c/em\u003eCase No. 20-cv-5649 (S.D.N.Y.) Representing Two Harbors Investment Corporation in a multi-faceted dispute involving claims for trade secret misappropriation.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eAudioEye, Inc. v. accessiBe Ltd.\u003c/em\u003e, Case No. 6:20-cv-997 (W.D. Tex.) Represented accessiBe in patent infringement litigation related to web accessibility technology.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eIn the Matter of Certain Computing Devices Utilizing Indexed Search Systems and Components Thereof\u003c/em\u003e, case number 337-TA-1389 represented the complainant X1 Discovery in a patent infringement litigation related to the use of certain index-based search technology.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eTQ Delta, LLC v. CommScope Holding Company, Inc. et al\u003c/em\u003e., Case No. 2:21-cv-310 (E.D. Tex.) Represented CommScope in patent infringement litigation related to certain signal impulse noise control and modulation technology.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eWeb 2.0 Technologies LLC v. Zendesk Inc.\u003c/em\u003e, Case No. 1:23-cv-00105 (D. Del.) Represented Zendesk in a patent infringement litigation related to cybersecurity techniques used in connection with online document collaboration.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eWeb 2.0 Technologies, LLC v. 37signals LLC., d/b/a Basecamp\u003c/em\u003e, Case No. 1:23-cv-230 (N.D. Ill.) Represented Basecamp in a patent infringement litigation related to cybersecurity techniques used in connection with online document collaboration.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eEasyweb Innovations LLC v. Bitpay Inc.\u003c/em\u003e, Case No. 1:24-cv-8582 (S.D.N.Y.) Represented BitPay in patent infringement litigation related to two-factor authentication technology.\u003c/p\u003e"],"recognitions":[{"title":"Rising Star in DC","detail":"National Law Journal, 2024"},{"title":"Recognized Amadou as a recommended Lawyer for his work in Patent Litigation: Full Coverage ","detail":"Legal 500 US, 2024"},{"title":"Rising Star and Top-Rated Intellectual Property Attorney in DC","detail":"Super Lawyers, 2017-Present"},{"title":"Outstanding Achievement Award","detail":"Washington Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights and Urban Affairs"}]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":12964}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2025-12-05T05:02:42.000Z","updated_at":"2025-12-05T05:02:42.000Z","searchable_text":"Diaw{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Rising Star in DC\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"National Law Journal, 2024\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Recognized Amadou as a recommended Lawyer for his work in Patent Litigation: Full Coverage \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500 US, 2024\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Rising Star and Top-Rated Intellectual Property Attorney in DC\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Super Lawyers, 2017-Present\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Outstanding Achievement Award\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Washington Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights and Urban Affairs\"}{{ FIELD }}PRCM Advisers LLC, et al. v. Two Harbors Investment Corp., Case No. 20-cv-5649 (S.D.N.Y.) Representing Two Harbors Investment Corporation in a multi-faceted dispute involving claims for trade secret misappropriation.{{ FIELD }}AudioEye, Inc. v. accessiBe Ltd., Case No. 6:20-cv-997 (W.D. Tex.) Represented accessiBe in patent infringement litigation related to web accessibility technology.{{ FIELD }}In the Matter of Certain Computing Devices Utilizing Indexed Search Systems and Components Thereof, case number 337-TA-1389 represented the complainant X1 Discovery in a patent infringement litigation related to the use of certain index-based search technology.{{ FIELD }}TQ Delta, LLC v. CommScope Holding Company, Inc. et al., Case No. 2:21-cv-310 (E.D. Tex.) Represented CommScope in patent infringement litigation related to certain signal impulse noise control and modulation technology.{{ FIELD }}Web 2.0 Technologies LLC v. Zendesk Inc., Case No. 1:23-cv-00105 (D. Del.) Represented Zendesk in a patent infringement litigation related to cybersecurity techniques used in connection with online document collaboration.{{ FIELD }}Web 2.0 Technologies, LLC v. 37signals LLC., d/b/a Basecamp, Case No. 1:23-cv-230 (N.D. Ill.) Represented Basecamp in a patent infringement litigation related to cybersecurity techniques used in connection with online document collaboration.{{ FIELD }}Easyweb Innovations LLC v. Bitpay Inc., Case No. 1:24-cv-8582 (S.D.N.Y.) Represented BitPay in patent infringement litigation related to two-factor authentication technology.{{ FIELD }}With 15 years of experience, Amadou’s practice focusses on patent and trade secret litigation matters for innovative technology companies. Amadou’s clients span numerous industries in the technology sector including data analytics, AI, cloud computing, cryptocurrency, search engine, web accessibility, wireless networking, finance, consumer products, and apparel. Amadou’s clients span the full spectrum of the corporate lifecycle from Fortune 100 companies to C-suite executives to individual founders and startups. Amadou is acutely aware of the unique needs of clients at different stages of their corporate trajectory and tailors his approach to each matter with this in mind. \nAmadou’s experience spans all stages of litigation, arbitration, and mediation through trial and other contested proceeding. He has extensive experience in numerous jurisdictions across the country including federal district courts, the International Trade Commission, the PTAB, and various arbitration tribunals. Amadou leverages his deep experience across numerous jurisdictions to develop holistic approaches for clients involved in complex multi-faceted litigations.\nFor startup and earlier stage clients, Amadou serves as a strategic advisor on key intellectual property issues like freedom to operate, brand protection, patent portfolio development, trade secret protection, and licensing matters.\nAmadou also counsels clients on a range of strategic IP dispute issues related to risk avoidance, mergers and acquisitions and other transactional matters.\nAmadou routinely presents continuing legal education programs to clients on a broad array of issues related to IP, equity and inclusion in the legal profession and welcomes the opportunity to interface with clients through this programming. He is committed to civic engagement and has over a decade of experience serving on non-profit boards.\nIn recognition of his dedication to client service, the National Law Journal recognized Amadou as a Rising Star in 2024. In 2024, Amadou was also recognized by the Legal 500 US as recommended Lawyer for his work in Patent Litigation: Full Coverage. Super Lawyers has recognized Amadou as a Rising Star and Top-Rated Intellectual Property Litigator each year since 2017. Partner Rising Star in DC National Law Journal, 2024 Recognized Amadou as a recommended Lawyer for his work in Patent Litigation: Full Coverage  Legal 500 US, 2024 Rising Star and Top-Rated Intellectual Property Attorney in DC Super Lawyers, 2017-Present Outstanding Achievement Award Washington Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights and Urban Affairs Georgetown University  University of Virginia University of Virginia School of Law Maryland State Bar Association National Bar Association Washington D.C. Bar Association Intellectual Property Owners Association Board of Strength in Numbers DC, Board Member Georgetown University’s Hoya Hoop Club, Secretary of the Board of Directors Hoyas Unlimited, At-Large Board Member University of Virginia School of Law Foundation, Class Agent PRCM Advisers LLC, et al. v. Two Harbors Investment Corp., Case No. 20-cv-5649 (S.D.N.Y.) Representing Two Harbors Investment Corporation in a multi-faceted dispute involving claims for trade secret misappropriation. AudioEye, Inc. v. accessiBe Ltd., Case No. 6:20-cv-997 (W.D. Tex.) Represented accessiBe in patent infringement litigation related to web accessibility technology. In the Matter of Certain Computing Devices Utilizing Indexed Search Systems and Components Thereof, case number 337-TA-1389 represented the complainant X1 Discovery in a patent infringement litigation related to the use of certain index-based search technology. TQ Delta, LLC v. CommScope Holding Company, Inc. et al., Case No. 2:21-cv-310 (E.D. Tex.) Represented CommScope in patent infringement litigation related to certain signal impulse noise control and modulation technology. Web 2.0 Technologies LLC v. Zendesk Inc., Case No. 1:23-cv-00105 (D. Del.) Represented Zendesk in a patent infringement litigation related to cybersecurity techniques used in connection with online document collaboration. Web 2.0 Technologies, LLC v. 37signals LLC., d/b/a Basecamp, Case No. 1:23-cv-230 (N.D. Ill.) Represented Basecamp in a patent infringement litigation related to cybersecurity techniques used in connection with online document collaboration. Easyweb Innovations LLC v. Bitpay Inc., Case No. 1:24-cv-8582 (S.D.N.Y.) Represented BitPay in patent infringement litigation related to two-factor authentication technology.","searchable_name":"Amadou Kilkenny Diaw","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":426835,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":5832,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eBrian Donovan litigates\u0026nbsp;complex commercial disputes principally on behalf of large financial institutions and insurers.\u0026nbsp; He has worked extensively on both the plaintiff and defense side\u0026nbsp;in state and federal court, with a focus on antitrust, market manipulation, and general commercial and contractual disputes.\u0026nbsp; Many of these disputes have been\u0026nbsp;the subject of large class actions and multidistrict litigation proceedings.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBrian also maintains an active government investigations practice\u0026nbsp;and has represented clients in the financial services sector in investigations by state and federal regulators, including the SEC, Federal Reserve Board, state financial services regulators, and state attorneys general.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"brian-donovan","email":"bdonovan@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":["\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003elarge financial institution\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in connection with all civil litigation arising out of alleged LIBOR manipulation, alleging antitrust, commodities manipulation, and other claims.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003elarge financial institution\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in connection with all civil litigation arising out of alleged manipulation of gold, silver, and platinum/palladium benchmarks, alleging antitrust, commodities manipulation, and other claims.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003elarge financial institution\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in connection with a government investigation into its ESG-related financing, investing, and advisory activity.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003econsultant\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in connection with bank failures caused by rising interest rates.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003elarge financial institution\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in connection with civil litigation arising out of the servicing of its residential mortgage loan portfolio.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003einsurer\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in connection with a coverage-related dispute with a governmental agency.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003einsurer\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in connection with civil litigation relating to cost of insurance (\u0026ldquo;COI\u0026rdquo;) rates.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003emetals and chemical producer\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in connection with mass tort litigation arising out of injuries allegedly caused by a smelter in Peru.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eproperty and building owners\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in connection with civil litigation challenging the constitutionality of New York City emissions law.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003emajor entertainment venue\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003ein a dispute concerning access to the venue.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003emajor healthcare system\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in connection with a contractual dispute with a healthcare provider.\u003c/p\u003e"],"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[]},"expertise":[{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":11,"guid":"11.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":5,"guid":"5.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":107,"guid":"107.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":1,"guid":"1.capabilities","index":4,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":3,"guid":"3.capabilities","index":5,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":12,"guid":"12.capabilities","index":6,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":19,"guid":"19.capabilities","index":7,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":15,"guid":"15.capabilities","index":8,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":1185,"guid":"1185.smart_tags","index":9,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1261,"guid":"1261.smart_tags","index":10,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":133,"guid":"133.capabilities","index":11,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":1248,"guid":"1248.smart_tags","index":12,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":129,"guid":"129.capabilities","index":13,"source":"capabilities"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Donovan","nick_name":"Brian","clerkships":[{"name":"Law Clerk, Hon. Frank P. Geraci, U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York","years_held":"2015 - 2016"}],"first_name":"Brian","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":202,"law_schools":[{"id":512,"meta":{"degree":"J.D.","honors":"magna cum laude, Order of the Coif","is_law_school":1,"graduation_date":"2015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC"},"order":1,"pin_order":null,"pin_expiration":null}],"middle_name":" ","name_suffix":"","recognitions":null,"linked_in_url":"https://www.linkedin.com/in/brian-donovan-823a4a86/","seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eBrian Donovan litigates\u0026nbsp;complex commercial disputes principally on behalf of large financial institutions and insurers.\u0026nbsp; He has worked extensively on both the plaintiff and defense side\u0026nbsp;in state and federal court, with a focus on antitrust, market manipulation, and general commercial and contractual disputes.\u0026nbsp; Many of these disputes have been\u0026nbsp;the subject of large class actions and multidistrict litigation proceedings.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBrian also maintains an active government investigations practice\u0026nbsp;and has represented clients in the financial services sector in investigations by state and federal regulators, including the SEC, Federal Reserve Board, state financial services regulators, and state attorneys general.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e","matters":["\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003elarge financial institution\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in connection with all civil litigation arising out of alleged LIBOR manipulation, alleging antitrust, commodities manipulation, and other claims.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003elarge financial institution\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in connection with all civil litigation arising out of alleged manipulation of gold, silver, and platinum/palladium benchmarks, alleging antitrust, commodities manipulation, and other claims.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003elarge financial institution\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in connection with a government investigation into its ESG-related financing, investing, and advisory activity.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003econsultant\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in connection with bank failures caused by rising interest rates.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003elarge financial institution\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in connection with civil litigation arising out of the servicing of its residential mortgage loan portfolio.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003einsurer\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in connection with a coverage-related dispute with a governmental agency.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003einsurer\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in connection with civil litigation relating to cost of insurance (\u0026ldquo;COI\u0026rdquo;) rates.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003emetals and chemical producer\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in connection with mass tort litigation arising out of injuries allegedly caused by a smelter in Peru.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eproperty and building owners\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in connection with civil litigation challenging the constitutionality of New York City emissions law.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003emajor entertainment venue\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003ein a dispute concerning access to the venue.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003emajor healthcare system\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in connection with a contractual dispute with a healthcare provider.\u003c/p\u003e"]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":9363}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2025-05-26T04:57:17.000Z","updated_at":"2025-05-26T04:57:17.000Z","searchable_text":"Donovan{{ FIELD }}Representing a large financial institution in connection with all civil litigation arising out of alleged LIBOR manipulation, alleging antitrust, commodities manipulation, and other claims.{{ FIELD }}Representing a large financial institution in connection with all civil litigation arising out of alleged manipulation of gold, silver, and platinum/palladium benchmarks, alleging antitrust, commodities manipulation, and other claims.{{ FIELD }}Representing a large financial institution in connection with a government investigation into its ESG-related financing, investing, and advisory activity.{{ FIELD }}Representing a consultant in connection with bank failures caused by rising interest rates.{{ FIELD }}Representing a large financial institution in connection with civil litigation arising out of the servicing of its residential mortgage loan portfolio.{{ FIELD }}Representing an insurer in connection with a coverage-related dispute with a governmental agency.{{ FIELD }}Representing an insurer in connection with civil litigation relating to cost of insurance (“COI”) rates.{{ FIELD }}Representing a metals and chemical producer in connection with mass tort litigation arising out of injuries allegedly caused by a smelter in Peru.{{ FIELD }}Representing property and building owners in connection with civil litigation challenging the constitutionality of New York City emissions law.{{ FIELD }}Representing a major entertainment venue in a dispute concerning access to the venue.{{ FIELD }}Representing a major healthcare system in connection with a contractual dispute with a healthcare provider.{{ FIELD }}Brian Donovan litigates complex commercial disputes principally on behalf of large financial institutions and insurers.  He has worked extensively on both the plaintiff and defense side in state and federal court, with a focus on antitrust, market manipulation, and general commercial and contractual disputes.  Many of these disputes have been the subject of large class actions and multidistrict litigation proceedings.\nBrian also maintains an active government investigations practice and has represented clients in the financial services sector in investigations by state and federal regulators, including the SEC, Federal Reserve Board, state financial services regulators, and state attorneys general.  