{"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":"K","per_page":12,"people":[{"id":444665,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":5176,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eRania Kajan specializes in defending clients in the\u0026nbsp;technology, pharmaceutical, automotive, and energy/mining\u0026nbsp;industries\u0026nbsp;in nationwide\u0026nbsp;product liability, toxic tort, and\u0026nbsp;mass tort litigation, including class actions.\u0026nbsp; Rania has significant\u0026nbsp;experience leading and managing\u0026nbsp;teams on cross-practice, cross-office matters, as well as serving in a strategic, coordination role on joint defense teams involving case\u0026nbsp;dockets with thousands of actions.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn addition to her Product Liability and Mass Torts practice, Rania is passionate about civic engagement in her local community.\u0026nbsp; She is a longstanding\u0026nbsp;member of the Young Supporters Board for the Furniture Bank of Metro Atlanta, whose mission is to turn houses into homes by providing donated furniture and household items to individuals and families moving out of homelessness, living with HIV/AIDS, or fleeing from domestic violence.\u0026nbsp; Rania also maintains a varied pro bono practice, including assisting with pardon applications, compassionate release petitions, record expungements, and\u0026nbsp;Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals\u0026nbsp;(DACA) application renewals.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePrior to\u0026nbsp;joining King \u0026amp; Spalding, Rania\u0026nbsp;clerked\u0026nbsp;for the Honorable Jose E. Martinez and Alicia O. Valle\u0026nbsp;in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida.\u0026nbsp; Before that, Rania clerked\u0026nbsp;at the\u0026nbsp;Special Tribunal for Lebanon in The Hague, Netherlands pursuant to a\u0026nbsp;fellowship\u0026nbsp;from NYU Law's\u0026nbsp;Center for Human Rights and Global Justice.\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"rania-kajan","email":"rkajan@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":["\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eDaimler AG\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eand\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eMercedes-Benz USA\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in putative class actions filed in the Southern District of Florida and Northern District of Georgia.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;TikTok\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 in the\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eIn re Social Media Adolescent Addiction/Personal Injury Litigation\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eMDL pending in the Northern District of California.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eBoehringer Ingelheim\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003ein the\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eIn re Zantac\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;MDL and in multiple state court actions arising from allegations concerning Zantac and other ranitidine-containing products.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eServing as National Counsel for\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\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eRenco Group\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;and\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eDoe Run Resources\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in mass tort litigation in federal court in St. Louis concerning personal injury allegations by several thousand Peruvian children allegedly exposed to contaminants from a smelter in the Andean Highlands.\u003c/p\u003e"],"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[]},"expertise":[{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":17,"guid":"17.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":16,"guid":"16.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":3,"guid":"3.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":112,"guid":"112.capabilities","index":4,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":764,"guid":"764.smart_tags","index":5,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":118,"guid":"118.capabilities","index":6,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":762,"guid":"762.smart_tags","index":7,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":761,"guid":"761.smart_tags","index":8,"source":"smartTags"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Kajan","nick_name":"Rania","clerkships":[{"name":"Law Clerk, Hon. Alicia O. Valle, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida","years_held":"2018 - 2018"},{"name":"Law Clerk, Hon. Jose E. Martinez, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida","years_held":"2015 - 2017"}],"first_name":"Rania","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":35,"law_schools":[{"id":1406,"meta":{"degree":"LL.M.","honors":null,"is_law_school":1,"graduation_date":"2012-01-01 00:00:00 UTC"},"order":2,"pin_order":null,"pin_expiration":null}],"middle_name":" ","name_suffix":"","recognitions":null,"linked_in_url":"https://www.linkedin.com/in/rania-kajan-2395443b/","seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eRania Kajan specializes in defending clients in the\u0026nbsp;technology, pharmaceutical, automotive, and energy/mining\u0026nbsp;industries\u0026nbsp;in nationwide\u0026nbsp;product liability, toxic tort, and\u0026nbsp;mass tort litigation, including class actions.\u0026nbsp; Rania has significant\u0026nbsp;experience leading and managing\u0026nbsp;teams on cross-practice, cross-office matters, as well as serving in a strategic, coordination role on joint defense teams involving case\u0026nbsp;dockets with thousands of actions.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn addition to her Product Liability and Mass Torts practice, Rania is passionate about civic engagement in her local community.\u0026nbsp; She is a longstanding\u0026nbsp;member of the Young Supporters Board for the Furniture Bank of Metro Atlanta, whose mission is to turn houses into homes by providing donated furniture and household items to individuals and families moving out of homelessness, living with HIV/AIDS, or fleeing from domestic violence.\u0026nbsp; Rania also maintains a varied pro bono practice, including assisting with pardon applications, compassionate release petitions, record expungements, and\u0026nbsp;Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals\u0026nbsp;(DACA) application renewals.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePrior to\u0026nbsp;joining King \u0026amp; Spalding, Rania\u0026nbsp;clerked\u0026nbsp;for the Honorable Jose E. Martinez and Alicia O. Valle\u0026nbsp;in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida.\u0026nbsp; Before that, Rania clerked\u0026nbsp;at the\u0026nbsp;Special Tribunal for Lebanon in The Hague, Netherlands pursuant to a\u0026nbsp;fellowship\u0026nbsp;from NYU Law's\u0026nbsp;Center for Human Rights and Global Justice.\u003c/p\u003e","matters":["\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eDaimler AG\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eand\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eMercedes-Benz USA\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in putative class actions filed in the Southern District of Florida and Northern District of Georgia.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;TikTok\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 in the\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eIn re Social Media Adolescent Addiction/Personal Injury Litigation\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eMDL pending in the Northern District of California.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eBoehringer Ingelheim\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003ein the\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eIn re Zantac\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;MDL and in multiple state court actions arising from allegations concerning Zantac and other ranitidine-containing products.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eServing as National Counsel for\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\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eRenco Group\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;and\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eDoe Run Resources\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in mass tort litigation in federal court in St. Louis concerning personal injury allegations by several thousand Peruvian children allegedly exposed to contaminants from a smelter in the Andean Highlands.\u003c/p\u003e"]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":6801}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2026-01-02T15:57:23.000Z","updated_at":"2026-01-02T15:57:23.000Z","searchable_text":"Kajan{{ FIELD }}Represented Daimler AG and Mercedes-Benz USA in putative class actions filed in the Southern District of Florida and Northern District of Georgia.{{ FIELD }}Representing TikTok 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 in the In re Social Media Adolescent Addiction/Personal Injury Litigation MDL pending in the Northern District of California.{{ FIELD }}Representing Boehringer Ingelheim in the In re Zantac MDL and in multiple state court actions arising from allegations concerning Zantac and other ranitidine-containing products.{{ FIELD }}Serving as National Counsel for 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 Renco Group and Doe Run Resources in mass tort litigation in federal court in St. Louis concerning personal injury allegations by several thousand Peruvian children allegedly exposed to contaminants from a smelter in the Andean Highlands.{{ FIELD }}Rania Kajan specializes in defending clients in the technology, pharmaceutical, automotive, and energy/mining industries in nationwide product liability, toxic tort, and mass tort litigation, including class actions.  Rania has significant experience leading and managing teams on cross-practice, cross-office matters, as well as serving in a strategic, coordination role on joint defense teams involving case dockets with thousands of actions.\nIn addition to her Product Liability and Mass Torts practice, Rania is passionate about civic engagement in her local community.  She is a longstanding member of the Young Supporters Board for the Furniture Bank of Metro Atlanta, whose mission is to turn houses into homes by providing donated furniture and household items to individuals and families moving out of homelessness, living with HIV/AIDS, or fleeing from domestic violence.  