Partner Cornell University Cornell Law School Cornell University Cornell Law School New York Law Clerk, Hon. Frank P. Geraci, U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York Representing a large financial institution in connection with all civil litigation arising out of alleged LIBOR manipulation, alleging antitrust, commodities manipulation, and other claims. Representing a large financial institution in connection with all civil litigation arising out of alleged manipulation of gold, silver, and platinum/palladium benchmarks, alleging antitrust, commodities manipulation, and other claims. Representing a large financial institution in connection with a government investigation into its ESG-related financing, investing, and advisory activity. Representing a consultant in connection with bank failures caused by rising interest rates. Representing a large financial institution in connection with civil litigation arising out of the servicing of its residential mortgage loan portfolio. Representing an insurer in connection with a coverage-related dispute with a governmental agency. Representing an insurer in connection with civil litigation relating to cost of insurance (“COI”) rates. Representing a metals and chemical producer in connection with mass tort litigation arising out of injuries allegedly caused by a smelter in Peru. Representing property and building owners in connection with civil litigation challenging the constitutionality of New York City emissions law. Representing a major entertainment venue in a dispute concerning access to the venue. Representing a major healthcare system in connection with a contractual dispute with a healthcare provider.","searchable_name":"Brian Donovan","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":431968,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":542,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eGeoffrey Drake is a partner in our Product Liability \u0026amp; Mass Torts Practice and a member of the firm's\u0026nbsp;Policy Committee.\u0026nbsp;Geoffrey is also Chair of our Consumer Products \u0026amp; Automotive Litigation Team, which \u003cem\u003eLegal 500\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;has recognized as one of the top five such practices in the country. Before that, Geoffrey led our Pharmaceutical/Medical Device Litigation Team. Geoffrey represents life sciences,\u0026nbsp;automotive and transportation, technology\u0026nbsp;and energy/mining\u0026nbsp;companies in high-profile product liability, toxic tort\u0026nbsp;and\u0026nbsp;mass tort litigation, for which he has extensive experience litigating all phases of individual, MDL and class action cases, as well as serving as coordinating and strategic counsel in connection with large dockets of cases at the federal and state levels.\u0026nbsp;Clients recently described Geoffrey to \u003cem\u003eChambers USA \u003c/em\u003eas \"extraordinary,\" incredibly talented,\" a \"clear communicator,\" \"very bright,\" \"good on his feet,\" and \"a common-sense litigator.\" In particular, clients compliment Geoffrey's ability to bring \"strategic insight and creativity to the table\" while also doing \"an excellent job imposing order on chaos.\"[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAn experienced litigator, Geoffrey represents clients in nationwide, high-exposure product liability, mass tort, class action, toxic tort and whistleblower litigation, along with internal and government investigations. He litigates all phases of cases in federal and state courts nationwide, including in the most challenging jurisdictions for corporate clients. From the start, Geoffrey handles each matter with a view toward trial, considering how to communicate effectively to a jury a host of complex scientific, technical and regulatory issues. Geoffrey also has significant experience with legal project management, having helped structure, lead\u0026nbsp;and manage several large, cross-practice, cross-office matters, including to design and implement sophisticated budgets and alternative billing arrangements and manage the organization, workflow\u0026nbsp;and staffing plans to deliver the client exceptional and efficient services.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eGeoffrey chairs our nationally recognized Consumer Products \u0026amp; Automotive Litigation Team. And for five years before that, he chaired our leading Pharmaceutical \u0026amp; Medical Device Litigation Team. He is ranked by \u003cem\u003eChambers USA \u003c/em\u003ein Product Liability\u0026nbsp; (Band Two: Georgia) and has been recommended by\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eLegal 500\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eas a Key Lawyer in consumer products litigation, automotive litigation\u0026nbsp;and pharmaceutical and medical device litigation for the past several years.\u0026nbsp;In 2025, \u003cem\u003eLawdragon \u003c/em\u003erecognized Geoffrey on its inaugural list of the 500 Leading Global Entertainment, Sports \u0026amp; Media Lawyers. Geoffrey co-authored the leading treatise, \u003cem\u003eDrug and Device Product Liability Litigation Strategy, 2nd Edition\u003c/em\u003e (Oxford Univ. Press). In 2016, \u003cem\u003eLaw360\u003c/em\u003e listed Geoffrey as a \u0026ldquo;Rising Star\u0026rdquo; in product liability litigation, recognizing him as among top legal talent under the age of 40\u003cem\u003e.\u003c/em\u003e He was named to the \u003cem\u003eBenchmark Litigation \u003c/em\u003e\"40 \u0026amp; Under Hot List\u0026rdquo; for five\u0026nbsp;consecutive years, was named by \u003cem\u003eBenchmark Litigation\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eas a \"Future Star\" in 2018, and was named in 2018 to the \u003cem\u003eDaily Report\u0026rsquo;s \u003c/em\u003e\u0026ldquo;On the Rise\u0026rdquo; list of attorneys under the age of 40 who are expected to go far in the field. Geoffrey also served as a member of the inaugural Next Generation Advisory Board for Emory University's Institute for Complex Litigation and Mass Claims.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eGeoffrey was elected to a 3-year term on\u0026nbsp;the firm's Policy Committee in December 2024.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cbr data-cke-eol=\"1\" /\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"geoffrey-drake","email":"gdrake@kslaw.com","phone":"+1 404 824 3277","matters":["\u003cp\u003eLead Counsel to\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eTikTok Inc.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003ein nationwide litigation in which individual plaintiffs allege personal injuries and school districts and other governmental entities allege economic damages arising from adolescent use of various online communications services, including in the\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eIn re Social Media Adolescent Addiction/Personal Injury Litigation\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eMDL pending in the Northern District of California and the\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eIn re Social Media Cases\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;JCCP pending in Los Angeles County.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel to\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eActivision Blizzard\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in connection with nationwide lawsuits alleging a variety of personal injuries and psychiatric harms arising from addiction to playing video games. In 2024, Geoffrey successfully argued on behalf of more than a dozen game developers and platforms in opposition to a petition to consolidate then-pending lawsuits in a federal MDL.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eRenco Group\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;and\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eDoe Run Resources\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in mass tort litigation in two consolidated proceedings in federal court in St. Louis concerning personal-injury allegations by several thousand Peruvians citizens allegedly harmed by exposure to lead and other contaminants from a smelter in the Andean Highlands of Peru.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eCo-Coordinating and Strategic Counsel to a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eU.S. automobile manufacturer\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in connection with thousands of California consumer fraud and breach of warranty lawsuits; previously co-led team representing\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eanother U.S. automobile manufacturer\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in hundreds of consumer-fraud lawsuits in California.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eNational Counsel to\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eViking Group, Inc.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003ewith respect to claims and lawsuits relating to property damage arising from alleged manufacturing or design defects in fire suppression equipment.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003elarge industrial real estate company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in connection with hundreds of lawsuits in Georgia state courts alleging cancers and personal injuries, as well as property devaluation, from exposure to ethylene oxide from a lessee's medical-device-sterilization operation.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eServing as one of a core group of partners leading the national coordinating and trial counsel team representing\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eGlaxoSmithKline\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in nationwide litigation concerning allegations of suicidality and birth defects from use of the company\u0026rsquo;s antidepressant.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eColoplast\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;as part of the team serving as National Coordinating and Trial Counsel in nationwide product liability litigation relating to injuries allegedly caused by the company\u0026rsquo;s female pelvic mesh devices.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eMerck\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in multidistrict litigation (MDL) involving allegations of injuries from use of the company\u0026rsquo;s osteoporosis medication, including in three bellwether trials in two different MDLs. In\u0026nbsp;\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eGlynn v. Merck\u003c/em\u003e, the jury returned a complete defense verdict, after which the court granted judgment based on federal preemption.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented the\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003emanufacturer of FDA-cleared surgical gowns\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in nationwide litigation concerning the design, labeling, advertising and manufacture of the devices, including: a federal class action trial; a\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003equi tam\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;suit brought under the Federal False Claims Act in which the court granted defendants' motion to dismiss; and a federal Lanham Act lawsuit concerning allegations of false marketing.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eCo-led several 360-degree risk assessments for a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eleading pharmaceutical manufacturer\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003ein connection with the launch of new medications.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ehealthcare companies\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eand\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eemployers\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003ein multiple COVID-19-related wrongful death lawsuits.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ePurdue Pharma\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an action filed by the Kentucky Attorney General seeking Medicaid-related costs and other damages allegedly caused by the company\u0026rsquo;s marketing and promotion of its prescription pain medication.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eDaVita Healthcare Partners\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003equi tam\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;case brought under the federal False Claims Act claiming improper billing of Medicare for unnecessary wastage of two medications used to treat dialysis patients.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea leading automobile manufacturer\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in connection with government investigations and multi-jurisdictional civil litigation relating to a series of high-profile vehicle recalls.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented the\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eowner of petroleum pipeline terminals\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in federal MDL proceedings in an action filed by the Pennsylvania Attorney General involving claims of groundwater contamination from MTBE-containing gasoline.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eLincoln Electric Company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;and other manufacturers in cases involving claims from exposure to manganese fumes from welding rods, and serving as national discovery counsel in the litigation for\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eEutectic Corporation\u003c/strong\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eCooper Industries\u003c/strong\u003e, the successor of a former operator of a Superfund site, in litigation involving allegations of a variety of personal injuries from PCB exposure.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cdiv id=\"mySiteMain\" data-name=\"ContentPlaceHolderMain\"\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"ctl00_PageContentSection\" class=\"pageContentSection\"\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"fixedWidthMain\"\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ePhillips Services Corp.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a class action lawsuit involving nuisance allegations arising from the release of odors from a wastewater treatment facility.\u003cbr /\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"clear\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"pageFooterSection noindex\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/div\u003e"],"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[{"id":3271}]},"expertise":[{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":106,"guid":"106.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":3,"guid":"3.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":103,"guid":"103.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":761,"guid":"761.smart_tags","index":4,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":17,"guid":"17.capabilities","index":5,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":16,"guid":"16.capabilities","index":6,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":764,"guid":"764.smart_tags","index":7,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":762,"guid":"762.smart_tags","index":8,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":114,"guid":"114.capabilities","index":9,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":1256,"guid":"1256.smart_tags","index":10,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":118,"guid":"118.capabilities","index":11,"source":"capabilities"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Drake","nick_name":"Geoffrey","clerkships":[],"first_name":"Geoffrey","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":202,"law_schools":[],"middle_name":"M.","name_suffix":"","recognitions":[{"title":"Recommended/Key Lawyer in Product liability, mass tort and class action - defense: consumer products","detail":"Legal 500, 2024"},{"title":"Recommended/Key Lawyer in Product liability, mass tort and class action - defense: pharmaceuticals and medical devices","detail":"Legal 500, 2020-2024"},{"title":"Recommended/Key Lawyer in Product liability, mass tort and class action - defense: automotive","detail":"Legal 500, 2023-2024"},{"title":"Recommended/Key Lawyer in Rail And Road - Litigation and Regulation","detail":"Legal 500, 2024"},{"title":"500 Leading Global Entertainment, Sports \u0026 Media Lawyers ","detail":"Lawdragon, 2025"},{"title":"Named to Best Lawyers in America, Commercial Litigation","detail":"2023 -2025"},{"title":"Named to \"On the Rise\" list","detail":"Daily Report, 2018"},{"title":"Named to Product Liability Editorial Advisory Board","detail":"Law360, 2018"},{"title":"Named Future Star","detail":"Benchmark Litigation, 2018"},{"title":"Named to Under 40 Hot List","detail":"Benchmark Litigation, 2016-2020"},{"title":"Named a Rising Star in Product Liability Litigation","detail":"Law360, 2016"},{"title":"Appointed to Next Generation Advisory Board","detail":"Emory University's Institute for Complex Litigation and Mass Claims, 2016"},{"title":"Named a Georgia Super Lawyer - Rising Star","detail":"Super Lawyers and Atlanta Magazine, 2013–2020"},{"title":"Graduate of the International Association of Defense Counsel’s Trial Academy","detail":"2012"},{"title":"Order of the Coif","detail":"Vanderbilt University Law School, 2005"},{"title":"Best Oralist Award","detail":"Vanderbilt University Law School Intramural Moot Coot Competition, 2004"},{"title":"Executive Development Editor","detail":"Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law, 2005"}],"linked_in_url":"https://www.linkedin.com/in/geoffrey-drake-11504574/","seodescription":"Geoffrey Drake is a lawyer of the Product Liability \u0026 Mass Torts Practice. Read more about him.","primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eGeoffrey Drake is a partner in our Product Liability \u0026amp; Mass Torts Practice and a member of the firm's\u0026nbsp;Policy Committee.\u0026nbsp;Geoffrey is also Chair of our Consumer Products \u0026amp; Automotive Litigation Team, which \u003cem\u003eLegal 500\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;has recognized as one of the top five such practices in the country. Before that, Geoffrey led our Pharmaceutical/Medical Device Litigation Team. Geoffrey represents life sciences,\u0026nbsp;automotive and transportation, technology\u0026nbsp;and energy/mining\u0026nbsp;companies in high-profile product liability, toxic tort\u0026nbsp;and\u0026nbsp;mass tort litigation, for which he has extensive experience litigating all phases of individual, MDL and class action cases, as well as serving as coordinating and strategic counsel in connection with large dockets of cases at the federal and state levels.\u0026nbsp;Clients recently described Geoffrey to \u003cem\u003eChambers USA \u003c/em\u003eas \"extraordinary,\" incredibly talented,\" a \"clear communicator,\" \"very bright,\" \"good on his feet,\" and \"a common-sense litigator.\" In particular, clients compliment Geoffrey's ability to bring \"strategic insight and creativity to the table\" while also doing \"an excellent job imposing order on chaos.\"[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAn experienced litigator, Geoffrey represents clients in nationwide, high-exposure product liability, mass tort, class action, toxic tort and whistleblower litigation, along with internal and government investigations. He litigates all phases of cases in federal and state courts nationwide, including in the most challenging jurisdictions for corporate clients. From the start, Geoffrey handles each matter with a view toward trial, considering how to communicate effectively to a jury a host of complex scientific, technical and regulatory issues. Geoffrey also has significant experience with legal project management, having helped structure, lead\u0026nbsp;and manage several large, cross-practice, cross-office matters, including to design and implement sophisticated budgets and alternative billing arrangements and manage the organization, workflow\u0026nbsp;and staffing plans to deliver the client exceptional and efficient services.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eGeoffrey chairs our nationally recognized Consumer Products \u0026amp; Automotive Litigation Team. And for five years before that, he chaired our leading Pharmaceutical \u0026amp; Medical Device Litigation Team. He is ranked by \u003cem\u003eChambers USA \u003c/em\u003ein Product Liability\u0026nbsp; (Band Two: Georgia) and has been recommended by\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eLegal 500\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eas a Key Lawyer in consumer products litigation, automotive litigation\u0026nbsp;and pharmaceutical and medical device litigation for the past several years.