Rania also maintains a varied pro bono practice, including assisting with pardon applications, compassionate release petitions, record expungements, and Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) application renewals. \nPrior to joining King \u0026amp; Spalding, Rania clerked for the Honorable Jose E. Martinez and Alicia O. Valle in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida.  Before that, Rania clerked at the Special Tribunal for Lebanon in The Hague, Netherlands pursuant to a fellowship from NYU Law's Center for Human Rights and Global Justice. Partner Florida International University Florida International College of Law University of Florida Levin College of Law New York University New York University School of Law U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia Georgia New York Law Clerk, Hon. Alicia O. Valle, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida Law Clerk, Hon. Jose E. Martinez, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida Represented Daimler AG and Mercedes-Benz USA in putative class actions filed in the Southern District of Florida and Northern District of Georgia. Representing TikTok 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 in the In re Social Media Adolescent Addiction/Personal Injury Litigation MDL pending in the Northern District of California. Representing Boehringer Ingelheim in the In re Zantac MDL and in multiple state court actions arising from allegations concerning Zantac and other ranitidine-containing products. Serving as National Counsel for 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 Renco Group and Doe Run Resources in mass tort litigation in federal court in St. Louis concerning personal injury allegations by several thousand Peruvian children allegedly exposed to contaminants from a smelter in the Andean Highlands.","searchable_name":"Rania Kajan","is_active":true,"featured":null,"publish_date":null,"expiration_date":null,"blog_featured":null,"published_by":35,"capability_group_featured":null,"home_page_featured":null},{"id":443889,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":6259,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eSamantha Kavanaugh defends corporate entities and individuals in federal and state courts around the country.\u0026nbsp; She has extensive experience litigating securities class actions, and other complex litigation, including private equity matters, business torts and contract disputes.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSamantha\u0026rsquo;s practice concentrates on defending clients in securities class actions alleging securities fraud, accounting fraud and breach of fiduciary duties.\u0026nbsp; She has defended many securities class actions collectively seeking damages in the billions of dollars.\u0026nbsp; Her defense of these cases often involves multiple related lawsuits and derivative claims.\u0026nbsp; Samantha also has experience conducting internal investigations for both public and private companies.\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"samantha-kavanaugh","email":"skavanaugh@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":["\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eSecurities Class Action Defense\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDefended federal and state securities class actions against officers and directors of a medical supply company.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended federal securities class action against global technology distributor.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended federal securities class action against a VOIP telecommunications company.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended federal and state securities class actions against an officer of a bankrupt entertainment company.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended federal securities class action against a pharmaceutical company related to the status of new product development.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended federal securities class action against a company in the education industry.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended federal securities class action against a company providing software and services to the healthcare industry.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended multi-district federal securities class actions against the former CEO of a bankrupt software company.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended federal securities class action against the former controller of a bankrupt time-share company.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended federal securities class action against an investment bank.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended federal securities class action against a software development company and certain of its officers and directors.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended federal securities class action against an aviation services company and certain of its officers and directors.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eOther Shareholder Derivative Litigation Defense\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented directors of a publicly-traded pharmaceutical company in defense of derivative claims asserted in more than one jurisdiction.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented an executive of a private equity fund in defending derivative claims brought in federal court by a lender alleging fraudulent accounts receivable.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented an executive of a private equity fund at multi-week jury trial in defense of derivative claims brought by a fund investor related to M\u0026amp;A transactions.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented a public company in the education industry in defending derivative claims arising from parallel criminal and SEC investigations.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eOther Accounting and Financial Fraud Litigation\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented a private equity fund in multiple lawsuits in New York federal and state courts alleging fraudulent accounts receivable.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented officers of a company in connection with an alleged misrepresentation and omission action brought by former and current shareholders of the company regarding on-site vehicle fluid analyzers.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eInternal Investigations\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented a NYSE-traded telecommunications company in the investigation of alleged dishonest conduct by senior financial personnel.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented a private company in the investigation of alleged dishonest conduct by a senior vice president.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented the audit committee of a NASDAQ-traded telecommunications company in the investigation of alleged stock-option backdating.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented a NASDAQ-traded brokerage company in the investigation of alleged stock-option backdating on behalf of the audit committee.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eOther Litigation\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented buyer of historic cooperative building in various actions asserting claims by unit owners.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented builders and contractors against multimillion dollar claims of defective Chinese drywall in federal multi-district and state court litigation.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented a watch manufacturer in an action seeking damages for purported breach of contract, misappropriation of trade secrets, and fraud.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented a company, its subsidiary, and an individual defendant in an action seeking damages for breach of contract, theft of trade secrets, and unfair competition.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented a healthcare receivables financing company in an action asserting breach of contract and fraudulent inducement claims.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented an alarm services company in a federal lawsuit involving a dispute over an asset purchase agreement.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented the developer of a senior living facility in a specific performance action to obtain a $10 million parcel of land.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented a developer with respect to claims involving an alleged contract to purchase luxury condominium units located on Fisher Island.\u003c/p\u003e"],"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[]},"expertise":[{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":19,"guid":"19.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":5,"guid":"5.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":3,"guid":"3.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":107,"guid":"107.capabilities","index":4,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":699,"guid":"699.smart_tags","index":5,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":766,"guid":"766.smart_tags","index":6,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1248,"guid":"1248.smart_tags","index":7,"source":"smartTags"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Kavanaugh","nick_name":"Samantha","clerkships":[],"first_name":"Samantha","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":32,"law_schools":[{"id":2410,"meta":{"degree":"J.D.","honors":"","is_law_school":"1","graduation_date":"1996-01-01 00:00:00"},"order":1,"pin_order":null,"pin_expiration":null}],"middle_name":" ","name_suffix":"","recognitions":[{"title":"Ranked Band 1","detail":"Chambers USA in Litigation: Securities – Florida"}],"linked_in_url":"https://www.linkedin.com/in/samantha-kavanaugh-2377114/","seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eSamantha Kavanaugh defends corporate entities and individuals in federal and state courts around the country.\u0026nbsp; She has extensive experience litigating securities class actions, and other complex litigation, including private equity matters, business torts and contract disputes.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSamantha\u0026rsquo;s practice concentrates on defending clients in securities class actions alleging securities fraud, accounting fraud and breach of fiduciary duties.\u0026nbsp; She has defended many securities class actions collectively seeking damages in the billions of dollars.\u0026nbsp; Her defense of these cases often involves multiple related lawsuits and derivative claims.\u0026nbsp; Samantha also has experience conducting internal investigations for both public and private companies.