\u0026nbsp;In 2025, \u003cem\u003eLawdragon \u003c/em\u003erecognized Geoffrey on its inaugural list of the 500 Leading Global Entertainment, Sports \u0026amp; Media Lawyers. Geoffrey co-authored the leading treatise, \u003cem\u003eDrug and Device Product Liability Litigation Strategy, 2nd Edition\u003c/em\u003e (Oxford Univ. Press). In 2016, \u003cem\u003eLaw360\u003c/em\u003e listed Geoffrey as a \u0026ldquo;Rising Star\u0026rdquo; in product liability litigation, recognizing him as among top legal talent under the age of 40\u003cem\u003e.\u003c/em\u003e He was named to the \u003cem\u003eBenchmark Litigation \u003c/em\u003e\"40 \u0026amp; Under Hot List\u0026rdquo; for five\u0026nbsp;consecutive years, was named by \u003cem\u003eBenchmark Litigation\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eas a \"Future Star\" in 2018, and was named in 2018 to the \u003cem\u003eDaily Report\u0026rsquo;s \u003c/em\u003e\u0026ldquo;On the Rise\u0026rdquo; list of attorneys under the age of 40 who are expected to go far in the field. Geoffrey also served as a member of the inaugural Next Generation Advisory Board for Emory University's Institute for Complex Litigation and Mass Claims.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eGeoffrey was elected to a 3-year term on\u0026nbsp;the firm's Policy Committee in December 2024.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cbr data-cke-eol=\"1\" /\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","matters":["\u003cp\u003eLead Counsel to\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eTikTok Inc.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003ein nationwide litigation in which individual plaintiffs allege personal injuries and school districts and other governmental entities allege economic damages arising from adolescent use of various online communications services, including in the\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eIn re Social Media Adolescent Addiction/Personal Injury Litigation\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eMDL pending in the Northern District of California and the\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eIn re Social Media Cases\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;JCCP pending in Los Angeles County.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel to\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eActivision Blizzard\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in connection with nationwide lawsuits alleging a variety of personal injuries and psychiatric harms arising from addiction to playing video games. In 2024, Geoffrey successfully argued on behalf of more than a dozen game developers and platforms in opposition to a petition to consolidate then-pending lawsuits in a federal MDL.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eRenco Group\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;and\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eDoe Run Resources\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in mass tort litigation in two consolidated proceedings in federal court in St. Louis concerning personal-injury allegations by several thousand Peruvians citizens allegedly harmed by exposure to lead and other contaminants from a smelter in the Andean Highlands of Peru.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eCo-Coordinating and Strategic Counsel to a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eU.S. automobile manufacturer\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in connection with thousands of California consumer fraud and breach of warranty lawsuits; previously co-led team representing\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eanother U.S. automobile manufacturer\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in hundreds of consumer-fraud lawsuits in California.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eNational Counsel to\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eViking Group, Inc.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003ewith respect to claims and lawsuits relating to property damage arising from alleged manufacturing or design defects in fire suppression equipment.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003elarge industrial real estate company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in connection with hundreds of lawsuits in Georgia state courts alleging cancers and personal injuries, as well as property devaluation, from exposure to ethylene oxide from a lessee's medical-device-sterilization operation.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eServing as one of a core group of partners leading the national coordinating and trial counsel team representing\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eGlaxoSmithKline\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in nationwide litigation concerning allegations of suicidality and birth defects from use of the company\u0026rsquo;s antidepressant.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eColoplast\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;as part of the team serving as National Coordinating and Trial Counsel in nationwide product liability litigation relating to injuries allegedly caused by the company\u0026rsquo;s female pelvic mesh devices.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eMerck\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in multidistrict litigation (MDL) involving allegations of injuries from use of the company\u0026rsquo;s osteoporosis medication, including in three bellwether trials in two different MDLs. In\u0026nbsp;\u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eGlynn v. Merck\u003c/em\u003e, the jury returned a complete defense verdict, after which the court granted judgment based on federal preemption.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented the\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003emanufacturer of FDA-cleared surgical gowns\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in nationwide litigation concerning the design, labeling, advertising and manufacture of the devices, including: a federal class action trial; a\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003equi tam\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;suit brought under the Federal False Claims Act in which the court granted defendants' motion to dismiss; and a federal Lanham Act lawsuit concerning allegations of false marketing.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eCo-led several 360-degree risk assessments for a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eleading pharmaceutical manufacturer\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003ein connection with the launch of new medications.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ehealthcare companies\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eand\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eemployers\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003ein multiple COVID-19-related wrongful death lawsuits.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ePurdue Pharma\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an action filed by the Kentucky Attorney General seeking Medicaid-related costs and other damages allegedly caused by the company\u0026rsquo;s marketing and promotion of its prescription pain medication.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eDaVita Healthcare Partners\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003equi tam\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;case brought under the federal False Claims Act claiming improper billing of Medicare for unnecessary wastage of two medications used to treat dialysis patients.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ea leading automobile manufacturer\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in connection with government investigations and multi-jurisdictional civil litigation relating to a series of high-profile vehicle recalls.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented the\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eowner of petroleum pipeline terminals\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in federal MDL proceedings in an action filed by the Pennsylvania Attorney General involving claims of groundwater contamination from MTBE-containing gasoline.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eLincoln Electric Company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;and other manufacturers in cases involving claims from exposure to manganese fumes from welding rods, and serving as national discovery counsel in the litigation for\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eEutectic Corporation\u003c/strong\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003eCooper Industries\u003c/strong\u003e, the successor of a former operator of a Superfund site, in litigation involving allegations of a variety of personal injuries from PCB exposure.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cdiv id=\"mySiteMain\" data-name=\"ContentPlaceHolderMain\"\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"ctl00_PageContentSection\" class=\"pageContentSection\"\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"fixedWidthMain\"\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong data-redactor-tag=\"strong\"\u003ePhillips Services Corp.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a class action lawsuit involving nuisance allegations arising from the release of odors from a wastewater treatment facility.\u003cbr /\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"clear\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"pageFooterSection noindex\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/div\u003e"],"recognitions":[{"title":"Recommended/Key Lawyer in Product liability, mass tort and class action - defense: consumer products","detail":"Legal 500, 2024"},{"title":"Recommended/Key Lawyer in Product liability, mass tort and class action - defense: pharmaceuticals and medical devices","detail":"Legal 500, 2020-2024"},{"title":"Recommended/Key Lawyer in Product liability, mass tort and class action - defense: automotive","detail":"Legal 500, 2023-2024"},{"title":"Recommended/Key Lawyer in Rail And Road - Litigation and Regulation","detail":"Legal 500, 2024"},{"title":"500 Leading Global Entertainment, Sports \u0026 Media Lawyers ","detail":"Lawdragon, 2025"},{"title":"Named to Best Lawyers in America, Commercial Litigation","detail":"2023 -2025"},{"title":"Named to \"On the Rise\" list","detail":"Daily Report, 2018"},{"title":"Named to Product Liability Editorial Advisory Board","detail":"Law360, 2018"},{"title":"Named Future Star","detail":"Benchmark Litigation, 2018"},{"title":"Named to Under 40 Hot List","detail":"Benchmark Litigation, 2016-2020"},{"title":"Named a Rising Star in Product Liability Litigation","detail":"Law360, 2016"},{"title":"Appointed to Next Generation Advisory Board","detail":"Emory University's Institute for Complex Litigation and Mass Claims, 2016"},{"title":"Named a Georgia Super Lawyer - Rising Star","detail":"Super Lawyers and Atlanta Magazine, 2013–2020"},{"title":"Graduate of the International Association of Defense Counsel’s Trial Academy","detail":"2012"},{"title":"Order of the Coif","detail":"Vanderbilt University Law School, 2005"},{"title":"Best Oralist Award","detail":"Vanderbilt University Law School Intramural Moot Coot Competition, 2004"},{"title":"Executive Development Editor","detail":"Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law, 2005"}]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":11790}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2025-07-14T18:55:33.000Z","updated_at":"2025-07-14T18:55:33.000Z","searchable_text":"Drake{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Recommended/Key Lawyer in Product liability, mass tort and class action - defense: consumer products\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500, 2024\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Recommended/Key Lawyer in Product liability, mass tort and class action - defense: pharmaceuticals and medical devices\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500, 2020-2024\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Recommended/Key Lawyer in Product liability, mass tort and class action - defense: automotive\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500, 2023-2024\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Recommended/Key Lawyer in Rail And Road - Litigation and Regulation\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500, 2024\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"500 Leading Global Entertainment, Sports \u0026amp; Media Lawyers \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Lawdragon, 2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named to Best Lawyers in America, Commercial Litigation\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"2023 -2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named to \\\"On the Rise\\\" list\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Daily Report, 2018\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named to Product Liability Editorial Advisory Board\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Law360, 2018\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named Future Star\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Benchmark Litigation, 2018\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named to Under 40 Hot List\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Benchmark Litigation, 2016-2020\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named a Rising Star in Product Liability Litigation\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Law360, 2016\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Appointed to Next Generation Advisory Board\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Emory University's Institute for Complex Litigation and Mass Claims, 2016\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named a Georgia Super Lawyer - Rising Star\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Super Lawyers and Atlanta Magazine, 2013–2020\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Graduate of the International Association of Defense Counsel’s Trial Academy\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"2012\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Order of the Coif\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Vanderbilt University Law School, 2005\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Best Oralist Award\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Vanderbilt University Law School Intramural Moot Coot Competition, 2004\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Executive Development Editor\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law, 2005\"}{{ FIELD }}Lead Counsel to TikTok Inc. in nationwide litigation in which individual plaintiffs allege personal injuries and school districts and other governmental entities allege economic damages arising from adolescent use of various online communications services, including in the In re Social Media Adolescent Addiction/Personal Injury Litigation MDL pending in the Northern District of California and the In re Social Media Cases JCCP pending in Los Angeles County.{{ FIELD }}Lead counsel to Activision Blizzard in connection with nationwide lawsuits alleging a variety of personal injuries and psychiatric harms arising from addiction to playing video games. In 2024, Geoffrey successfully argued on behalf of more than a dozen game developers and platforms in opposition to a petition to consolidate then-pending lawsuits in a federal MDL.{{ FIELD }}Representing Renco Group and Doe Run Resources in mass tort litigation in two consolidated proceedings in federal court in St. Louis concerning personal-injury allegations by several thousand Peruvians citizens allegedly harmed by exposure to lead and other contaminants from a smelter in the Andean Highlands of Peru.{{ FIELD }}Co-Coordinating and Strategic Counsel to a U.S. automobile manufacturer in connection with thousands of California consumer fraud and breach of warranty lawsuits; previously co-led team representing another U.S. automobile manufacturer in hundreds of consumer-fraud lawsuits in California.{{ FIELD }}National Counsel to Viking Group, Inc. with respect to claims and lawsuits relating to property damage arising from alleged manufacturing or design defects in fire suppression equipment.{{ FIELD }}Representing a large industrial real estate company in connection with hundreds of lawsuits in Georgia state courts alleging cancers and personal injuries, as well as property devaluation, from exposure to ethylene oxide from a lessee's medical-device-sterilization operation.{{ FIELD }}Serving as one of a core group of partners leading the national coordinating and trial counsel team representing GlaxoSmithKline in nationwide litigation concerning allegations of suicidality and birth defects from use of the company’s antidepressant.{{ FIELD }}Representing Coloplast as part of the team serving as National Coordinating and Trial Counsel in nationwide product liability litigation relating to injuries allegedly caused by the company’s female pelvic mesh devices.{{ FIELD }}Represented Merck in multidistrict litigation (MDL) involving allegations of injuries from use of the company’s osteoporosis medication, including in three bellwether trials in two different MDLs. In Glynn v. Merck, the jury returned a complete defense verdict, after which the court granted judgment based on federal preemption.{{ FIELD }}Represented the manufacturer of FDA-cleared surgical gowns in nationwide litigation concerning the design, labeling, advertising and manufacture of the devices, including: a federal class action trial; a qui tam suit brought under the Federal False Claims Act in which the court granted defendants' motion to dismiss; and a federal Lanham Act lawsuit concerning allegations of false marketing.{{ FIELD }}Co-led several 360-degree risk assessments for a leading pharmaceutical manufacturer in connection with the launch of new medications.{{ FIELD }}Representing healthcare companies and employers in multiple COVID-19-related wrongful death lawsuits.{{ FIELD }}Represented Purdue Pharma in an action filed by the Kentucky Attorney General seeking Medicaid-related costs and other damages allegedly caused by the company’s marketing and promotion of its prescription pain medication.{{ FIELD }}Represented DaVita Healthcare Partners in a qui tam case brought under the federal False Claims Act claiming improper billing of Medicare for unnecessary wastage of two medications used to treat dialysis patients.{{ FIELD }}Represented a leading automobile manufacturer in connection with government investigations and multi-jurisdictional civil litigation relating to a series of high-profile vehicle recalls.{{ FIELD }}Represented the owner of petroleum pipeline terminals in federal MDL proceedings in an action filed by the Pennsylvania Attorney General involving claims of groundwater contamination from MTBE-containing gasoline.{{ FIELD }}Represented Lincoln Electric Company and other manufacturers in cases involving claims from exposure to manganese fumes from welding rods, and serving as national discovery counsel in the litigation for Eutectic Corporation.{{ FIELD }}Represented Cooper Industries, the successor of a former operator of a Superfund site, in litigation involving allegations of a variety of personal injuries from PCB exposure.{{ FIELD }}\n\nRepresented Phillips Services Corp. in a class action lawsuit involving nuisance allegations arising from the release of odors from a wastewater treatment facility.\n \n\n\n\n {{ FIELD }}Geoffrey Drake is a partner in our Product Liability \u0026amp; Mass Torts Practice and a member of the firm's Policy Committee. Geoffrey is also Chair of our Consumer Products \u0026amp; Automotive Litigation Team, which Legal 500 has recognized as one of the top five such practices in the country. Before that, Geoffrey led our Pharmaceutical/Medical Device Litigation Team. Geoffrey represents life sciences, automotive and transportation, technology and energy/mining companies in high-profile product liability, toxic tort and mass tort litigation, for which he has extensive experience litigating all phases of individual, MDL and class action cases, as well as serving as coordinating and strategic counsel in connection with large dockets of cases at the federal and state levels. Clients recently described Geoffrey to Chambers USA as \"extraordinary,\" incredibly talented,\" a \"clear communicator,\" \"very bright,\" \"good on his feet,\" and \"a common-sense litigator.\" In particular, clients compliment Geoffrey's ability to bring \"strategic insight and creativity to the table\" while also doing \"an excellent job imposing order on chaos.