\u003c/p\u003e","matters":["\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eSecurities Class Action Defense\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDefended federal and state securities class actions against officers and directors of a medical supply company.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended federal securities class action against global technology distributor.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended federal securities class action against a VOIP telecommunications company.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended federal and state securities class actions against an officer of a bankrupt entertainment company.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended federal securities class action against a pharmaceutical company related to the status of new product development.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended federal securities class action against a company in the education industry.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended federal securities class action against a company providing software and services to the healthcare industry.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended multi-district federal securities class actions against the former CEO of a bankrupt software company.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended federal securities class action against the former controller of a bankrupt time-share company.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended federal securities class action against an investment bank.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended federal securities class action against a software development company and certain of its officers and directors.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended federal securities class action against an aviation services company and certain of its officers and directors.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eOther Shareholder Derivative Litigation Defense\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented directors of a publicly-traded pharmaceutical company in defense of derivative claims asserted in more than one jurisdiction.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented an executive of a private equity fund in defending derivative claims brought in federal court by a lender alleging fraudulent accounts receivable.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented an executive of a private equity fund at multi-week jury trial in defense of derivative claims brought by a fund investor related to M\u0026amp;A transactions.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented a public company in the education industry in defending derivative claims arising from parallel criminal and SEC investigations.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eOther Accounting and Financial Fraud Litigation\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented a private equity fund in multiple lawsuits in New York federal and state courts alleging fraudulent accounts receivable.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented officers of a company in connection with an alleged misrepresentation and omission action brought by former and current shareholders of the company regarding on-site vehicle fluid analyzers.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eInternal Investigations\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented a NYSE-traded telecommunications company in the investigation of alleged dishonest conduct by senior financial personnel.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented a private company in the investigation of alleged dishonest conduct by a senior vice president.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented the audit committee of a NASDAQ-traded telecommunications company in the investigation of alleged stock-option backdating.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented a NASDAQ-traded brokerage company in the investigation of alleged stock-option backdating on behalf of the audit committee.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eOther Litigation\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented buyer of historic cooperative building in various actions asserting claims by unit owners.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented builders and contractors against multimillion dollar claims of defective Chinese drywall in federal multi-district and state court litigation.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented a watch manufacturer in an action seeking damages for purported breach of contract, misappropriation of trade secrets, and fraud.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented a company, its subsidiary, and an individual defendant in an action seeking damages for breach of contract, theft of trade secrets, and unfair competition.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented a healthcare receivables financing company in an action asserting breach of contract and fraudulent inducement claims.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented an alarm services company in a federal lawsuit involving a dispute over an asset purchase agreement.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented the developer of a senior living facility in a specific performance action to obtain a $10 million parcel of land.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepresented a developer with respect to claims involving an alleged contract to purchase luxury condominium units located on Fisher Island.\u003c/p\u003e"],"recognitions":[{"title":"Ranked Band 1","detail":"Chambers USA in Litigation: Securities – Florida"}]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":9670}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2025-12-05T05:00:08.000Z","updated_at":"2025-12-05T05:00:08.000Z","searchable_text":"Kavanaugh{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Ranked Band 1\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers USA in Litigation: Securities – Florida\"}{{ FIELD }}Securities Class Action Defense\nDefended federal and state securities class actions against officers and directors of a medical supply company.{{ FIELD }}Defended federal securities class action against global technology distributor.{{ FIELD }}Defended federal securities class action against a VOIP telecommunications company.{{ FIELD }}Defended federal and state securities class actions against an officer of a bankrupt entertainment company.{{ FIELD }}Defended federal securities class action against a pharmaceutical company related to the status of new product development.{{ FIELD }}Defended federal securities class action against a company in the education industry.{{ FIELD }}Defended federal securities class action against a company providing software and services to the healthcare industry.{{ FIELD }}Defended multi-district federal securities class actions against the former CEO of a bankrupt software company.{{ FIELD }}Defended federal securities class action against the former controller of a bankrupt time-share company.{{ FIELD }}Defended federal securities class action against an investment bank.{{ FIELD }}Defended federal securities class action against a software development company and certain of its officers and directors.{{ FIELD }}Defended federal securities class action against an aviation services company and certain of its officers and directors.{{ FIELD }}Other Shareholder Derivative Litigation Defense\nRepresented directors of a publicly-traded pharmaceutical company in defense of derivative claims asserted in more than one jurisdiction.\nRepresented an executive of a private equity fund in defending derivative claims brought in federal court by a lender alleging fraudulent accounts receivable.\nRepresented an executive of a private equity fund at multi-week jury trial in defense of derivative claims brought by a fund investor related to M\u0026amp;A transactions.\nRepresented a public company in the education industry in defending derivative claims arising from parallel criminal and SEC investigations.{{ FIELD }}Other Accounting and Financial Fraud Litigation\nRepresented a private equity fund in multiple lawsuits in New York federal and state courts alleging fraudulent accounts receivable.\nRepresented officers of a company in connection with an alleged misrepresentation and omission action brought by former and current shareholders of the company regarding on-site vehicle fluid analyzers.{{ FIELD }}Internal Investigations\nRepresented a NYSE-traded telecommunications company in the investigation of alleged dishonest conduct by senior financial personnel.\nRepresented a private company in the investigation of alleged dishonest conduct by a senior vice president.\nRepresented the audit committee of a NASDAQ-traded telecommunications company in the investigation of alleged stock-option backdating.\nRepresented a NASDAQ-traded brokerage company in the investigation of alleged stock-option backdating on behalf of the audit committee.{{ FIELD }}Other Litigation\nRepresented buyer of historic cooperative building in various actions asserting claims by unit owners.\nRepresented builders and contractors against multimillion dollar claims of defective Chinese drywall in federal multi-district and state court litigation.\nRepresented a watch manufacturer in an action seeking damages for purported breach of contract, misappropriation of trade secrets, and fraud.\nRepresented a company, its subsidiary, and an individual defendant in an action seeking damages for breach of contract, theft of trade secrets, and unfair competition.\nRepresented a healthcare receivables financing company in an action asserting breach of contract and fraudulent inducement claims.\nRepresented an alarm services company in a federal lawsuit involving a dispute over an asset purchase agreement.\nRepresented the developer of a senior living facility in a specific performance action to obtain a $10 million parcel of land.\nRepresented a developer with respect to claims involving an alleged contract to purchase luxury condominium units located on Fisher Island.{{ FIELD }}Samantha Kavanaugh defends corporate entities and individuals in federal and state courts around the country.  She has extensive experience litigating securities class actions, and other complex litigation, including private equity matters, business torts and contract disputes.\nSamantha’s practice concentrates on defending clients in securities class actions alleging securities fraud, accounting fraud and breach of fiduciary duties.  She has defended many securities class actions collectively seeking damages in the billions of dollars.  Her defense of these cases often involves multiple related lawsuits and derivative claims.  