\"\nAn experienced litigator, Geoffrey represents clients in nationwide, high-exposure product liability, mass tort, class action, toxic tort and whistleblower litigation, along with internal and government investigations. He litigates all phases of cases in federal and state courts nationwide, including in the most challenging jurisdictions for corporate clients. From the start, Geoffrey handles each matter with a view toward trial, considering how to communicate effectively to a jury a host of complex scientific, technical and regulatory issues. Geoffrey also has significant experience with legal project management, having helped structure, lead and manage several large, cross-practice, cross-office matters, including to design and implement sophisticated budgets and alternative billing arrangements and manage the organization, workflow and staffing plans to deliver the client exceptional and efficient services.\nGeoffrey chairs our nationally recognized Consumer Products \u0026amp; Automotive Litigation Team. And for five years before that, he chaired our leading Pharmaceutical \u0026amp; Medical Device Litigation Team. He is ranked by Chambers USA in Product Liability  (Band Two: Georgia) and has been recommended by Legal 500 as a Key Lawyer in consumer products litigation, automotive litigation and pharmaceutical and medical device litigation for the past several years. In 2025, Lawdragon recognized Geoffrey on its inaugural list of the 500 Leading Global Entertainment, Sports \u0026amp; Media Lawyers. Geoffrey co-authored the leading treatise, Drug and Device Product Liability Litigation Strategy, 2nd Edition (Oxford Univ. Press). In 2016, Law360 listed Geoffrey as a “Rising Star” in product liability litigation, recognizing him as among top legal talent under the age of 40. He was named to the Benchmark Litigation \"40 \u0026amp; Under Hot List” for five consecutive years, was named by Benchmark Litigation as a \"Future Star\" in 2018, and was named in 2018 to the Daily Report’s “On the Rise” list of attorneys under the age of 40 who are expected to go far in the field. Geoffrey also served as a member of the inaugural Next Generation Advisory Board for Emory University's Institute for Complex Litigation and Mass Claims.\nGeoffrey was elected to a 3-year term on the firm's Policy Committee in December 2024.\n Geoffrey Drake lawyer Partner Recommended/Key Lawyer in Product liability, mass tort and class action - defense: consumer products Legal 500, 2024 Recommended/Key Lawyer in Product liability, mass tort and class action - defense: pharmaceuticals and medical devices Legal 500, 2020-2024 Recommended/Key Lawyer in Product liability, mass tort and class action - defense: automotive Legal 500, 2023-2024 Recommended/Key Lawyer in Rail And Road - Litigation and Regulation Legal 500, 2024 500 Leading Global Entertainment, Sports \u0026amp; Media Lawyers  Lawdragon, 2025 Named to Best Lawyers in America, Commercial Litigation 2023 -2025 Named to \"On the Rise\" list Daily Report, 2018 Named to Product Liability Editorial Advisory Board Law360, 2018 Named Future Star Benchmark Litigation, 2018 Named to Under 40 Hot List Benchmark Litigation, 2016-2020 Named a Rising Star in Product Liability Litigation Law360, 2016 Appointed to Next Generation Advisory Board Emory University's Institute for Complex Litigation and Mass Claims, 2016 Named a Georgia Super Lawyer - Rising Star Super Lawyers and Atlanta Magazine, 2013–2020 Graduate of the International Association of Defense Counsel’s Trial Academy 2012 Order of the Coif Vanderbilt University Law School, 2005 Best Oralist Award Vanderbilt University Law School Intramural Moot Coot Competition, 2004 Executive Development Editor Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law, 2005 University of Virginia University of Virginia School of Law Vanderbilt University Vanderbilt University School of Law U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia Georgia Court of Appeals of Georgia Supreme Court of Georgia Lead Counsel to TikTok Inc. in nationwide litigation in which individual plaintiffs allege personal injuries and school districts and other governmental entities allege economic damages arising from adolescent use of various online communications services, including in the In re Social Media Adolescent Addiction/Personal Injury Litigation MDL pending in the Northern District of California and the In re Social Media Cases JCCP pending in Los Angeles County. Lead counsel to Activision Blizzard in connection with nationwide lawsuits alleging a variety of personal injuries and psychiatric harms arising from addiction to playing video games. In 2024, Geoffrey successfully argued on behalf of more than a dozen game developers and platforms in opposition to a petition to consolidate then-pending lawsuits in a federal MDL. Representing Renco Group and Doe Run Resources in mass tort litigation in two consolidated proceedings in federal court in St. Louis concerning personal-injury allegations by several thousand Peruvians citizens allegedly harmed by exposure to lead and other contaminants from a smelter in the Andean Highlands of Peru. Co-Coordinating and Strategic Counsel to a U.S. automobile manufacturer in connection with thousands of California consumer fraud and breach of warranty lawsuits; previously co-led team representing another U.S. automobile manufacturer in hundreds of consumer-fraud lawsuits in California. National Counsel to Viking Group, Inc. with respect to claims and lawsuits relating to property damage arising from alleged manufacturing or design defects in fire suppression equipment. Representing a large industrial real estate company in connection with hundreds of lawsuits in Georgia state courts alleging cancers and personal injuries, as well as property devaluation, from exposure to ethylene oxide from a lessee's medical-device-sterilization operation. Serving as one of a core group of partners leading the national coordinating and trial counsel team representing GlaxoSmithKline in nationwide litigation concerning allegations of suicidality and birth defects from use of the company’s antidepressant. Representing Coloplast as part of the team serving as National Coordinating and Trial Counsel in nationwide product liability litigation relating to injuries allegedly caused by the company’s female pelvic mesh devices. Represented Merck in multidistrict litigation (MDL) involving allegations of injuries from use of the company’s osteoporosis medication, including in three bellwether trials in two different MDLs. In Glynn v. Merck, the jury returned a complete defense verdict, after which the court granted judgment based on federal preemption. Represented the manufacturer of FDA-cleared surgical gowns in nationwide litigation concerning the design, labeling, advertising and manufacture of the devices, including: a federal class action trial; a qui tam suit brought under the Federal False Claims Act in which the court granted defendants' motion to dismiss; and a federal Lanham Act lawsuit concerning allegations of false marketing. Co-led several 360-degree risk assessments for a leading pharmaceutical manufacturer in connection with the launch of new medications. Representing healthcare companies and employers in multiple COVID-19-related wrongful death lawsuits. Represented Purdue Pharma in an action filed by the Kentucky Attorney General seeking Medicaid-related costs and other damages allegedly caused by the company’s marketing and promotion of its prescription pain medication. Represented DaVita Healthcare Partners in a qui tam case brought under the federal False Claims Act claiming improper billing of Medicare for unnecessary wastage of two medications used to treat dialysis patients. Represented a leading automobile manufacturer in connection with government investigations and multi-jurisdictional civil litigation relating to a series of high-profile vehicle recalls. Represented the owner of petroleum pipeline terminals in federal MDL proceedings in an action filed by the Pennsylvania Attorney General involving claims of groundwater contamination from MTBE-containing gasoline. Represented Lincoln Electric Company and other manufacturers in cases involving claims from exposure to manganese fumes from welding rods, and serving as national discovery counsel in the litigation for Eutectic Corporation. Represented Cooper Industries, the successor of a former operator of a Superfund site, in litigation involving allegations of a variety of personal injuries from PCB exposure. \n\nRepresented Phillips Services Corp. in a class action lawsuit involving nuisance allegations arising from the release of odors from a wastewater treatment facility.\n \n\n\n\n ","searchable_name":"Geoffrey M. Drake","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":446917,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":6695,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eChris represents clients in a broad range of litigation and regulatory matters, with an emphasis on representing financial institutions in courts and before international arbitration tribunals. He focuses on high value and highly sensitive and complex commercial trials, arbitrations, appeals, pre-litigation disputes, and government investigations.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eChris is regularly recognized in leading industry publications such as \u003cem\u003eLawdragon\u003c/em\u003e (included in \u0026ldquo;The 500 Leading Lawyers in America\u0026rdquo;), \u003cem\u003eChambers USA\u003c/em\u003e (New York Litigation/General Commercial), where a commentator described him as \"an outstanding civil litigator who is able to distil complicated issues into simple and compelling themes\";\u0026nbsp;and \u003cem\u003eThe Legal 500\u003c/em\u003e, where\u0026nbsp;commentators have called him \u0026ldquo;a star for international commercial litigation,\" \"a first-class legal mind,\" and a \"very strategic\" attorney who\u0026nbsp;\"excels at witness examination and argument.\"\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"christopher-duffy","email":"cduffy@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":["\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for a major financial institution in an international arbitration seeking more than $400 million of damages against a contractual counterparty. Leading press coverage described the outcome of the case as a \"big win\" and \"windfall\" for the client\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for a major financial institution in an ongoing international arbitration, including successful emergency arbitration proceedings, over control of digital infrastructure assets in South and Central America\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eCo-lead defense counsel for an international financial institution in a jury trial in New York state court; obtained a jury verdict eliminating all of the plaintiff\u0026rsquo;s claims for more than $100 million in damages and interest\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eCo-lead counsel for a publicly traded medical device company in defense of multiple ongoing federal securities lawsuits alleging misstatements in securities registration materials\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for an investment bank in an expedited trial in the Delaware Court of Chancery, and a subsequent appeal to the Delaware Supreme Court, in a closely watched indemnification dispute; prevailed at trial and on appeal in Delaware, and subsequently prevailed in a related federal court lawsuit, and in multiple appeals to the Third Circuit\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAmicus curiae counsel for the Society for Corporate Governance in multiple U.S. Supreme Court and Second Circuit appeals regarding high-profile securities law issues\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for an investment firm in expedited multi-court litigation over the control of two publicly traded REITs; prevailed against a motion for preliminary injunction and successfully resolved all claims\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for two hedge funds in an expedited nine-witness trial in Delaware Court of Chancery over a disputed multi-billion dollar stock authorization by a public company\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for an investment firm in proxy fight litigation over disputed board nominations; prevailed against multiple motions for injunctive relief and reached a successful settlement of all claims\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for a depositary institution in winning a ten-figure judgment in New York state court against a group of defaulted borrowers; obtained preliminary and permanent injunctions prohibiting the borrowers from transferring collateral intended to secure the disputed loans\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eCo-lead counsel for a private equity consortium in an expedited bench trial in Bankruptcy Court in the Southern District of Texas; obtained a full defense judgment dismissing all claims by equity holders seeking more than $700 million in damages from the private equity lender group\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for an asset management firm in multi-forum litigation regarding five renewable energy projects\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eCounsel for an investment bank in civil litigation brought by the New York Attorney General relating to the operation of the bank\u0026rsquo;s equity trading platform\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for an investment bank and several of its former employees in litigation and arbitration involving equity swaps\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eCo-lead counsel for a seed investor in Delaware Court of Chancery trial against a hedge fund; obtained a post-trial judgment that the hedge fund breached its fiduciary and contractual duties to the seed investor\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eCounsel in federal court jury trial involving claims brought by a public company seeking control of a private investment firm\u0026rsquo;s board of directors and billions of dollars of its assets; obtained jury verdict dismissing all claims\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for creditor in the Title III PROMESA restructuring of Puerto Rico\u0026rsquo;s Sales Tax Financing Corporation in pursuing and successfully settling claims arising from an ISDA-governed interest rate swap agreement\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel in multiple external investigations by the New York Attorney General, the SEC, FINRA, and other agencies\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon a rare appellate reversal of a jury verdict in a multibillion dollar fraud trial arising from a public-to-private M\u0026amp;A deal\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon a full dismissal of claims brought by a former top cable television executive asserting an ownership interest in a major cable network\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon the dismissal of all damages claims in a fiduciary duty lawsuit brought by a court-appointed bankruptcy trustee against a private equity firm and several of its principals, arising from the bankruptcy of one of the firm\u0026rsquo;s portfolio companies\u003c/p\u003e"],"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[]},"expertise":[{"id":19,"guid":"19.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":1,"guid":"1.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":129,"guid":"129.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":3,"guid":"3.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":38,"guid":"38.capabilities","index":4,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":5,"guid":"5.capabilities","index":5,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":14,"guid":"14.capabilities","index":6,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":11,"guid":"11.capabilities","index":7,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":107,"guid":"107.capabilities","index":8,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":118,"guid":"118.capabilities","index":9,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":1248,"guid":"1248.smart_tags","index":10,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":11,"source":"capabilities"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Duffy","nick_name":"Chris","clerkships":[],"first_name":"Christopher","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":202,"law_schools":[{"id":485,"meta":{"degree":"J.D.","honors":"","is_law_school":"1","graduation_date":"2001-01-01 00:00:00"},"order":1,"pin_order":null,"pin_expiration":null}],"middle_name":"E.","name_suffix":"","recognitions":[{"title":"Selected to the 500 Leading Lawyers in America ","detail":"Lawdragon, 2022–2026"},{"title":"Described as an \"outstanding civil litigator,\" a \"great courtroom presence,\" and \"a great writer and trial lawyer\" ","detail":"Chambers USA, Litigation: General Commercial (New York), 2022-2025"},{"title":"Described as a \"stand-out\" with \"a first-class legal mind\" who \"excels at witness examination and argument\" ","detail":"Legal 500 U.S., Dispute Resolution: General Commercial Disputes, 2022-2025"},{"title":"Recognized for International Arbitration","detail":"Legal 500 U.S., Dispute Resolution, 2025"},{"title":"Recognized for Financial Services Litigation","detail":"Legal 500 U.S., Dispute Resolution, 2025"},{"title":"Selected to the 500 Leading Litigators in America","detail":"Lawdragon, 2023-2025"},{"title":"Selected to the 500 Leading Global Antitrust \u0026 Competition Lawyers in America","detail":"Lawdragon, 2026"},{"title":"Recognized for Corporate Investigations \u0026 White-Collar Criminal Defense ","detail":"Legal 500 U.S., Dispute Resolution, 2021–2023"},{"title":"Selected to the New York Super Lawyers list ","detail":"Super Lawyers (Thomson Reuters), 2013–2025"}],"linked_in_url":null,"seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eChris represents clients in a broad range of litigation and regulatory matters, with an emphasis on representing financial institutions in courts and before international arbitration tribunals. He focuses on high value and highly sensitive and complex commercial trials, arbitrations, appeals, pre-litigation disputes, and government investigations.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eChris is regularly recognized in leading industry publications such as \u003cem\u003eLawdragon\u003c/em\u003e (included in \u0026ldquo;The 500 Leading Lawyers in America\u0026rdquo;), \u003cem\u003eChambers USA\u003c/em\u003e (New York Litigation/General Commercial), where a commentator described him as \"an outstanding civil litigator who is able to distil complicated issues into simple and compelling themes\";\u0026nbsp;and \u003cem\u003eThe Legal 500\u003c/em\u003e, where\u0026nbsp;commentators have called him \u0026ldquo;a star for international commercial litigation,\" \"a first-class legal mind,\" and a \"very strategic\" attorney who\u0026nbsp;\"excels at witness examination and argument.