Samantha also has experience conducting internal investigations for both public and private companies. Partner Ranked Band 1 Chambers USA in Litigation: Securities – Florida George Mason University George Mason University School of Law University of Virginia University of Virginia School of Law 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 Eighth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Georgia U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia Florida The Florida Bar, Member Dade County Bar Association, Member Securities Class Action Defense\nDefended federal and state securities class actions against officers and directors of a medical supply company. Defended federal securities class action against global technology distributor. Defended federal securities class action against a VOIP telecommunications company. Defended federal and state securities class actions against an officer of a bankrupt entertainment company. Defended federal securities class action against a pharmaceutical company related to the status of new product development. Defended federal securities class action against a company in the education industry. Defended federal securities class action against a company providing software and services to the healthcare industry. Defended multi-district federal securities class actions against the former CEO of a bankrupt software company. Defended federal securities class action against the former controller of a bankrupt time-share company. Defended federal securities class action against an investment bank. Defended federal securities class action against a software development company and certain of its officers and directors. Defended federal securities class action against an aviation services company and certain of its officers and directors. Other Shareholder Derivative Litigation Defense\nRepresented directors of a publicly-traded pharmaceutical company in defense of derivative claims asserted in more than one jurisdiction.\nRepresented an executive of a private equity fund in defending derivative claims brought in federal court by a lender alleging fraudulent accounts receivable.\nRepresented an executive of a private equity fund at multi-week jury trial in defense of derivative claims brought by a fund investor related to M\u0026amp;A transactions.\nRepresented a public company in the education industry in defending derivative claims arising from parallel criminal and SEC investigations. Other Accounting and Financial Fraud Litigation\nRepresented a private equity fund in multiple lawsuits in New York federal and state courts alleging fraudulent accounts receivable.\nRepresented officers of a company in connection with an alleged misrepresentation and omission action brought by former and current shareholders of the company regarding on-site vehicle fluid analyzers. Internal Investigations\nRepresented a NYSE-traded telecommunications company in the investigation of alleged dishonest conduct by senior financial personnel.\nRepresented a private company in the investigation of alleged dishonest conduct by a senior vice president.\nRepresented the audit committee of a NASDAQ-traded telecommunications company in the investigation of alleged stock-option backdating.\nRepresented a NASDAQ-traded brokerage company in the investigation of alleged stock-option backdating on behalf of the audit committee. Other Litigation\nRepresented buyer of historic cooperative building in various actions asserting claims by unit owners.\nRepresented builders and contractors against multimillion dollar claims of defective Chinese drywall in federal multi-district and state court litigation.\nRepresented a watch manufacturer in an action seeking damages for purported breach of contract, misappropriation of trade secrets, and fraud.\nRepresented a company, its subsidiary, and an individual defendant in an action seeking damages for breach of contract, theft of trade secrets, and unfair competition.\nRepresented a healthcare receivables financing company in an action asserting breach of contract and fraudulent inducement claims.\nRepresented an alarm services company in a federal lawsuit involving a dispute over an asset purchase agreement.\nRepresented the developer of a senior living facility in a specific performance action to obtain a $10 million parcel of land.\nRepresented a developer with respect to claims involving an alleged contract to purchase luxury condominium units located on Fisher Island.","searchable_name":"Samantha Kavanaugh","is_active":true,"featured":null,"publish_date":null,"expiration_date":null,"blog_featured":null,"published_by":32,"capability_group_featured":null,"home_page_featured":null},{"id":436384,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":2855,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eNick Kayhan focuses on the defense of toxic tort and environmental claims. As a partner in our Mass Tort and Toxic Tort and Environmental practices, Nick represents chemical, energy and agricultural industry clients in state and federal courts.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWith more than 25 years of experience, Nick defends environmental remediation, property damage and personal injury claims involving a variety of chemicals and products.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNick is adept at understanding and presenting scientific evidence on a wide range of subjects, enabling him to effectively try cases involving complex technical issues.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNick has been repeatedly named a Northern California Super Lawyer by \u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eSan Francisco Magazine\u003c/em\u003e and the \u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eJournal for Law \u0026amp; Politics\u003c/em\u003e. He was also recognized in 2015 and 2014 by \u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eLegal 500\u003c/em\u003e for product liability and mass tort defense.\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"nicholas-kayhan","email":"nkayhan@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":null,"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[{"id":114}]},"expertise":[{"id":102,"guid":"102.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":17,"guid":"17.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":16,"guid":"16.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Kayhan","nick_name":"Nick","clerkships":[],"first_name":"Nicholas","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":101,"law_schools":[],"middle_name":"D.","name_suffix":"","recognitions":[{"title":"Tier 1: Product Liability and Mass Tort Defense ","detail":"Legal 500, 2015, 2014"},{"title":"Northern California Super Lawyer ","detail":"Environmental Litigation"},{"title":"","detail":""}],"linked_in_url":null,"seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eNick Kayhan focuses on the defense of toxic tort and environmental claims. As a partner in our Mass Tort and Toxic Tort and Environmental practices, Nick represents chemical, energy and agricultural industry clients in state and federal courts.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWith more than 25 years of experience, Nick defends environmental remediation, property damage and personal injury claims involving a variety of chemicals and products.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNick is adept at understanding and presenting scientific evidence on a wide range of subjects, enabling him to effectively try cases involving complex technical issues.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNick has been repeatedly named a Northern California Super Lawyer by \u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eSan Francisco Magazine\u003c/em\u003e and the \u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eJournal for Law \u0026amp; Politics\u003c/em\u003e. He was also recognized in 2015 and 2014 by \u003cem data-redactor-tag=\"em\"\u003eLegal 500\u003c/em\u003e for product liability and mass tort defense.\u003c/p\u003e","recognitions":[{"title":"Tier 1: Product Liability and Mass Tort Defense ","detail":"Legal 500, 2015, 2014"},{"title":"Northern California Super Lawyer ","detail":"Environmental Litigation"},{"title":"","detail":""}]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":959}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2025-09-02T04:51:35.000Z","updated_at":"2025-09-02T04:51:35.000Z","searchable_text":"Kayhan{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Tier 1: Product Liability and Mass Tort Defense \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500, 2015, 2014\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Northern California Super Lawyer \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Environmental Litigation\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"\"}{{ FIELD }}Nick Kayhan focuses on the defense of toxic tort and environmental claims. As a partner in our Mass Tort and Toxic Tort and Environmental practices, Nick represents chemical, energy and agricultural industry clients in state and federal courts.\nWith more than 25 years of experience, Nick defends environmental remediation, property damage and personal injury claims involving a variety of chemicals and products.\nNick is adept at understanding and presenting scientific evidence on a wide range of subjects, enabling him to effectively try cases involving complex technical issues.\nNick has been repeatedly named a Northern California Super Lawyer by San Francisco Magazine and the Journal for Law \u0026amp; Politics. He was also recognized in 2015 and 2014 by Legal 500 for product liability and mass tort defense. Nicholas D Kayhan Partner Tier 1: Product Liability and Mass Tort Defense  Legal 500, 2015, 2014 Northern California Super Lawyer  Environmental Litigation   University of California, Berkeley University of California, Berkeley, School of Law University of California Hastings College of Law University of California Hastings College of Law California American Bar Association State Bar of California Defense Research Institute Alameda County Bar Association Association of Defense Counsel of Northern California","searchable_name":"Nicholas D. Kayhan (Nick)","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":426909,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":5930,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eAlexander Kazam is a partner\u0026nbsp;in the Washington, D.C. office of King \u0026amp; Spalding and a member of the firm\u0026rsquo;s Appellate, Constitutional, and Administrative Law practice group.\u0026nbsp; Alex\u0026rsquo;s practice focuses on appeals, dispositive motions, and counseling clients on high-stakes legal issues.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePreviously, Alex\u0026nbsp;served as senior counsel in the Office of the Associate Attorney General at the United States Department of Justice, where he assisted in supervising the Department\u0026rsquo;s civil litigation and drafted public addresses for the Attorney General of the United States.\u0026nbsp; Alex\u0026nbsp;has also clerked at every level of the federal judiciary: for Justices Neil M. Gorsuch and Anthony M. Kennedy of the United States Supreme Court; for Judge Raymond M. Kethledge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit; and for Judge Richard J. Sullivan of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"alexander-kazam","email":"akazam@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":null,"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[]},"expertise":[{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":2,"guid":"2.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Kazam","nick_name":"Alexander","clerkships":[{"name":"Law Clerk, Justice Neil M. Gorsuch, Supreme Court of the United States","years_held":"2018 - 2019"},{"name":"Law Clerk, Judge Raymond M. Kethledge, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit","years_held":"2016 - 2017"},{"name":"Law Clerk, Judge Richard J. Sullivan, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York","years_held":"2017 - 2018"}],"first_name":"Alexander","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":32,"law_schools":[{"id":2605,"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":" ","name_suffix":"","recognitions":null,"linked_in_url":null,"seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eAlexander Kazam is a partner\u0026nbsp;in the Washington, D.C. office of King \u0026amp; Spalding and a member of the firm\u0026rsquo;s Appellate, Constitutional, and Administrative Law practice group.\u0026nbsp; Alex\u0026rsquo;s practice focuses on appeals, dispositive motions, and counseling clients on high-stakes legal issues.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePreviously, Alex\u0026nbsp;served as senior counsel in the Office of the Associate Attorney General at the United States Department of Justice, where he assisted in supervising the Department\u0026rsquo;s civil litigation and drafted public addresses for the Attorney General of the United States.\u0026nbsp; Alex\u0026nbsp;has also clerked at every level of the federal judiciary: for Justices Neil M. Gorsuch and Anthony M. Kennedy of the United States Supreme Court; for Judge Raymond M. Kethledge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit; and for Judge Richard J. Sullivan of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.\u003c/p\u003e"},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":10794}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2025-05-26T04:57:45.000Z","updated_at":"2025-05-26T04:57:45.000Z","searchable_text":"Kazam{{ FIELD }}Alexander Kazam is a partner in the Washington, D.C. office of King \u0026amp; Spalding and a member of the firm’s Appellate, Constitutional, and Administrative Law practice group.  Alex’s practice focuses on appeals, dispositive motions, and counseling clients on high-stakes legal issues.\nPreviously, Alex served as senior counsel in the Office of the Associate Attorney General at the United States Department of Justice, where he assisted in supervising the Department’s civil litigation and drafted public addresses for the Attorney General of the United States.  Alex has also clerked at every level of the federal judiciary: for Justices Neil M. Gorsuch and Anthony M. Kennedy of the United States Supreme Court; for Judge Raymond M. Kethledge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit; and for Judge Richard J. Sullivan of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. Partner Harvard University Harvard Law School Yale University Yale Law School U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit Supreme Court of the United States U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit 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 Fourth Circuit 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 Seventh Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit District of Columbia New York Law Clerk, Justice Neil M. Gorsuch, Supreme Court of the United States Law Clerk, Judge Raymond M. Kethledge, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit Law Clerk, Judge Richard J. Sullivan, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York","searchable_name":"Alexander Kazam","is_active":true,"featured":null,"publish_date":null,"expiration_date":null,"blog_featured":null,"published_by":32,"capability_group_featured":null,"home_page_featured":null},{"id":426547,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":4105,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eBrandon Keel is a partner in the firm\u0026rsquo;s Business Litigation Group, where he represents clients in a variety of complex commercial litigation, focusing primarily on class actions, securities litigation, and other shareholder disputes. Brandon has represented clients through all stages of litigation in a broad array of commercial matters, including securities and consumer class actions, shareholder derivative lawsuits, contract disputes, post-closing M\u0026amp;A disputes, and business torts.\u0026nbsp;[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBefore joining King \u0026amp; Spalding, Brandon was a litigation associate at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher \u0026amp; Flom LLP, where he represented a number of Fortune 500 companies in high-stakes commercial litigation. During his time at Skadden, he helped secure dismissals of numerous putative consumer class action lawsuits against one of the nation\u0026rsquo;s leading food and beverage companies. He also represented clients in substantial litigation arising out of the financial crisis.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBrandon has served on the firm\u0026rsquo;s hiring committee and is active in the firm\u0026rsquo;s efforts to recruit new attorneys. He is a member of the Georgia and Illinois bars, as well as the Atlanta Bar Association.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePublications\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cul\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u003cem\u003eCFPB Proposes Rule Prohibiting Class Action Waivers And Requiring Reporting Of Arbitration Information\u003c/em\u003e, Client Alert, May 11, 2016.\u003cbr /\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u003cem\u003eProfiting Under the Veil of Compensation: Wills v. Foster and the Application of the Collateral Source Rule to Medicare and Medicaid\u003c/em\u003e, 58 DePaul L. Rev. 789 (2009)\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ul\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"brandon-keel","email":"bkeel@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":["\u003cp\u003eRepresenting SCANA Corporation in various litigation matters arising out of the abandonment of SCANA\u0026rsquo;s new nuclear power development at the V.C. Summer nuclear station in South Carolina, including the defense of ratepayer class actions, securities class action litigation, shareholder derivative lawsuits, and a regulatory proceeding in which SCANA achieved approval for a proposed $14.6 billion merger with Dominion Energy.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting Equifax, Inc. in securities class action litigation and related government investigations arising out of the data breach announced in September 2017.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting Quorum Health Corporation, an owner and operator of acute care hospitals, and its former officers in defense of securities class action and derivative litigation relating to Quorum\u0026rsquo;s spin-off from its former parent company.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting U.S. Xpress Enterprises, Inc., a large truckload carrier, and its directors and officers in securities class action litigation relating to the company\u0026rsquo;s 2018 initial public offering.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting Tivity Health, Inc., a provider of health and fitness improvement programs, and its directors and officers in securities class action and derivative litigation.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting Acadia Healthcare Company, Inc., an owner and operater of behavioral healthcare facilities, and its directors and officers in securities class action litigation.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting Aeterna Zentaris, Inc., a biopharmaceutical company, and certain of its former officers in securities class action litigation arising out of the FDA\u0026rsquo;s rejection of the company\u0026rsquo;s New Drug Application.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a leading company in the payment processing industry in connection with class action litigation brought on behalf of merchants.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented an international airline in defense of a commercial dispute for alleged breach of contract.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented one of the world\u0026rsquo;s leading food and beverage companies in defense of various consumer class action litigation.\u003c/p\u003e"],"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[]},"expertise":[{"id":3,"guid":"3.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":5,"guid":"5.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":19,"guid":"19.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":21,"guid":"21.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":4,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":1157,"guid":"1157.smart_tags","index":5,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1204,"guid":"1204.smart_tags","index":6,"source":"smartTags"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Keel","nick_name":"Brandon","clerkships":[],"first_name":"Brandon","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":202,"law_schools":[{"id":565,"meta":{"degree":"J.D.","honors":"summa cum laude, Order of the Coif","is_law_school":1,"graduation_date":"2009-01-01 00:00:00 UTC"},"order":1,"pin_order":null,"pin_expiration":null}],"middle_name":"R.","name_suffix":"","recognitions":null,"linked_in_url":null,"seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eBrandon Keel is a partner in the firm\u0026rsquo;s Business Litigation Group, where he represents clients in a variety of complex commercial litigation, focusing primarily on class actions, securities litigation, and other shareholder disputes. Brandon has represented clients through all stages of litigation in a broad array of commercial matters, including securities and consumer class actions, shareholder derivative lawsuits, contract disputes, post-closing M\u0026amp;A disputes, and business torts.