\"\u003c/p\u003e","matters":["\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for a major financial institution in an international arbitration seeking more than $400 million of damages against a contractual counterparty. Leading press coverage described the outcome of the case as a \"big win\" and \"windfall\" for the client\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for a major financial institution in an ongoing international arbitration, including successful emergency arbitration proceedings, over control of digital infrastructure assets in South and Central America\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eCo-lead defense counsel for an international financial institution in a jury trial in New York state court; obtained a jury verdict eliminating all of the plaintiff\u0026rsquo;s claims for more than $100 million in damages and interest\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eCo-lead counsel for a publicly traded medical device company in defense of multiple ongoing federal securities lawsuits alleging misstatements in securities registration materials\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for an investment bank in an expedited trial in the Delaware Court of Chancery, and a subsequent appeal to the Delaware Supreme Court, in a closely watched indemnification dispute; prevailed at trial and on appeal in Delaware, and subsequently prevailed in a related federal court lawsuit, and in multiple appeals to the Third Circuit\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eAmicus curiae counsel for the Society for Corporate Governance in multiple U.S. Supreme Court and Second Circuit appeals regarding high-profile securities law issues\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for an investment firm in expedited multi-court litigation over the control of two publicly traded REITs; prevailed against a motion for preliminary injunction and successfully resolved all claims\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for two hedge funds in an expedited nine-witness trial in Delaware Court of Chancery over a disputed multi-billion dollar stock authorization by a public company\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for an investment firm in proxy fight litigation over disputed board nominations; prevailed against multiple motions for injunctive relief and reached a successful settlement of all claims\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for a depositary institution in winning a ten-figure judgment in New York state court against a group of defaulted borrowers; obtained preliminary and permanent injunctions prohibiting the borrowers from transferring collateral intended to secure the disputed loans\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eCo-lead counsel for a private equity consortium in an expedited bench trial in Bankruptcy Court in the Southern District of Texas; obtained a full defense judgment dismissing all claims by equity holders seeking more than $700 million in damages from the private equity lender group\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for an asset management firm in multi-forum litigation regarding five renewable energy projects\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eCounsel for an investment bank in civil litigation brought by the New York Attorney General relating to the operation of the bank\u0026rsquo;s equity trading platform\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for an investment bank and several of its former employees in litigation and arbitration involving equity swaps\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eCo-lead counsel for a seed investor in Delaware Court of Chancery trial against a hedge fund; obtained a post-trial judgment that the hedge fund breached its fiduciary and contractual duties to the seed investor\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eCounsel in federal court jury trial involving claims brought by a public company seeking control of a private investment firm\u0026rsquo;s board of directors and billions of dollars of its assets; obtained jury verdict dismissing all claims\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel for creditor in the Title III PROMESA restructuring of Puerto Rico\u0026rsquo;s Sales Tax Financing Corporation in pursuing and successfully settling claims arising from an ISDA-governed interest rate swap agreement\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel in multiple external investigations by the New York Attorney General, the SEC, FINRA, and other agencies\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon a rare appellate reversal of a jury verdict in a multibillion dollar fraud trial arising from a public-to-private M\u0026amp;A deal\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon a full dismissal of claims brought by a former top cable television executive asserting an ownership interest in a major cable network\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon the dismissal of all damages claims in a fiduciary duty lawsuit brought by a court-appointed bankruptcy trustee against a private equity firm and several of its principals, arising from the bankruptcy of one of the firm\u0026rsquo;s portfolio companies\u003c/p\u003e"],"recognitions":[{"title":"Selected to the 500 Leading Lawyers in America ","detail":"Lawdragon, 2022–2026"},{"title":"Described as an \"outstanding civil litigator,\" a \"great courtroom presence,\" and \"a great writer and trial lawyer\" ","detail":"Chambers USA, Litigation: General Commercial (New York), 2022-2025"},{"title":"Described as a \"stand-out\" with \"a first-class legal mind\" who \"excels at witness examination and argument\" ","detail":"Legal 500 U.S., Dispute Resolution: General Commercial Disputes, 2022-2025"},{"title":"Recognized for International Arbitration","detail":"Legal 500 U.S., Dispute Resolution, 2025"},{"title":"Recognized for Financial Services Litigation","detail":"Legal 500 U.S., Dispute Resolution, 2025"},{"title":"Selected to the 500 Leading Litigators in America","detail":"Lawdragon, 2023-2025"},{"title":"Selected to the 500 Leading Global Antitrust \u0026 Competition Lawyers in America","detail":"Lawdragon, 2026"},{"title":"Recognized for Corporate Investigations \u0026 White-Collar Criminal Defense ","detail":"Legal 500 U.S., Dispute Resolution, 2021–2023"},{"title":"Selected to the New York Super Lawyers list ","detail":"Super Lawyers (Thomson Reuters), 2013–2025"}]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":11711}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2026-03-20T20:43:37.000Z","updated_at":"2026-03-20T20:43:37.000Z","searchable_text":"Duffy{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Selected to the 500 Leading Lawyers in America \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Lawdragon, 2022–2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Described as an \\\"outstanding civil litigator,\\\" a \\\"great courtroom presence,\\\" and \\\"a great writer and trial lawyer\\\" \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers USA, Litigation: General Commercial (New York), 2022-2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Described as a \\\"stand-out\\\" with \\\"a first-class legal mind\\\" who \\\"excels at witness examination and argument\\\" \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500 U.S., Dispute Resolution: General Commercial Disputes, 2022-2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Recognized for International Arbitration\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500 U.S., Dispute Resolution, 2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Recognized for Financial Services Litigation\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500 U.S., Dispute Resolution, 2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Selected to the 500 Leading Litigators in America\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Lawdragon, 2023-2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Selected to the 500 Leading Global Antitrust \u0026amp; Competition Lawyers in America\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Lawdragon, 2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Recognized for Corporate Investigations \u0026amp; White-Collar Criminal Defense \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500 U.S., Dispute Resolution, 2021–2023\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Selected to the New York Super Lawyers list \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Super Lawyers (Thomson Reuters), 2013–2025\"}{{ FIELD }}Lead counsel for a major financial institution in an international arbitration seeking more than $400 million of damages against a contractual counterparty. Leading press coverage described the outcome of the case as a \"big win\" and \"windfall\" for the client{{ FIELD }}Lead counsel for a major financial institution in an ongoing international arbitration, including successful emergency arbitration proceedings, over control of digital infrastructure assets in South and Central America{{ FIELD }}Co-lead defense counsel for an international financial institution in a jury trial in New York state court; obtained a jury verdict eliminating all of the plaintiff’s claims for more than $100 million in damages and interest{{ FIELD }}Co-lead counsel for a publicly traded medical device company in defense of multiple ongoing federal securities lawsuits alleging misstatements in securities registration materials{{ FIELD }}Lead counsel for an investment bank in an expedited trial in the Delaware Court of Chancery, and a subsequent appeal to the Delaware Supreme Court, in a closely watched indemnification dispute; prevailed at trial and on appeal in Delaware, and subsequently prevailed in a related federal court lawsuit, and in multiple appeals to the Third Circuit{{ FIELD }}Amicus curiae counsel for the Society for Corporate Governance in multiple U.S. Supreme Court and Second Circuit appeals regarding high-profile securities law issues{{ FIELD }}Lead counsel for an investment firm in expedited multi-court litigation over the control of two publicly traded REITs; prevailed against a motion for preliminary injunction and successfully resolved all claims{{ FIELD }}Lead counsel for two hedge funds in an expedited nine-witness trial in Delaware Court of Chancery over a disputed multi-billion dollar stock authorization by a public company{{ FIELD }}Lead counsel for an investment firm in proxy fight litigation over disputed board nominations; prevailed against multiple motions for injunctive relief and reached a successful settlement of all claims{{ FIELD }}Lead counsel for a depositary institution in winning a ten-figure judgment in New York state court against a group of defaulted borrowers; obtained preliminary and permanent injunctions prohibiting the borrowers from transferring collateral intended to secure the disputed loans{{ FIELD }}Co-lead counsel for a private equity consortium in an expedited bench trial in Bankruptcy Court in the Southern District of Texas; obtained a full defense judgment dismissing all claims by equity holders seeking more than $700 million in damages from the private equity lender group{{ FIELD }}Lead counsel for an asset management firm in multi-forum litigation regarding five renewable energy projects{{ FIELD }}Counsel for an investment bank in civil litigation brought by the New York Attorney General relating to the operation of the bank’s equity trading platform{{ FIELD }}Lead counsel for an investment bank and several of its former employees in litigation and arbitration involving equity swaps{{ FIELD }}Co-lead counsel for a seed investor in Delaware Court of Chancery trial against a hedge fund; obtained a post-trial judgment that the hedge fund breached its fiduciary and contractual duties to the seed investor{{ FIELD }}Counsel in federal court jury trial involving claims brought by a public company seeking control of a private investment firm’s board of directors and billions of dollars of its assets; obtained jury verdict dismissing all claims{{ FIELD }}Lead counsel for creditor in the Title III PROMESA restructuring of Puerto Rico’s Sales Tax Financing Corporation in pursuing and successfully settling claims arising from an ISDA-governed interest rate swap agreement{{ FIELD }}Lead counsel in multiple external investigations by the New York Attorney General, the SEC, FINRA, and other agencies{{ FIELD }}Won a rare appellate reversal of a jury verdict in a multibillion dollar fraud trial arising from a public-to-private M\u0026amp;A deal{{ FIELD }}Won a full dismissal of claims brought by a former top cable television executive asserting an ownership interest in a major cable network{{ FIELD }}Won the dismissal of all damages claims in a fiduciary duty lawsuit brought by a court-appointed bankruptcy trustee against a private equity firm and several of its principals, arising from the bankruptcy of one of the firm’s portfolio companies{{ FIELD }}Chris represents clients in a broad range of litigation and regulatory matters, with an emphasis on representing financial institutions in courts and before international arbitration tribunals. He focuses on high value and highly sensitive and complex commercial trials, arbitrations, appeals, pre-litigation disputes, and government investigations.\nChris is regularly recognized in leading industry publications such as Lawdragon (included in “The 500 Leading Lawyers in America”), Chambers USA (New York Litigation/General Commercial), where a commentator described him as \"an outstanding civil litigator who is able to distil complicated issues into simple and compelling themes\"; and The Legal 500, where commentators have called him “a star for international commercial litigation,\" \"a first-class legal mind,\" and a \"very strategic\" attorney who \"excels at witness examination and argument.\" Partner Selected to the 500 Leading Lawyers in America  Lawdragon, 2022–2026 Described as an \"outstanding civil litigator,\" a \"great courtroom presence,\" and \"a great writer and trial lawyer\"  Chambers USA, Litigation: General Commercial (New York), 2022-2025 Described as a \"stand-out\" with \"a first-class legal mind\" who \"excels at witness examination and argument\"  Legal 500 U.S., Dispute Resolution: General Commercial Disputes, 2022-2025 Recognized for International Arbitration Legal 500 U.S., Dispute Resolution, 2025 Recognized for Financial Services Litigation Legal 500 U.S., Dispute Resolution, 2025 Selected to the 500 Leading Litigators in America Lawdragon, 2023-2025 Selected to the 500 Leading Global Antitrust \u0026amp; Competition Lawyers in America Lawdragon, 2026 Recognized for Corporate Investigations \u0026amp; White-Collar Criminal Defense  Legal 500 U.S., Dispute Resolution, 2021–2023 Selected to the New York Super Lawyers list  Super Lawyers (Thomson Reuters), 2013–2025 University of Virginia  Columbia University Columbia 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 Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit 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 Eastern District of Wisconsin New York Texas New York Regional Board of the College Foundation of the University of Virginia Lead counsel for a major financial institution in an international arbitration seeking more than $400 million of damages against a contractual counterparty. Leading press coverage described the outcome of the case as a \"big win\" and \"windfall\" for the client Lead counsel for a major financial institution in an ongoing international arbitration, including successful emergency arbitration proceedings, over control of digital infrastructure assets in South and Central America Co-lead defense counsel for an international financial institution in a jury trial in New York state court; obtained a jury verdict eliminating all of the plaintiff’s claims for more than $100 million in damages and interest Co-lead counsel for a publicly traded medical device company in defense of multiple ongoing federal securities lawsuits alleging misstatements in securities registration materials Lead counsel for an investment bank in an expedited trial in the Delaware Court of Chancery, and a subsequent appeal to the Delaware Supreme Court, in a closely watched indemnification dispute; prevailed at trial and on appeal in Delaware, and subsequently prevailed in a related federal court lawsuit, and in multiple appeals to the Third Circuit Amicus curiae counsel for the Society for Corporate Governance in multiple U.S. Supreme Court and Second Circuit appeals regarding high-profile securities law issues Lead counsel for an investment firm in expedited multi-court litigation over the control of two publicly traded REITs; prevailed against a motion for preliminary injunction and successfully resolved all claims Lead counsel for two hedge funds in an expedited nine-witness trial in Delaware Court of Chancery over a disputed multi-billion dollar stock authorization by a public company Lead counsel for an investment firm in proxy fight litigation over disputed board nominations; prevailed against multiple motions for injunctive relief and reached a successful settlement of all claims Lead counsel for a depositary institution in winning a ten-figure judgment in New York state court against a group of defaulted borrowers; obtained preliminary and permanent injunctions prohibiting the borrowers from transferring collateral intended to secure the disputed loans Co-lead counsel for a private equity consortium in an expedited bench trial in Bankruptcy Court in the Southern District of Texas; obtained a full defense judgment dismissing all claims by equity holders seeking more than $700 million in damages from the private equity lender group Lead counsel for an asset management firm in multi-forum litigation regarding five renewable energy projects Counsel for an investment bank in civil litigation brought by the New York Attorney General relating to the operation of the bank’s equity trading platform Lead counsel for an investment bank and several of its former employees in litigation and arbitration involving equity swaps Co-lead counsel for a seed investor in Delaware Court of Chancery trial against a hedge fund; obtained a post-trial judgment that the hedge fund breached its fiduciary and contractual duties to the seed investor Counsel in federal court jury trial involving claims brought by a public company seeking control of a private investment firm’s board of directors and billions of dollars of its assets; obtained jury verdict dismissing all claims Lead counsel for creditor in the Title III PROMESA restructuring of Puerto Rico’s Sales Tax Financing Corporation in pursuing and successfully settling claims arising from an ISDA-governed interest rate swap agreement Lead counsel in multiple external investigations by the New York Attorney General, the SEC, FINRA, and other agencies Won a rare appellate reversal of a jury verdict in a multibillion dollar fraud trial arising from a public-to-private M\u0026amp;A deal Won a full dismissal of claims brought by a former top cable television executive asserting an ownership interest in a major cable network Won the dismissal of all damages claims in a fiduciary duty lawsuit brought by a court-appointed bankruptcy trustee against a private equity firm and several of its principals, arising from the bankruptcy of one of the firm’s portfolio companies","searchable_name":"Christopher E. Duffy (Chris)","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":445116,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":2811,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eElodie Dulac is a partner in King \u0026amp; Spalding\u0026rsquo;s Singapore office and a member of the firm\u0026rsquo;s International Arbitration group. Ms. Dulac has represented clients in commercial and investment arbitrations around the world, with a particular focus on Asia, where she has been based for 18 years. She has worked on international arbitrations under the rules of the ICC, ICSID, SCC, SIAC, and UNCITRAL.\u0026nbsp; In addition to her work as counsel, Ms. Dulac has been appointed as an arbitrator in over 30 arbitrations (HKIAC, ICC, SIAC, AIAC, KIAC and \u003cem\u003ead hoc\u003c/em\u003e).\u0026nbsp; She has particular expertise in energy, mining, joint venture/shareholder and investor-State disputes, as well as Asia-Africa disputes.\u0026nbsp;Ms. Dulac is a Singapore representative on the ICC Commission on Arbitration and ADR, a Vice-Chair of the Dispute Resolution and Arbitration Committee of the Inter-Pacific Bar Association and a Member of the Investment Arbitration Committee of the International Bar Association.\u0026nbsp; She has been named as a leading lawyer for international arbitration in Chambers Asia Pacific 2025, Legal500 2025, Arbitration Powerlist - Southeast Asia 2025, Lexology/Who's Who Legal 2024 (Thought Leader) and Lexology/Who's Who Legal Southeast Asia 2025.\u0026nbsp;[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMs. Dulac is admitted to practice in England \u0026amp; Wales (Solicitor-Advocate), Paris, France and Cambodia (Foreign Lawyer).\u0026nbsp; She is a Registered Foreign Lawyer at the Singapore International Commercial Court.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePro Bono:\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cul\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCivil Party Lawyer, Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (Khmer Rouge Tribunal), Phnom Penh, Cambodia\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eVisiting Lecturer, Settlement of International Disputes, Addis Ababa University School of Law, Ethiopia\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eVisiting Lecturer, International Arbitration Course, University of Bahir Dar, Ethiopia\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eVisiting Lecturer, International Investment Law Course, University of Mekelle, Ethiopia\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSecondment to the Office of the Prosecutor at the UN International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, Arusha, Tanzania\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ul\u003e","slug":"elodie-dulac","email":"edulac@kslaw.com","phone":"+65-8499-7283","matters":["\u003cp\u003eWon an award for declaratory relief worth over USD 4 billion in an ICC arbitration on behalf of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003etwo international oil majors\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eagainst a Southeast Asian government arising out of a revenue-allocation dispute under a gas service contract.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon an award for declaratory relief on behalf of a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eSoutheast Asian conglomerate\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an SIAC arbitration over share ownership in a joint venture that owns and manages the tollways in Manila.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ePrime Energy\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a multibillion dollar ICSID arbitration against the Republic of the Philippines under the Netherlands-Philippines bilateral investment treaty. The dispute concerns revenue allocation for the Malampaya gas to power project. We recently obtained provisional measures in favour of our client.