\u0026nbsp;[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBefore joining King \u0026amp; Spalding, Brandon was a litigation associate at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher \u0026amp; Flom LLP, where he represented a number of Fortune 500 companies in high-stakes commercial litigation. During his time at Skadden, he helped secure dismissals of numerous putative consumer class action lawsuits against one of the nation\u0026rsquo;s leading food and beverage companies. He also represented clients in substantial litigation arising out of the financial crisis.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBrandon has served on the firm\u0026rsquo;s hiring committee and is active in the firm\u0026rsquo;s efforts to recruit new attorneys. He is a member of the Georgia and Illinois bars, as well as the Atlanta Bar Association.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePublications\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cul\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u003cem\u003eCFPB Proposes Rule Prohibiting Class Action Waivers And Requiring Reporting Of Arbitration Information\u003c/em\u003e, Client Alert, May 11, 2016.\u003cbr /\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u003cem\u003eProfiting Under the Veil of Compensation: Wills v. Foster and the Application of the Collateral Source Rule to Medicare and Medicaid\u003c/em\u003e, 58 DePaul L. Rev. 789 (2009)\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ul\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e","matters":["\u003cp\u003eRepresenting SCANA Corporation in various litigation matters arising out of the abandonment of SCANA\u0026rsquo;s new nuclear power development at the V.C. Summer nuclear station in South Carolina, including the defense of ratepayer class actions, securities class action litigation, shareholder derivative lawsuits, and a regulatory proceeding in which SCANA achieved approval for a proposed $14.6 billion merger with Dominion Energy.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting Equifax, Inc. in securities class action litigation and related government investigations arising out of the data breach announced in September 2017.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting Quorum Health Corporation, an owner and operator of acute care hospitals, and its former officers in defense of securities class action and derivative litigation relating to Quorum\u0026rsquo;s spin-off from its former parent company.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting U.S. Xpress Enterprises, Inc., a large truckload carrier, and its directors and officers in securities class action litigation relating to the company\u0026rsquo;s 2018 initial public offering.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting Tivity Health, Inc., a provider of health and fitness improvement programs, and its directors and officers in securities class action and derivative litigation.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting Acadia Healthcare Company, Inc., an owner and operater of behavioral healthcare facilities, and its directors and officers in securities class action litigation.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting Aeterna Zentaris, Inc., a biopharmaceutical company, and certain of its former officers in securities class action litigation arising out of the FDA\u0026rsquo;s rejection of the company\u0026rsquo;s New Drug Application.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting a leading company in the payment processing industry in connection with class action litigation brought on behalf of merchants.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented an international airline in defense of a commercial dispute for alleged breach of contract.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented one of the world\u0026rsquo;s leading food and beverage companies in defense of various consumer class action litigation.\u003c/p\u003e"]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":11795}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2025-05-26T04:54:35.000Z","updated_at":"2025-05-26T04:54:35.000Z","searchable_text":"Keel{{ FIELD }}Representing SCANA Corporation in various litigation matters arising out of the abandonment of SCANA’s new nuclear power development at the V.C. Summer nuclear station in South Carolina, including the defense of ratepayer class actions, securities class action litigation, shareholder derivative lawsuits, and a regulatory proceeding in which SCANA achieved approval for a proposed $14.6 billion merger with Dominion Energy.{{ FIELD }}Representing Equifax, Inc. in securities class action litigation and related government investigations arising out of the data breach announced in September 2017.{{ FIELD }}Representing Quorum Health Corporation, an owner and operator of acute care hospitals, and its former officers in defense of securities class action and derivative litigation relating to Quorum’s spin-off from its former parent company.{{ FIELD }}Representing U.S. Xpress Enterprises, Inc., a large truckload carrier, and its directors and officers in securities class action litigation relating to the company’s 2018 initial public offering.{{ FIELD }}Representing Tivity Health, Inc., a provider of health and fitness improvement programs, and its directors and officers in securities class action and derivative litigation.{{ FIELD }}Representing Acadia Healthcare Company, Inc., an owner and operater of behavioral healthcare facilities, and its directors and officers in securities class action litigation.{{ FIELD }}Representing Aeterna Zentaris, Inc., a biopharmaceutical company, and certain of its former officers in securities class action litigation arising out of the FDA’s rejection of the company’s New Drug Application.{{ FIELD }}Representing a leading company in the payment processing industry in connection with class action litigation brought on behalf of merchants.{{ FIELD }}Represented an international airline in defense of a commercial dispute for alleged breach of contract.{{ FIELD }}Represented one of the world’s leading food and beverage companies in defense of various consumer class action litigation.{{ FIELD }}Brandon Keel is a partner in the firm’s Business Litigation Group, where he represents clients in a variety of complex commercial litigation, focusing primarily on class actions, securities litigation, and other shareholder disputes. Brandon has represented clients through all stages of litigation in a broad array of commercial matters, including securities and consumer class actions, shareholder derivative lawsuits, contract disputes, post-closing M\u0026amp;A disputes, and business torts. \nBefore joining King \u0026amp; Spalding, Brandon was a litigation associate at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher \u0026amp; Flom LLP, where he represented a number of Fortune 500 companies in high-stakes commercial litigation. During his time at Skadden, he helped secure dismissals of numerous putative consumer class action lawsuits against one of the nation’s leading food and beverage companies. He also represented clients in substantial litigation arising out of the financial crisis.\nBrandon has served on the firm’s hiring committee and is active in the firm’s efforts to recruit new attorneys. He is a member of the Georgia and Illinois bars, as well as the Atlanta Bar Association.\nPublications\n\nCFPB Proposes Rule Prohibiting Class Action Waivers And Requiring Reporting Of Arbitration Information, Client Alert, May 11, 2016.\nProfiting Under the Veil of Compensation: Wills v. Foster and the Application of the Collateral Source Rule to Medicare and Medicaid, 58 DePaul L. Rev. 789 (2009)\n\n  Partner University of Colorado at Boulder University of Colorado School of Law DePaul University DePaul University College of Law U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth 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 Northern District of Illinois U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia Georgia Illinois Representing SCANA Corporation in various litigation matters arising out of the abandonment of SCANA’s new nuclear power development at the V.C. Summer nuclear station in South Carolina, including the defense of ratepayer class actions, securities class action litigation, shareholder derivative lawsuits, and a regulatory proceeding in which SCANA achieved approval for a proposed $14.6 billion merger with Dominion Energy. Representing Equifax, Inc. in securities class action litigation and related government investigations arising out of the data breach announced in September 2017. Representing Quorum Health Corporation, an owner and operator of acute care hospitals, and its former officers in defense of securities class action and derivative litigation relating to Quorum’s spin-off from its former parent company. Representing U.S. Xpress Enterprises, Inc., a large truckload carrier, and its directors and officers in securities class action litigation relating to the company’s 2018 initial public offering. Representing Tivity Health, Inc., a provider of health and fitness improvement programs, and its directors and officers in securities class action and derivative litigation. Representing Acadia Healthcare Company, Inc., an owner and operater of behavioral healthcare facilities, and its directors and officers in securities class action litigation. Representing Aeterna Zentaris, Inc., a biopharmaceutical company, and certain of its former officers in securities class action litigation arising out of the FDA’s rejection of the company’s New Drug Application. Representing a leading company in the payment processing industry in connection with class action litigation brought on behalf of merchants. Represented an international airline in defense of a commercial dispute for alleged breach of contract. Represented one of the world’s leading food and beverage companies in defense of various consumer class action litigation.","searchable_name":"Brandon R. Keel","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":445242,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":6425,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eMark Kirsch is a partner in King \u0026amp; Spalding\u0026rsquo;s New York office. He is an experienced trial lawyer whose practice focuses on complex securities, white collar, commercial and antitrust litigation. He is routinely named one of the leading litigators in the United States. [[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMark is ranked for Securities Litigation nationwide and in New York by \u003cem\u003eChambers USA: America\u0026rsquo;s Leading Lawyers for Business\u003c/em\u003e.\u0026nbsp; The 2022 edition of \u003cem\u003eChambers USA\u003c/em\u003e states that clients say he is \u0026ldquo;a very strategic thinker with a great demeanor in litigation, as well as providing good client service,\u0026rdquo; and that \u0026ldquo;he has incredible judgment, is very good on his feet and always prepared.\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp; The 2021 edition shares that clients believe he is \u0026ldquo;an amazingly quick study, and great at strategic decision-making.\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp; The 2020 edition notes that clients say Mark is \u0026ldquo;a brilliant lawyer and a great strategist, with excellent client service\u0026rdquo; and that \u0026ldquo;his way of handling cases and his ability to combine legal knowledge with the business risks is absolutely excellent.\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp; A client also comments that he has \u0026ldquo;fantastic cross-examination skills.\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp; Prior recent editions of \u003cem\u003eChambers USA\u003c/em\u003e refer to Mark as \u0026ldquo;one of the most extraordinary litigators I\u0026rsquo;ve seen,\u0026rdquo; \u0026ldquo;a very deep thinker who is always incredibly well prepared,\u0026rdquo; and who \u0026ldquo;does a fantastic job when arguing cases,\u0026rdquo; \u0026ldquo;is at the vanguard of the US securities litigation market and enjoys a stunning reputation,\u0026rdquo; is \u0026ldquo;a force to be reckoned with,\u0026rdquo; is \u0026ldquo;a great strategist who\u0026rsquo;s detail-oriented and fantastic on his feet,\u0026rdquo; is \u0026ldquo;very good at strategy and very responsive to client needs,\u0026rdquo; and who is \u0026ldquo;extremely pleasant to deal with.\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp; He is also recognized as a leading securities litigation attorney by \u003cem\u003eThe Legal 500 United States\u003c/em\u003e.\u0026nbsp; Mark is named as a leading commercial litigation attorney by \u003cem\u003eThe Best Lawyers in America\u0026reg;,\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eBenchmark Litigation\u0026rsquo;s\u003c/em\u003e Guide to America\u0026rsquo;s Leading Litigation Firms and Attorneys recognized him as a \u0026ldquo;Litigation Star.\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp; In both 2019 and 2016, Law360 named Mark as one of five Securities Litigation MVPs nationwide.\u0026nbsp; In addition, he was named to \u003cem\u003eCity \u0026amp; State\u0026rsquo;s\u003c/em\u003e \u0026ldquo;50 Over 50\u0026rdquo; list of the most distinguished public servants in New York in 2020, a \u0026ldquo;Life Sciences Star\u0026rdquo; by \u003cem\u003eLMG Life Sciences 2017\u003c/em\u003e, and selected by \u003cem\u003eThe Lawyer\u003c/em\u003e as one of its \u0026ldquo;Global Hot 100 Attorneys\u0026rdquo; in 2006.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMark currently serves on the Board of Trustees of the American Friends of Hebrew University.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFrom 1991 to 1995, he served as Assistant United States Attorney in the Eastern District of New York, focusing on complex financial crimes.\u0026nbsp; In 1994, U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno personally awarded Mr. Kirsch the Justice Department Director\u0026rsquo;s Award for Superior Achievement as an Assistant U.S. Attorney.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMark was previously a partner at Gibson, Dunn \u0026amp; Crutcher where he served on the Executive Committee, as Co-Partner in Charge of the New York Office, and as Global Co-Chair of Gibson Dunn\u0026rsquo;s litigation practice. Prior to that, he was a partner at Clifford Chance where he served as Global Chair of the Litigation Practice and as a member of the Global Management Committee.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMark received his Juris Doctor from Yale University Law School, where he was Articles Editor of the Yale Law \u0026amp; Policy Review, and his Bachelor of Arts degree with distinction from Cornell University.\u0026nbsp; He clerked for the Honorable John M. Walker, Jr. in New York.\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"mark-kirsch","email":"mkirsch@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":["\u003cp\u003eRepresent\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: normal !msorm;\"\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eRio Tinto\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/span\u003e, the world\u0026rsquo;s second largest mining company, in an SEC suit alleging violations of Section 10(b), 17(a), internal controls requirements and books and records requirements, concerning the timing of a more than $3 billion impairment taken in connection with a mining project in Mozambique. Prior to trial the SEC dropped the 10(b), 17(a) and all scienter-based charges, settling for non-scienter books and records violations, a historic outcome for Rio Tinto.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented \u003cstrong\u003eRio Tinto\u003c/strong\u003e in defeating a Section 10(b) class action based on the same conduct as in the SEC case. The Second Circuit affirmed the dismissal by the District Court.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: normal !msorm;\"\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eVale S.A.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u0026nbsp;in massive class actions relating to the collapse of the Fundao dam in Brazil. Defeated class certification in one class action, effectively ending it, and obtained dismissal of a second that was affirmed by the Second Circuit.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eVale S.A.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in another massive class action resulting from the collapse of the Brumadinho dam in Brazil. (Case still pending.)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented half the board of directors of \u003cstrong\u003eAeroJet RocketDyne\u003c/strong\u003e against the other half of the board in a proxy fight, including trial to verdict in Delaware Chancery.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefending\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eBlackRock\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a major suit\u0026nbsp;in Virgin Islands Superior Court by shareholders of two public companies alleging BlackRock fraudulently drove down the share price of the companies.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefending\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eFanDuel\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;and its directors in an action in New York State court brought by common shareholders challenging distribution of $550 million in merger proceeds.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefending a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003emajor global bank\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a large arbitration brought by a corporate entity alleging breach of fiduciary duty and breach of contract in connection with the sale of a large energy asset.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefending\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eFareva S.A.\u003c/strong\u003e, a large European manufacturer, in a breach of contract suit brought by LG and Avon the Southern District of New York.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: normal !msorm;\"\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eGerald Metals\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/span\u003e, the largest privately owned metals trading firm in the world, in litigation in Connecticut Superior Court brought by former senior executives and shareholders alleging breach of fiduciary duty and breach of contract in connection with shareholding and other agreements.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eUBS\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in class actions alleging that primary dealers of the New York Federal Reserve Bank price-fixed the auction market for U.S. Treasury securities.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eUBS\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in multiple LIBOR-related actions alleging price fixing, including cases where class certification was denied in connection with three separate putative classes.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon a complete trial verdict for global investment adviser \u003cstrong\u003eInvestcorp\u003c/strong\u003e in a case brought by hedge fund Kortright Partners for $250 million for negligent misrepresentation.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon a significant trial verdict for a \u003cstrong\u003eSusquehanna fund and two senior executives\u003c/strong\u003e after a bench trial asserting fraud claims in the $115 million sale of Plimus to Great Hill.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eObtained complete dismissal of a shareholder class action for\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: normal !msorm;\"\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAmTrust Financial\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/span\u003e, a Fortune 500 insurer, alleging violations of Section 11 of the 1933 Act and Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act, despite the Company\u0026rsquo;s restatement of financials and a disclosed SEC investigation.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eServed as the co-lead lawyer for \u003cstrong\u003eLynn Tilton\u003c/strong\u003e, the \u0026ldquo;Diva of Distressed,\u0026rdquo; and defeated the SEC after a three-week trial in the SEC\u0026rsquo;s ALJ court, where the ALJ dismissed all fraud and negligence charges against Ms. Tilton.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eObtained a rare reversal of a denial of summary judgment from the New York Appellate Division, on behalf of \u003cstrong\u003eTrust Company of the West\u003c/strong\u003e, on grounds the plaintiff hedge fund failed to establish loss causation in a case where TCW was the collateral manager for a large portfolio of mortgage-backed securities that failed to perform in the wake of the global financial crisis. TCW successfully argued the financial crisis caused the loss, not TCW\u0026rsquo;s management.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eObtained affirmance by the New Jersey Appellate Division of a dismissal from the bench after oral argument of a complaint against \u003cstrong\u003eMerck\u003c/strong\u003e challenging its tax disclosures.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended \u003cstrong\u003eCorvex Management\u003c/strong\u003e and \u003cstrong\u003eThe Related Companies\u003c/strong\u003e in a two-week arbitration (the result of which was publicly disclosed) that resulted in invalidating all material anti-shareholder defenses of CommonWealth REIT, whose Trustees Corvex/Related ultimately removed in a consent solicitation.