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a major\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ePhilippine conglomerate\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an SIAC arbitration against its Indonesian joint venture partner, arising out of a dispute over shares in a Dutch venture that owns and operates the major toll roads in and around Manila.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eSoutheast Asian conglomerate\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in five SIAC arbitrations against European contractors in relation to an infrastructure project in Southeast Asia.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eEuropean company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an SIAC arbitration against a Chinese company arising out of the EU sanctions against Russia.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eChevron\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003ein multibillion dollar UNCITRAL arbitration against the Republic of the Philippines under the Switzerland-Philippines bilateral investment treaty. The dispute concerns revenue allocation for the Malampaya gas to power project.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;two Singapore companies\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003ein an investment treaty dispute against a North Asian State arising out of a mining project.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eSouth East Asian mining company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an SIAC arbitration in Singapore against its joint venture partner. The dispute concerns the termination of the joint venture agreement and the ownership of shares.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eSouth East Asian company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;against a South East Asian Government in an ad hoc arbitration arising out of a light rail project.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon an USD 85 million award for\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eConocoPhillips\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003ein an UNCITRAL arbitration concerning the proper tariff charged by a gas pipeline in Indonesia. The case involved the application of a contract various representations and warranties to hold the gas transporter liable for a tariff increase decreed by Indonesia's pipeline regulators.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eGaranti Koza\u003c/strong\u003e, a UK construction contractor, in an ICSID arbitration against Turkmenistan arising out of violations by Turkmenistan of its obligations under the UK- Turkmenistan BIT. Our client recently defeated Turkmenistan\u0026rsquo;s objection to jurisdiction in a pioneering decision by the Tribunal based on the BIT\u0026rsquo;s most favoured nation provision and prevailed on the merits.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eAstro All Asia Networks and South Asia Entertainment Holdings\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in two UNCITRAL arbitrations against India under bilateral investment treaties. The dispute concerns mistreatment by India of our clients\u0026rsquo; investments in the satellite television and radio sectors in India.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eAsian production sharing contractor\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in multiple disputes against the host government all subject to ad hoc arbitration in Asia.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eoil major\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in cost recovery disputes against an Asian host government.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eDow Chemical Company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an ICC arbitration in London against Petrochemical Industries Company, which is wholly-owned by the State of Kuwait, arising out of a wide-ranging joint venture agreement. English law governed. The tribunal awarded our client damages, interest and costs of over USD 2.48 billion \u0026ndash; one of the largest arbitration awards in history. Dow received USD 2.2 billion in a direct cash payment from PIC in May 2013.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eAsian construction contractor\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an ICC arbitration in Geneva against a European subcontractor concerning an LNG project in Asia.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003edownstream subsidiary\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;of an oil major in an ICC arbitration in Singapore against one of its Indonesian distributors. Indonesian law governed. Our client obtained the dismissal of all claims and an award of most of its costs.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eEuropean industrial company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an ICC arbitration in Zurich against a Korean company concerning a joint venture in China. Korean law governed.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003etwo Vietnamese textile companies\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an ICC arbitration in Singapore against a North American company concerning a joint venture in Vietnam. Vietnamese law governed.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eRussian industrial company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an ICC arbitration in Istanbul against a French company, arising out of the opposing party\u0026rsquo;s failure to close the sale of a business. Turkish law governed.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eUS private equity house\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an UNCITRAL arbitration in Singapore against an investee company from South Asia. Our client prevailed on all its claims.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eAsian automobile manufacturer\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an ICC arbitration in Singapore against a Middle Eastern distributor. Korean law governed. All claims against our client were dismissed and an award of costs was made in our client\u0026rsquo;s favor.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eSouth East Asian investor\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an arbitration against a South East Asian state under the ASEAN Investment Agreement. Over USD 100 million is in dispute.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eAfrican State\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an ICSID arbitration brought by European investor.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eNorth American investors\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an ICSID arbitration against Egypt.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eMalaysian Historical Salvors\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in its successful action to annul an ICSID award made in favour of Malaysia.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eSGS\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;as claimant in its ICSID arbitration against the Republic of the Philippines, resulting in a settlement of CHF 150 million (of CHF 174 million claimed).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eEuropean investors\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an SCC arbitration brought under the Energy Charter Treaty.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eExpert Consultant for the World Bank\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;on the reform of the international arbitration regime in Vietnam.\u003c/p\u003e"],"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[{"id":36}]},"expertise":[{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":14,"guid":"14.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":1,"guid":"1.smart_tags","index":2,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":102,"guid":"102.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":128,"guid":"128.capabilities","index":4,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":1237,"guid":"1237.smart_tags","index":5,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":107,"guid":"107.capabilities","index":6,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":1327,"guid":"1327.smart_tags","index":7,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1248,"guid":"1248.smart_tags","index":8,"source":"smartTags"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Dulac","nick_name":"Elodie","clerkships":[],"first_name":"Elodie","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":202,"law_schools":[],"middle_name":" ","name_suffix":"","recognitions":[{"title":"“Elodie’s command of investment treaty arbitration and commercial arbitration across Asia is unmatched.” ","detail":"LEGAL 500 ASIA-PACIFIC, INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION, SINGAPORE 2026"},{"title":"“Elodie Dulac brings an exceptional blend of analytical depth and client-focused pragmatism to complex int'l disputes.\" ","detail":"LEGAL 500 ASIA-PACIFIC, INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION, SINGAPORE 2026"},{"title":"“Elodie Dulac is our key contact point and has vast experience.” ","detail":"LEGAL 500 ASIA-PACIFIC, INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION, SINGAPORE 2026"},{"title":"\"Elodie Dulac has “laser-sharp intellect, strategic finesse, and genuine passion for advocacy.\" ","detail":"LEGAL 500 ASIA-PACIFIC, INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION, SINGAPORE 2026"},{"title":"“I have worked extensively with Elodie Dulac.\" ","detail":"LEGAL 500 ASIA-PACIFIC, FOREIGN FIRMS, PHILIPPINES 2026"},{"title":"\"Elodie is excellent in advocacy, especially in arbitration, and provides clear and concise advice to her clients.\" ","detail":"LEGAL 500 ASIA-PACIFIC, FOREIGN FIRMS, PHILIPPINES 2026"},{"title":"\"Elodie is a very good and well-rounded lawyer\"","detail":"CHAMBERS ASIA-PACIFIC, DISPUTE RESOLUTION: ARBITRATION, SINGAPORE 2026"},{"title":"Leading Partner - International Arbitration ","detail":"Legal 500 2025"},{"title":"\"Elodie Dulac noted for her expertise within the region in energy, mining, and investor state disputes\" ","detail":"Legal 500 Asia-Pacific, Foreign Firms: Philippines 2025"},{"title":"Leading individual - International Arbitration","detail":"Chambers Asia Pacific 2017-2025"},{"title":"“Elodie is a very good arbitration lawyer. She was on top of the matter and read into it well.” ","detail":"Chambers Asia Pacific, Dispute Resolution: Arbitration, Singapore 2025"},{"title":"“Elodie provides excellent support and reliable legal advice in relation to international arbitration matters.” ","detail":"Chambers Asia Pacific, Dispute Resolution: Arbitration, Singapore 2025"},{"title":"\"Elodie is an extremely knowledgeable arbitrator. She is highly recommended in international arbitration\"","detail":"LEXOLOGY/WHO'S WHO LEGAL ARBITRATION 2025"},{"title":"Thought Leader - International Arbitration ","detail":"LEXOLOGY/WHO'S WHO LEGAL ARBITRATION 2025"},{"title":"Leading individual ","detail":"LEXOLOGY/WHO'S WHO LEGAL SOUTHEAST ASIA 2025"},{"title":"\"Elodie is highly professional and delivers results.\"","detail":"Chambers Asia Pacific 2024"},{"title":"\"Elodie has niche expertise in investment treaty arbitrations\" ","detail":"Legal 500 Asia Pacific, Foreign Firms, Philippines 2024"},{"title":"“Very happy with Elodie’s skill in advocacy and communication\"","detail":"Legal 500 2024"},{"title":"\"[S]he impresses market observers with her 'skill in advocacy ''. \"She is outstanding in treaty arbitration\".","detail":"Who's Who Legal -- Thought Leaders -- Arbitration 2023"},{"title":"Global Leader","detail":"Who's Who Legal Arbitration 2023"},{"title":"\"Elodie has a very good reputation. She is a very sharp lawyer\"","detail":"Chambers Asia Pacific 2023"},{"title":"\"[Elodie] has real expertise in the field of investment arbitration\"","detail":"Chambers Asia Pacific 2023"},{"title":"\"[Elodie's] forte is investment treaty arbitrations\" ","detail":"Legal500 2023"},{"title":"Ranked","detail":"BEST LAWYERS 2023 - Singapore - Arbitration"},{"title":"Next Generation Partner","detail":"Legal500 2023 - International Arbitration Singapore"},{"title":"\"She is noted by market sources for her expertise in investor-state matters and described as a \"very, very good\" lawyer\"","detail":"Chambers Asia Pacific 2022"},{"title":"Top 10 Most-Highly Regarded Asia-Pacific wide","detail":"Arbitration Future Leaders - Who's Who Legal Arbitration 2021"},{"title":"\"Elodie Dulac is a 'reference in regional investor-state dispute\"","detail":"Who’s Who Legal: Southeast Asia 2021 - Arbitration 2021"},{"title":"\"One impressed source notes, 'She is the best chair so far that I have served with'\"","detail":"Who’s Who Legal: Southeast Asia 2021 -- Arbitration 2021"},{"title":"\"She is 'well recognised for investor state disputes'”","detail":"Arbitration Future Leaders -- Who's Who Legal 2020"},{"title":"Ranked Expert","detail":"Euromoney Expert Guides 2020 - Commercial Arbitration, Singapore"},{"title":"A \"very good lawyer and particularly good for investor-state work\"","detail":"ChambersAsia Pacific 2020"},{"title":"Ranked Expert","detail":"Euromoney Expert Guides 2020 - Women in Business Law, Singapore"},{"title":"\"[A] class act, with a world of experience and good instincts\"","detail":"Chambers Asia Pacific 2019"},{"title":"“Elodie Dulac is highlighted for her growing profile in investment treaty cases across the region”","detail":"Chambers Asia Pacific 2018"},{"title":"\"She is very, very good, a first-rate lawyer”","detail":"Chambers Asia Pacific 2018"},{"title":"An “‘outstanding practitioner’ who is recognised for her broad knowledge of investment law”","detail":"Arbitration Future Leaders -- Who's Who Legal 2018"}],"linked_in_url":"https://www.linkedin.com/in/elodie-dulac-23897363/","seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eElodie Dulac is a partner in King \u0026amp; Spalding\u0026rsquo;s Singapore office and a member of the firm\u0026rsquo;s International Arbitration group. Ms. Dulac has represented clients in commercial and investment arbitrations around the world, with a particular focus on Asia, where she has been based for 18 years. She has worked on international arbitrations under the rules of the ICC, ICSID, SCC, SIAC, and UNCITRAL.\u0026nbsp; In addition to her work as counsel, Ms. Dulac has been appointed as an arbitrator in over 30 arbitrations (HKIAC, ICC, SIAC, AIAC, KIAC and \u003cem\u003ead hoc\u003c/em\u003e).\u0026nbsp; She has particular expertise in energy, mining, joint venture/shareholder and investor-State disputes, as well as Asia-Africa disputes.\u0026nbsp;Ms. Dulac is a Singapore representative on the ICC Commission on Arbitration and ADR, a Vice-Chair of the Dispute Resolution and Arbitration Committee of the Inter-Pacific Bar Association and a Member of the Investment Arbitration Committee of the International Bar Association.\u0026nbsp; She has been named as a leading lawyer for international arbitration in Chambers Asia Pacific 2025, Legal500 2025, Arbitration Powerlist - Southeast Asia 2025, Lexology/Who's Who Legal 2024 (Thought Leader) and Lexology/Who's Who Legal Southeast Asia 2025.\u0026nbsp;[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMs. Dulac is admitted to practice in England \u0026amp; Wales (Solicitor-Advocate), Paris, France and Cambodia (Foreign Lawyer).\u0026nbsp; She is a Registered Foreign Lawyer at the Singapore International Commercial Court.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePro Bono:\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cul\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCivil Party Lawyer, Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (Khmer Rouge Tribunal), Phnom Penh, Cambodia\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eVisiting Lecturer, Settlement of International Disputes, Addis Ababa University School of Law, Ethiopia\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eVisiting Lecturer, International Arbitration Course, University of Bahir Dar, Ethiopia\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eVisiting Lecturer, International Investment Law Course, University of Mekelle, Ethiopia\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSecondment to the Office of the Prosecutor at the UN International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, Arusha, Tanzania\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ul\u003e","matters":["\u003cp\u003eWon an award for declaratory relief worth over USD 4 billion in an ICC arbitration on behalf of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003etwo international oil majors\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eagainst a Southeast Asian government arising out of a revenue-allocation dispute under a gas service contract.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon an award for declaratory relief on behalf of a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eSoutheast Asian conglomerate\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an SIAC arbitration over share ownership in a joint venture that owns and manages the tollways in Manila.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ePrime Energy\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a multibillion dollar ICSID arbitration against the Republic of the Philippines under the Netherlands-Philippines bilateral investment treaty. The dispute concerns revenue allocation for the Malampaya gas to power project. We recently obtained provisional measures in favour of our client.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a major\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003ePhilippine conglomerate\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an SIAC arbitration against its Indonesian joint venture partner, arising out of a dispute over shares in a Dutch venture that owns and operates the major toll roads in and around Manila.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eSoutheast Asian conglomerate\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in five SIAC arbitrations against European contractors in relation to an infrastructure project in Southeast Asia.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eEuropean company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an SIAC arbitration against a Chinese company arising out of the EU sanctions against Russia.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eChevron\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003ein multibillion dollar UNCITRAL arbitration against the Republic of the Philippines under the Switzerland-Philippines bilateral investment treaty. The dispute concerns revenue allocation for the Malampaya gas to power project.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;two Singapore companies\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003ein an investment treaty dispute against a North Asian State arising out of a mining project.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eSouth East Asian mining company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an SIAC arbitration in Singapore against its joint venture partner. The dispute concerns the termination of the joint venture agreement and the ownership of shares.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eSouth East Asian company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;against a South East Asian Government in an ad hoc arbitration arising out of a light rail project.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon an USD 85 million award for\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eConocoPhillips\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003ein an UNCITRAL arbitration concerning the proper tariff charged by a gas pipeline in Indonesia. The case involved the application of a contract various representations and warranties to hold the gas transporter liable for a tariff increase decreed by Indonesia's pipeline regulators.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eGaranti Koza\u003c/strong\u003e, a UK construction contractor, in an ICSID arbitration against Turkmenistan arising out of violations by Turkmenistan of its obligations under the UK- Turkmenistan BIT. Our client recently defeated Turkmenistan\u0026rsquo;s objection to jurisdiction in a pioneering decision by the Tribunal based on the BIT\u0026rsquo;s most favoured nation provision and prevailed on the merits.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eAstro All Asia Networks and South Asia Entertainment Holdings\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in two UNCITRAL arbitrations against India under bilateral investment treaties. The dispute concerns mistreatment by India of our clients\u0026rsquo; investments in the satellite television and radio sectors in India.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eAsian production sharing contractor\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in multiple disputes against the host government all subject to ad hoc arbitration in Asia.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eoil major\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in cost recovery disputes against an Asian host government.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eDow Chemical Company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an ICC arbitration in London against Petrochemical Industries Company, which is wholly-owned by the State of Kuwait, arising out of a wide-ranging joint venture agreement. English law governed. The tribunal awarded our client damages, interest and costs of over USD 2.48 billion \u0026ndash; one of the largest arbitration awards in history. Dow received USD 2.2 billion in a direct cash payment from PIC in May 2013.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eAsian construction contractor\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an ICC arbitration in Geneva against a European subcontractor concerning an LNG project in Asia.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003edownstream subsidiary\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;of an oil major in an ICC arbitration in Singapore against one of its Indonesian distributors. Indonesian law governed. Our client obtained the dismissal of all claims and an award of most of its costs.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eEuropean industrial company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an ICC arbitration in Zurich against a Korean company concerning a joint venture in China. Korean law governed.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003etwo Vietnamese textile companies\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an ICC arbitration in Singapore against a North American company concerning a joint venture in Vietnam. Vietnamese law governed.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eRussian industrial company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an ICC arbitration in Istanbul against a French company, arising out of the opposing party\u0026rsquo;s failure to close the sale of a business. Turkish law governed.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eUS private equity house\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an UNCITRAL arbitration in Singapore against an investee company from South Asia. Our client prevailed on all its claims.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eAsian automobile manufacturer\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an ICC arbitration in Singapore against a Middle Eastern distributor. Korean law governed. All claims against our client were dismissed and an award of costs was made in our client\u0026rsquo;s favor.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eSouth East Asian investor\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an arbitration against a South East Asian state under the ASEAN Investment Agreement. Over USD 100 million is in dispute.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eAfrican State\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an ICSID arbitration brought by European investor.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eNorth American investors\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an ICSID arbitration against Egypt.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eMalaysian Historical Salvors\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in its successful action to annul an ICSID award made in favour of Malaysia.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eSGS\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;as claimant in its ICSID arbitration against the Republic of the Philippines, resulting in a settlement of CHF 150 million (of CHF 174 million claimed).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eEuropean investors\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in an SCC arbitration brought under the Energy Charter Treaty.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eExpert Consultant for the World Bank\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;on the reform of the international arbitration regime in Vietnam.\u003c/p\u003e"],"recognitions":[{"title":"“Elodie’s command of investment treaty arbitration and commercial arbitration across Asia is unmatched.” ","detail":"LEGAL 500 ASIA-PACIFIC, INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION, SINGAPORE 2026"},{"title":"“Elodie Dulac brings an exceptional blend of analytical depth and client-focused pragmatism to complex int'l disputes.\" ","detail":"LEGAL 500 ASIA-PACIFIC, INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION, SINGAPORE 2026"},{"title":"“Elodie Dulac is our key contact point and has vast experience.” ","detail":"LEGAL 500 ASIA-PACIFIC, INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION, SINGAPORE 2026"},{"title":"\"Elodie Dulac has “laser-sharp intellect, strategic finesse, and genuine passion for advocacy.\" ","detail":"LEGAL 500 ASIA-PACIFIC, INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION, SINGAPORE 2026"},{"title":"“I have worked extensively with Elodie Dulac.\" ","detail":"LEGAL 500 ASIA-PACIFIC, FOREIGN FIRMS, PHILIPPINES 2026"},{"title":"\"Elodie is excellent in advocacy, especially in arbitration, and provides clear and concise advice to her clients.\" ","detail":"LEGAL 500 ASIA-PACIFIC, FOREIGN FIRMS, PHILIPPINES 2026"},{"title":"\"Elodie is a very good and well-rounded lawyer\"","detail":"CHAMBERS ASIA-PACIFIC, DISPUTE RESOLUTION: ARBITRATION, SINGAPORE 2026"},{"title":"Leading Partner - International Arbitration ","detail":"Legal 500 2025"},{"title":"\"Elodie Dulac noted for her expertise within the region in energy, mining, and investor state disputes\" ","detail":"Legal 500 Asia-Pacific, Foreign Firms: Philippines 2025"},{"title":"Leading individual - International Arbitration","detail":"Chambers Asia Pacific 2017-2025"},{"title":"“Elodie is a very good arbitration lawyer. She was on top of the matter and read into it well.” ","detail":"Chambers Asia Pacific, Dispute Resolution: Arbitration, Singapore 2025"},{"title":"“Elodie provides excellent support and reliable legal advice in relation to international arbitration matters.” ","detail":"Chambers Asia Pacific, Dispute Resolution: Arbitration, Singapore 2025"},{"title":"\"Elodie is an extremely knowledgeable arbitrator. She is highly recommended in international arbitration\"","detail":"LEXOLOGY/WHO'S WHO LEGAL ARBITRATION 2025"},{"title":"Thought Leader - International Arbitration ","detail":"LEXOLOGY/WHO'S WHO LEGAL ARBITRATION 2025"},{"title":"Leading individual ","detail":"LEXOLOGY/WHO'S WHO LEGAL SOUTHEAST ASIA 2025"},{"title":"\"Elodie is highly professional and delivers results.\"","detail":"Chambers Asia Pacific 2024"},{"title":"\"Elodie has niche expertise in investment treaty arbitrations\" ","detail":"Legal 500 Asia Pacific, Foreign Firms, Philippines 2024"},{"title":"“Very happy with Elodie’s skill in advocacy and communication\"","detail":"Legal 500 2024"},{"title":"\"[S]he impresses market observers with her 'skill in advocacy ''. \"She is outstanding in treaty arbitration\".","detail":"Who's Who Legal -- Thought Leaders -- Arbitration 2023"},{"title":"Global Leader","detail":"Who's Who Legal Arbitration 2023"},{"title":"\"Elodie has a very good reputation. She is a very sharp lawyer\"","detail":"Chambers Asia Pacific 2023"},{"title":"\"[Elodie] has real expertise in the field of investment arbitration\"","detail":"Chambers Asia Pacific 2023"},{"title":"\"[Elodie's] forte is investment treaty arbitrations\" ","detail":"Legal500 2023"},{"title":"Ranked","detail":"BEST LAWYERS 2023 - Singapore - Arbitration"},{"title":"Next Generation Partner","detail":"Legal500 2023 - International Arbitration Singapore"},{"title":"\"She is noted by market sources for her expertise in investor-state matters and described as a \"very, very good\" lawyer\"","detail":"Chambers Asia Pacific 2022"},{"title":"Top 10 Most-Highly Regarded Asia-Pacific wide","detail":"Arbitration Future Leaders - Who's Who Legal Arbitration 2021"},{"title":"\"Elodie Dulac is a 'reference in regional investor-state dispute\"","detail":"Who’s Who Legal: Southeast Asia 2021 - Arbitration 2021"},{"title":"\"One impressed source notes, 'She is the best chair so far that I have served with'\"","detail":"Who’s Who Legal: Southeast Asia 2021 -- Arbitration 2021"},{"title":"\"She is 'well recognised for investor state disputes'”","detail":"Arbitration Future Leaders -- Who's Who Legal 2020"},{"title":"Ranked Expert","detail":"Euromoney Expert Guides 2020 - Commercial Arbitration, Singapore"},{"title":"A \"very good lawyer and particularly good for investor-state work\"","detail":"ChambersAsia Pacific 2020"},{"title":"Ranked Expert","detail":"Euromoney Expert Guides 2020 - Women in Business Law, Singapore"},{"title":"\"[A] class act, with a world of experience and good instincts\"","detail":"Chambers Asia Pacific 2019"},{"title":"“Elodie Dulac is highlighted for her growing profile in investment treaty cases across the region”","detail":"Chambers Asia Pacific 2018"},{"title":"\"She is very, very good, a first-rate lawyer”","detail":"Chambers Asia Pacific 2018"},{"title":"An “‘outstanding practitioner’ who is recognised for her broad knowledge of investment law”","detail":"Arbitration Future Leaders -- Who's Who Legal 2018"}]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":4806}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2026-01-20T14:53:58.000Z","updated_at":"2026-01-20T14:53:58.000Z","searchable_text":"Dulac{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“Elodie’s command of investment treaty arbitration and commercial arbitration across Asia is unmatched.” \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"LEGAL 500 ASIA-PACIFIC, INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION, SINGAPORE 2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“Elodie Dulac brings an exceptional blend of analytical depth and client-focused pragmatism to complex int'l disputes.\\\" \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"LEGAL 500 ASIA-PACIFIC, INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION, SINGAPORE 2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“Elodie Dulac is our key contact point and has vast experience.” \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"LEGAL 500 ASIA-PACIFIC, INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION, SINGAPORE 2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"\\\"Elodie Dulac has “laser-sharp intellect, strategic finesse, and genuine passion for advocacy.\\\" \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"LEGAL 500 ASIA-PACIFIC, INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION, SINGAPORE 2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“I have worked extensively with Elodie Dulac.\\\" \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"LEGAL 500 ASIA-PACIFIC, FOREIGN FIRMS, PHILIPPINES 2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"\\\"Elodie is excellent in advocacy, especially in arbitration, and provides clear and concise advice to her clients.\\\" \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"LEGAL 500 ASIA-PACIFIC, FOREIGN FIRMS, PHILIPPINES 2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"\\\"Elodie is a very good and well-rounded lawyer\\\"\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"CHAMBERS ASIA-PACIFIC, DISPUTE RESOLUTION: ARBITRATION, SINGAPORE 2026\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Leading Partner - International Arbitration \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500 2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"\\\"Elodie Dulac noted for her expertise within the region in energy, mining, and investor state disputes\\\" \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500 Asia-Pacific, Foreign Firms: Philippines 2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Leading individual - International Arbitration\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers Asia Pacific 2017-2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“Elodie is a very good arbitration lawyer. She was on top of the matter and read into it well.” \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers Asia Pacific, Dispute Resolution: Arbitration, Singapore 2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“Elodie provides excellent support and reliable legal advice in relation to international arbitration matters.” \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers Asia Pacific, Dispute Resolution: Arbitration, Singapore 2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"\\\"Elodie is an extremely knowledgeable arbitrator. She is highly recommended in international arbitration\\\"\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"LEXOLOGY/WHO'S WHO LEGAL ARBITRATION 2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Thought Leader - International Arbitration \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"LEXOLOGY/WHO'S WHO LEGAL ARBITRATION 2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Leading individual \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"LEXOLOGY/WHO'S WHO LEGAL SOUTHEAST ASIA 2025\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"\\\"Elodie is highly professional and delivers results.\\\"\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers Asia Pacific 2024\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"\\\"Elodie has niche expertise in investment treaty arbitrations\\\" \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500 Asia Pacific, Foreign Firms, Philippines 2024\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“Very happy with Elodie’s skill in advocacy and communication\\\"\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500 2024\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"\\\"[S]he impresses market observers with her 'skill in advocacy ''. \\\"She is outstanding in treaty arbitration\\\".\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Who's Who Legal -- Thought Leaders -- Arbitration 2023\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Global Leader\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Who's Who Legal Arbitration 2023\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"\\\"Elodie has a very good reputation. She is a very sharp lawyer\\\"\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers Asia Pacific 2023\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"\\\"[Elodie] has real expertise in the field of investment arbitration\\\"\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers Asia Pacific 2023\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"\\\"[Elodie's] forte is investment treaty arbitrations\\\" \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal500 2023\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Ranked\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"BEST LAWYERS 2023 - Singapore - Arbitration\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Next Generation Partner\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal500 2023 - International Arbitration Singapore\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"\\\"She is noted by market sources for her expertise in investor-state matters and described as a \\\"very, very good\\\" lawyer\\\"\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers Asia Pacific 2022\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Top 10 Most-Highly Regarded Asia-Pacific wide\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Arbitration Future Leaders - Who's Who Legal Arbitration 2021\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"\\\"Elodie Dulac is a 'reference in regional investor-state dispute\\\"\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Who’s Who Legal: Southeast Asia 2021 - Arbitration 2021\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"\\\"One impressed source notes, 'She is the best chair so far that I have served with'\\\"\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Who’s Who Legal: Southeast Asia 2021 -- Arbitration 2021\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"\\\"She is 'well recognised for investor state disputes'”\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Arbitration Future Leaders -- Who's Who Legal 2020\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Ranked Expert\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Euromoney Expert Guides 2020 - Commercial Arbitration, Singapore\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"A \\\"very good lawyer and particularly good for investor-state work\\\"\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"ChambersAsia Pacific 2020\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Ranked Expert\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Euromoney Expert Guides 2020 - Women in Business Law, Singapore\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"\\\"[A] class act, with a world of experience and good instincts\\\"\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers Asia Pacific 2019\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"“Elodie Dulac is highlighted for her growing profile in investment treaty cases across the region”\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers Asia Pacific 2018\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"\\\"She is very, very good, a first-rate lawyer”\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers Asia Pacific 2018\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"An “‘outstanding practitioner’ who is recognised for her broad knowledge of investment law”\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Arbitration Future Leaders -- Who's Who Legal 2018\"}{{ FIELD }}Won an award for declaratory relief worth over USD 4 billion in an ICC arbitration on behalf of two international oil majors against a Southeast Asian government arising out of a revenue-allocation dispute under a gas service contract.{{ FIELD }}Won an award for declaratory relief on behalf of a Southeast Asian conglomerate in an SIAC arbitration over share ownership in a joint venture that owns and manages the tollways in Manila.{{ FIELD }}Representing Prime Energy in a multibillion dollar ICSID arbitration against the Republic of the Philippines under the Netherlands-Philippines bilateral investment treaty. The dispute concerns revenue allocation for the Malampaya gas to power project. We recently obtained provisional measures in favour of our client.{{ FIELD }}Representing a major Philippine conglomerate in an SIAC arbitration against its Indonesian joint venture partner, arising out of a dispute over shares in a Dutch venture that owns and operates the major toll roads in and around Manila.{{ FIELD }}Representing a Southeast Asian conglomerate in five SIAC arbitrations against European contractors in relation to an infrastructure project in Southeast Asia.{{ FIELD }}Representing a European company in an SIAC arbitration against a Chinese company arising out of the EU sanctions against Russia.{{ FIELD }}Representing Chevron in multibillion dollar UNCITRAL arbitration against the Republic of the Philippines under the Switzerland-Philippines bilateral investment treaty. The dispute concerns revenue allocation for the Malampaya gas to power project.{{ FIELD }}Representing two Singapore companies in an investment treaty dispute against a North Asian State arising out of a mining project.{{ FIELD }}Representing a South East Asian mining company in an SIAC arbitration in Singapore against its joint venture partner. The dispute concerns the termination of the joint venture agreement and the ownership of shares.{{ FIELD }}Representing a South East Asian company against a South East Asian Government in an ad hoc arbitration arising out of a light rail project.{{ FIELD }}Won an USD 85 million award for ConocoPhillips in an UNCITRAL arbitration concerning the proper tariff charged by a gas pipeline in Indonesia. The case involved the application of a contract various representations and warranties to hold the gas transporter liable for a tariff increase decreed by Indonesia's pipeline regulators.{{ FIELD }}Representing Garanti Koza, a UK construction contractor, in an ICSID arbitration against Turkmenistan arising out of violations by Turkmenistan of its obligations under the UK- Turkmenistan BIT. Our client recently defeated Turkmenistan’s objection to jurisdiction in a pioneering decision by the Tribunal based on the BIT’s most favoured nation provision and prevailed on the merits.{{ FIELD }}Representing Astro All Asia Networks and South Asia Entertainment Holdings in two UNCITRAL arbitrations against India under bilateral investment treaties. The dispute concerns mistreatment by India of our clients’ investments in the satellite television and radio sectors in India.{{ FIELD }}Representing an Asian production sharing contractor in multiple disputes against the host government all subject to ad hoc arbitration in Asia.{{ FIELD }}Representing an oil major in cost recovery disputes against an Asian host government.{{ FIELD }}Representing Dow Chemical Company in an ICC arbitration in London against Petrochemical Industries Company, which is wholly-owned by the State of Kuwait, arising out of a wide-ranging joint venture agreement. English law governed. The tribunal awarded our client damages, interest and costs of over USD 2.48 billion – one of the largest arbitration awards in history. Dow received USD 2.2 billion in a direct cash payment from PIC in May 2013.{{ FIELD }}Representing an Asian construction contractor in an ICC arbitration in Geneva against a European subcontractor concerning an LNG project in Asia.{{ FIELD }}Representing a downstream subsidiary of an oil major in an ICC arbitration in Singapore against one of its Indonesian distributors. Indonesian law governed. Our client obtained the dismissal of all claims and an award of most of its costs.{{ FIELD }}Representing a European industrial company in an ICC arbitration in Zurich against a Korean company concerning a joint venture in China. Korean law governed.{{ FIELD }}Representing two Vietnamese textile companies in an ICC arbitration in Singapore against a North American company concerning a joint venture in Vietnam. Vietnamese law governed.{{ FIELD }}Representing a Russian industrial company in an ICC arbitration in Istanbul against a French company, arising out of the opposing party’s failure to close the sale of a business. Turkish law governed.{{ FIELD }}Representing a US private equity house in an UNCITRAL arbitration in Singapore against an investee company from South Asia. Our client prevailed on all its claims.{{ FIELD }}Representing an Asian automobile manufacturer in an ICC arbitration in Singapore against a Middle Eastern distributor. Korean law governed. All claims against our client were dismissed and an award of costs was made in our client’s favor.{{ FIELD }}Representing a South East Asian investor in an arbitration against a South East Asian state under the ASEAN Investment Agreement. Over USD 100 million is in dispute.{{ FIELD }}Representing African State in an ICSID arbitration brought by European investor.{{ FIELD }}Representing North American investors in an ICSID arbitration against Egypt.{{ FIELD }}Representing Malaysian Historical Salvors in its successful action to annul an ICSID award made in favour of Malaysia.{{ FIELD }}Representing SGS as claimant in its ICSID arbitration against the Republic of the Philippines, resulting in a settlement of CHF 150 million (of CHF 174 million claimed).{{ FIELD }}Representing European investors in an SCC arbitration brought under the Energy Charter Treaty.{{ FIELD }}Expert Consultant for the World Bank on the reform of the international arbitration regime in Vietnam.{{ FIELD }}Elodie Dulac is a partner in King \u0026amp; Spalding’s Singapore office and a member of the firm’s International Arbitration group. Ms. Dulac has represented clients in commercial and investment arbitrations around the world, with a particular focus on Asia, where she has been based for 18 years. She has worked on international arbitrations under the rules of the ICC, ICSID, SCC, SIAC, and UNCITRAL.  In addition to her work as counsel, Ms. Dulac has been appointed as an arbitrator in over 30 arbitrations (HKIAC, ICC, SIAC, AIAC, KIAC and ad hoc).  She has particular expertise in energy, mining, joint venture/shareholder and investor-State disputes, as well as Asia-Africa disputes. Ms. Dulac is a Singapore representative on the ICC Commission on Arbitration and ADR, a Vice-Chair of the Dispute Resolution and Arbitration Committee of the Inter-Pacific Bar Association and a Member of the Investment Arbitration Committee of the International Bar Association.  She has been named as a leading lawyer for international arbitration in Chambers Asia Pacific 2025, Legal500 2025, Arbitration Powerlist - Southeast Asia 2025, Lexology/Who's Who Legal 2024 (Thought Leader) and Lexology/Who's Who Legal Southeast Asia 2025. \nMs. Dulac is admitted to practice in England \u0026amp; Wales (Solicitor-Advocate), Paris, France and Cambodia (Foreign Lawyer).  She is a Registered Foreign Lawyer at the Singapore International Commercial Court.\nPro Bono:\n\nCivil Party Lawyer, Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (Khmer Rouge Tribunal), Phnom Penh, Cambodia\nVisiting Lecturer, Settlement of International Disputes, Addis Ababa University School of Law, Ethiopia\nVisiting Lecturer, International Arbitration Course, University of Bahir Dar, Ethiopia\nVisiting Lecturer, International Investment Law Course, University of Mekelle, Ethiopia\nSecondment to the Office of the Prosecutor at the UN International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, Arusha, Tanzania\n Elodie Dulac Partner “Elodie’s command of investment treaty arbitration and commercial arbitration across Asia is unmatched.”  LEGAL 500 ASIA-PACIFIC, INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION, SINGAPORE 2026 “Elodie Dulac brings an exceptional blend of analytical depth and client-focused pragmatism to complex int'l disputes.\"  LEGAL 500 ASIA-PACIFIC, INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION, SINGAPORE 2026 “Elodie Dulac is our key contact point and has vast experience.”  LEGAL 500 ASIA-PACIFIC, INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION, SINGAPORE 2026 \"Elodie Dulac has “laser-sharp intellect, strategic finesse, and genuine passion for advocacy.\"  LEGAL 500 ASIA-PACIFIC, INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION, SINGAPORE 2026 “I have worked extensively with Elodie Dulac.\"  LEGAL 500 ASIA-PACIFIC, FOREIGN FIRMS, PHILIPPINES 2026 \"Elodie is excellent in advocacy, especially in arbitration, and provides clear and concise advice to her clients.\"  LEGAL 500 ASIA-PACIFIC, FOREIGN FIRMS, PHILIPPINES 2026 \"Elodie is a very good and well-rounded lawyer\" CHAMBERS ASIA-PACIFIC, DISPUTE RESOLUTION: ARBITRATION, SINGAPORE 2026 Leading Partner - International Arbitration  Legal 500 2025 \"Elodie Dulac noted for her expertise within the region in energy, mining, and investor state disputes\"  Legal 500 Asia-Pacific, Foreign Firms: Philippines 2025 Leading individual - International Arbitration Chambers Asia Pacific 2017-2025 “Elodie is a very good arbitration lawyer. She was on top of the matter and read into it well.”  Chambers Asia Pacific, Dispute Resolution: Arbitration, Singapore 2025 “Elodie provides excellent support and reliable legal advice in relation to international arbitration matters.”  Chambers Asia Pacific, Dispute Resolution: Arbitration, Singapore 2025 \"Elodie is an extremely knowledgeable arbitrator. She is highly recommended in international arbitration\" LEXOLOGY/WHO'S WHO LEGAL ARBITRATION 2025 Thought Leader - International Arbitration  LEXOLOGY/WHO'S WHO LEGAL ARBITRATION 2025 Leading individual  LEXOLOGY/WHO'S WHO LEGAL SOUTHEAST ASIA 2025 \"Elodie is highly professional and delivers results.\" Chambers Asia Pacific 2024 \"Elodie has niche expertise in investment treaty arbitrations\"  Legal 500 Asia Pacific, Foreign Firms, Philippines 2024 “Very happy with Elodie’s skill in advocacy and communication\" Legal 500 2024 \"[S]he impresses market observers with her 'skill in advocacy ''. \"She is outstanding in treaty arbitration\". Who's Who Legal -- Thought Leaders -- Arbitration 2023 Global Leader Who's Who Legal Arbitration 2023 \"Elodie has a very good reputation. She is a very sharp lawyer\" Chambers Asia Pacific 2023 \"[Elodie] has real expertise in the field of investment arbitration\" Chambers Asia Pacific 2023 \"[Elodie's] forte is investment treaty arbitrations\"  Legal500 2023 Ranked BEST LAWYERS 2023 - Singapore - Arbitration Next Generation Partner Legal500 2023 - International Arbitration Singapore \"She is noted by market sources for her expertise in investor-state matters and described as a \"very, very good\" lawyer\" Chambers Asia Pacific 2022 Top 10 Most-Highly Regarded Asia-Pacific wide Arbitration Future Leaders - Who's Who Legal Arbitration 2021 \"Elodie Dulac is a 'reference in regional investor-state dispute\" Who’s Who Legal: Southeast Asia 2021 - Arbitration 2021 \"One impressed source notes, 'She is the best chair so far that I have served with'\" Who’s Who Legal: Southeast Asia 2021 -- Arbitration 2021 \"She is 'well recognised for investor state disputes'” Arbitration Future Leaders -- Who's Who Legal 2020 Ranked Expert Euromoney Expert Guides 2020 - Commercial Arbitration, Singapore A \"very good lawyer and particularly good for investor-state work\" ChambersAsia Pacific 2020 Ranked Expert Euromoney Expert Guides 2020 - Women in Business Law, Singapore \"[A] class act, with a world of experience and good instincts\" Chambers Asia Pacific 2019 “Elodie Dulac is highlighted for her growing profile in investment treaty cases across the region” Chambers Asia Pacific 2018 \"She is very, very good, a first-rate lawyer” Chambers Asia Pacific 2018 An “‘outstanding practitioner’ who is recognised for her broad knowledge of investment law” Arbitration Future Leaders -- Who's Who Legal 2018 Université Paris I Panthéon-Sorbonne  King's College, University of London, UK  England and Wales Paris Cambodia Foreign Lawyer Singapore International Commercial Court, Registered Foreign Lawyer Asia-Pacific Forum for International Arbitration (AFIA), Member of Executive Committee Member, Panel of Arbitrators, Thailand Arbitration Centre Member, Panel of Arbitrators, Japan Commercial Arbitration Association Singapore representative, ICC Commission on Arbitration and ADR Member, Singapore International Arbitration Centre’s Users Council Member, Panel of Arbitrators, Singapore International Arbitration Centre Member, List of Arbitrators, Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre Member, Panel of Arbitrators, Asian International Arbitration Centre (former KLRCA) Regional Leader, Legal and Business Women for Africa (www.labfa.org) Founding Member, East Africa International Arbitration Conference Member, Panel of Arbitrators, Kigali International Arbitration Centre Member, Panel of Arbitrators, Cairo Regional Centre for International Commercial Arbitration Won an award for declaratory relief worth over USD 4 billion in an ICC arbitration on behalf of two international oil majors against a Southeast Asian government arising out of a revenue-allocation dispute under a gas service contract. Won an award for declaratory relief on behalf of a Southeast Asian conglomerate in an SIAC arbitration over share ownership in a joint venture that owns and manages the tollways in Manila. Representing Prime Energy in a multibillion dollar ICSID arbitration against the Republic of the Philippines under the Netherlands-Philippines bilateral investment treaty. The dispute concerns revenue allocation for the Malampaya gas to power project. We recently obtained provisional measures in favour of our client. Representing a major Philippine conglomerate in an SIAC arbitration against its Indonesian joint venture partner, arising out of a dispute over shares in a Dutch venture that owns and operates the major toll roads in and around Manila. Representing a Southeast Asian conglomerate in five SIAC arbitrations against European contractors in relation to an infrastructure project in Southeast Asia. Representing a European company in an SIAC arbitration against a Chinese company arising out of the EU sanctions against Russia. Representing Chevron in multibillion dollar UNCITRAL arbitration against the Republic of the Philippines under the Switzerland-Philippines bilateral investment treaty. The dispute concerns revenue allocation for the Malampaya gas to power project. Representing two Singapore companies in an investment treaty dispute against a North Asian State arising out of a mining project. Representing a South East Asian mining company in an SIAC arbitration in Singapore against its joint venture partner. The dispute concerns the termination of the joint venture agreement and the ownership of shares. Representing a South East Asian company against a South East Asian Government in an ad hoc arbitration arising out of a light rail project. Won an USD 85 million award for ConocoPhillips in an UNCITRAL arbitration concerning the proper tariff charged by a gas pipeline in Indonesia. The case involved the application of a contract various representations and warranties to hold the gas transporter liable for a tariff increase decreed by Indonesia's pipeline regulators. Representing Garanti Koza, a UK construction contractor, in an ICSID arbitration against Turkmenistan arising out of violations by Turkmenistan of its obligations under the UK- Turkmenistan BIT. Our client recently defeated Turkmenistan’s objection to jurisdiction in a pioneering decision by the Tribunal based on the BIT’s most favoured nation provision and prevailed on the merits. Representing Astro All Asia Networks and South Asia Entertainment Holdings in two UNCITRAL arbitrations against India under bilateral investment treaties. The dispute concerns mistreatment by India of our clients’ investments in the satellite television and radio sectors in India. Representing an Asian production sharing contractor in multiple disputes against the host government all subject to ad hoc arbitration in Asia. Representing an oil major in cost recovery disputes against an Asian host government. Representing Dow Chemical Company in an ICC arbitration in London against Petrochemical Industries Company, which is wholly-owned by the State of Kuwait, arising out of a wide-ranging joint venture agreement. English law governed. The tribunal awarded our client damages, interest and costs of over USD 2.48 billion – one of the largest arbitration awards in history. Dow received USD 2.2 billion in a direct cash payment from PIC in May 2013. Representing an Asian construction contractor in an ICC arbitration in Geneva against a European subcontractor concerning an LNG project in Asia. Representing a downstream subsidiary of an oil major in an ICC arbitration in Singapore against one of its Indonesian distributors. Indonesian law governed. Our client obtained the dismissal of all claims and an award of most of its costs. Representing a European industrial company in an ICC arbitration in Zurich against a Korean company concerning a joint venture in China. Korean law governed. Representing two Vietnamese textile companies in an ICC arbitration in Singapore against a North American company concerning a joint venture in Vietnam. Vietnamese law governed. Representing a Russian industrial company in an ICC arbitration in Istanbul against a French company, arising out of the opposing party’s failure to close the sale of a business. Turkish law governed. Representing a US private equity house in an UNCITRAL arbitration in Singapore against an investee company from South Asia. Our client prevailed on all its claims. Representing an Asian automobile manufacturer in an ICC arbitration in Singapore against a Middle Eastern distributor. Korean law governed. All claims against our client were dismissed and an award of costs was made in our client’s favor. Representing a South East Asian investor in an arbitration against a South East Asian state under the ASEAN Investment Agreement. Over USD 100 million is in dispute. Representing African State in an ICSID arbitration brought by European investor. Representing North American investors in an ICSID arbitration against Egypt. Representing Malaysian Historical Salvors in its successful action to annul an ICSID award made in favour of Malaysia. Representing SGS as claimant in its ICSID arbitration against the Republic of the Philippines, resulting in a settlement of CHF 150 million (of CHF 174 million claimed). Representing European investors in an SCC arbitration brought under the Energy Charter Treaty. Expert Consultant for the World Bank on the reform of the international arbitration regime in Vietnam.","searchable_name":"Elodie Dulac","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":442362,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":841,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eBill Durham specializes in complex, high-stakes product litigation. A partner in our Mass Tort and Toxic Tort and Environmental practices, Bill represents product manufacturers in a variety of matters.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBill defends product manufacturers, often in what are known to be challenging jurisdictions. As an example, he has represented R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company in numerous product liability lawsuits filed in Florida, Mississippi, Louisiana and Missouri. He also has served as lead counsel in numerous appeals in state and federal courts.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn individual cases and class actions, Bill has managed every aspect of complex high-stakes litigation, from strategic planning and preparation through discovery, pretrial motions, trial and appeal. He identifies and works cooperatively with national, regional and local counsel for codefendants.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBill was recognized in 2013 by \u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eLegal 500\u003c/em\u003e for Litigation \u0026mdash; Product Liability and Mass Tort Defense: Consumer Products.\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"william-durham","email":"bdurham@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":null,"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[{"id":89}]},"expertise":[{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":2,"guid":"2.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":3,"guid":"3.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":17,"guid":"17.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":16,"guid":"16.capabilities","index":4,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":764,"guid":"764.smart_tags","index":5,"source":"smartTags"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Durham","nick_name":"Bill","clerkships":[{"name":"Judicial Clerk, Clement F. Haynsworth, Jr., U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit","years_held":"1985 - 1986"}],"first_name":"William","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":101,"law_schools":[],"middle_name":"L.","name_suffix":"II","recognitions":null,"linked_in_url":null,"seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eBill Durham specializes in complex, high-stakes product litigation. A partner in our Mass Tort and Toxic Tort and Environmental practices, Bill represents product manufacturers in a variety of matters.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBill defends product manufacturers, often in what are known to be challenging jurisdictions. As an example, he has represented R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company in numerous product liability lawsuits filed in Florida, Mississippi, Louisiana and Missouri. He also has served as lead counsel in numerous appeals in state and federal courts.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn individual cases and class actions, Bill has managed every aspect of complex high-stakes litigation, from strategic planning and preparation through discovery, pretrial motions, trial and appeal. He identifies and works cooperatively with national, regional and local counsel for codefendants.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBill was recognized in 2013 by \u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eLegal 500\u003c/em\u003e for Litigation \u0026mdash; Product Liability and Mass Tort Defense: Consumer Products.\u003c/p\u003e"},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":6381}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2025-11-05T05:03:31.000Z","updated_at":"2025-11-05T05:03:31.000Z","searchable_text":"Durham{{ FIELD }}Bill Durham specializes in complex, high-stakes product litigation. A partner in our Mass Tort and Toxic Tort and Environmental practices, Bill represents product manufacturers in a variety of matters.\n\nBill defends product manufacturers, often in what are known to be challenging jurisdictions. As an example, he has represented R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company in numerous product liability lawsuits filed in Florida, Mississippi, Louisiana and Missouri. He also has served as lead counsel in numerous appeals in state and federal courts.\nIn individual cases and class actions, Bill has managed every aspect of complex high-stakes litigation, from strategic planning and preparation through discovery, pretrial motions, trial and appeal. He identifies and works cooperatively with national, regional and local counsel for codefendants.\nBill was recognized in 2013 by Legal 500 for Litigation — Product Liability and Mass Tort Defense: Consumer Products. William L Durham Partner University of North Carolina  University of Virginia University of Virginia School of Law U.S. Court of Appeals for the First 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 Northern District of Mississippi U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Georgia U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia California Florida Georgia Mississippi Court of Appeals of Georgia Supreme Court of Georgia American Bar Association State Bar of Georgia Judicial Clerk, Clement F. Haynsworth, Jr., U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit","searchable_name":"William L. Durham II (Bill)","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}]}}