\u0026nbsp; Many major media outlets described the outcome as a \u0026ldquo;major victory\u0026rdquo; for Corvex/Related.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eObtained the voluntary dismissal of a putative class action on behalf of \u003cstrong\u003eGoldman Sachs, Citigroup, Merrill Lynch, Morgan Stanley, UBS and BNY Mellon Capital Markets\u003c/strong\u003e \u0026ndash; after three years of litigation \u0026ndash; arising from BNYM\u0026rsquo;s foreign exchange business, alleging violation of the federal securities laws in connection with underwriting $2 billion of securities for BNYM.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended \u003cstrong\u003eGoldman Sachs, Citigroup, Bank of America, Merrill Lynch, J.P. Morgan, Deutsche Bank and Royal Bank of Scotland\u003c/strong\u003e in a putative class action alleging violation of the federal securities laws in connection with underwriting $900 million of notes for MF Global Holdings.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eResolved favorably for \u003cstrong\u003eMoody\u0026rsquo;s\u003c/strong\u003e the two most significant cases it had faced concerning ratings of structured investment vehicles.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eObtained summary judgment for \u003cstrong\u003eCitigroup\u003c/strong\u003e in connection with a securities fraud claim for $13.2 billion brought by Parmalat investors after Parmalat\u0026rsquo;s collapse.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLed the team that achieved five significant victories for \u003cstrong\u003eAllianceBernstein\u003c/strong\u003e in securities litigation arising out of the Enron collapse, including a seven-week state court jury trial in which Alliance defeated the Florida state pension fund\u0026rsquo;s attempt to recover $3.2 billion in losses the fund sustained in Enron and other stocks, and AllianceBernstein won its damages counterclaim and costs.\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eThe National Law Journal\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;selected the trial victory as one of its \u0026ldquo;Top 10 Defense Verdicts of 2006.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented \u003cstrong\u003eAllianceBernstein\u003c/strong\u003e in the\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eNewby\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;securities class action in Houston, in which Enron shareholders and bondholders sought over $1 billion in damages against the company. Obtained summary judgment for AllianceBernstein and costs against plaintiffs\u0026rsquo; counsel, a victory written about twice by the\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eWall Street Journal\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;in editorials.\u003c/p\u003e"],"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[]},"expertise":[{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":19,"guid":"19.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":5,"guid":"5.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":3,"guid":"3.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":1,"guid":"1.capabilities","index":4,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":20,"guid":"20.capabilities","index":5,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":11,"guid":"11.capabilities","index":6,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":107,"guid":"107.capabilities","index":7,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":103,"guid":"103.capabilities","index":8,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":762,"guid":"762.smart_tags","index":9,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1248,"guid":"1248.smart_tags","index":10,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":132,"guid":"132.capabilities","index":11,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":1434,"guid":"1434.smart_tags","index":12,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":129,"guid":"129.capabilities","index":13,"source":"capabilities"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Kirsch","nick_name":"Mark","clerkships":[{"name":"Judicial Clerk, Honorable John M. Waker, Jr., U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York","years_held":"1987 - 1988"}],"first_name":"Mark","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":32,"law_schools":[{"id":2605,"meta":{"degree":"J.D.","honors":"","is_law_school":"1","graduation_date":"1987-01-01 00:00:00"},"order":1,"pin_order":null,"pin_expiration":null}],"middle_name":"A.","name_suffix":"","recognitions":null,"linked_in_url":"https://www.linkedin.com/in/mark-kirsch-525a3610/","seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eMark Kirsch is a partner in King \u0026amp; Spalding\u0026rsquo;s New York office. He is an experienced trial lawyer whose practice focuses on complex securities, white collar, commercial and antitrust litigation. He is routinely named one of the leading litigators in the United States. [[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMark is ranked for Securities Litigation nationwide and in New York by \u003cem\u003eChambers USA: America\u0026rsquo;s Leading Lawyers for Business\u003c/em\u003e.\u0026nbsp; The 2022 edition of \u003cem\u003eChambers USA\u003c/em\u003e states that clients say he is \u0026ldquo;a very strategic thinker with a great demeanor in litigation, as well as providing good client service,\u0026rdquo; and that \u0026ldquo;he has incredible judgment, is very good on his feet and always prepared.\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp; The 2021 edition shares that clients believe he is \u0026ldquo;an amazingly quick study, and great at strategic decision-making.\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp; The 2020 edition notes that clients say Mark is \u0026ldquo;a brilliant lawyer and a great strategist, with excellent client service\u0026rdquo; and that \u0026ldquo;his way of handling cases and his ability to combine legal knowledge with the business risks is absolutely excellent.\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp; A client also comments that he has \u0026ldquo;fantastic cross-examination skills.\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp; Prior recent editions of \u003cem\u003eChambers USA\u003c/em\u003e refer to Mark as \u0026ldquo;one of the most extraordinary litigators I\u0026rsquo;ve seen,\u0026rdquo; \u0026ldquo;a very deep thinker who is always incredibly well prepared,\u0026rdquo; and who \u0026ldquo;does a fantastic job when arguing cases,\u0026rdquo; \u0026ldquo;is at the vanguard of the US securities litigation market and enjoys a stunning reputation,\u0026rdquo; is \u0026ldquo;a force to be reckoned with,\u0026rdquo; is \u0026ldquo;a great strategist who\u0026rsquo;s detail-oriented and fantastic on his feet,\u0026rdquo; is \u0026ldquo;very good at strategy and very responsive to client needs,\u0026rdquo; and who is \u0026ldquo;extremely pleasant to deal with.\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp; He is also recognized as a leading securities litigation attorney by \u003cem\u003eThe Legal 500 United States\u003c/em\u003e.\u0026nbsp; Mark is named as a leading commercial litigation attorney by \u003cem\u003eThe Best Lawyers in America\u0026reg;,\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eBenchmark Litigation\u0026rsquo;s\u003c/em\u003e Guide to America\u0026rsquo;s Leading Litigation Firms and Attorneys recognized him as a \u0026ldquo;Litigation Star.\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp; In both 2019 and 2016, Law360 named Mark as one of five Securities Litigation MVPs nationwide.\u0026nbsp; In addition, he was named to \u003cem\u003eCity \u0026amp; State\u0026rsquo;s\u003c/em\u003e \u0026ldquo;50 Over 50\u0026rdquo; list of the most distinguished public servants in New York in 2020, a \u0026ldquo;Life Sciences Star\u0026rdquo; by \u003cem\u003eLMG Life Sciences 2017\u003c/em\u003e, and selected by \u003cem\u003eThe Lawyer\u003c/em\u003e as one of its \u0026ldquo;Global Hot 100 Attorneys\u0026rdquo; in 2006.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMark currently serves on the Board of Trustees of the American Friends of Hebrew University.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFrom 1991 to 1995, he served as Assistant United States Attorney in the Eastern District of New York, focusing on complex financial crimes.\u0026nbsp; In 1994, U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno personally awarded Mr. Kirsch the Justice Department Director\u0026rsquo;s Award for Superior Achievement as an Assistant U.S. Attorney.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMark was previously a partner at Gibson, Dunn \u0026amp; Crutcher where he served on the Executive Committee, as Co-Partner in Charge of the New York Office, and as Global Co-Chair of Gibson Dunn\u0026rsquo;s litigation practice. Prior to that, he was a partner at Clifford Chance where he served as Global Chair of the Litigation Practice and as a member of the Global Management Committee.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMark received his Juris Doctor from Yale University Law School, where he was Articles Editor of the Yale Law \u0026amp; Policy Review, and his Bachelor of Arts degree with distinction from Cornell University.\u0026nbsp; He clerked for the Honorable John M. Walker, Jr. in New York.\u003c/p\u003e","matters":["\u003cp\u003eRepresent\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: normal !msorm;\"\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eRio Tinto\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/span\u003e, the world\u0026rsquo;s second largest mining company, in an SEC suit alleging violations of Section 10(b), 17(a), internal controls requirements and books and records requirements, concerning the timing of a more than $3 billion impairment taken in connection with a mining project in Mozambique. Prior to trial the SEC dropped the 10(b), 17(a) and all scienter-based charges, settling for non-scienter books and records violations, a historic outcome for Rio Tinto.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented \u003cstrong\u003eRio Tinto\u003c/strong\u003e in defeating a Section 10(b) class action based on the same conduct as in the SEC case. The Second Circuit affirmed the dismissal by the District Court.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: normal !msorm;\"\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eVale S.A.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u0026nbsp;in massive class actions relating to the collapse of the Fundao dam in Brazil. Defeated class certification in one class action, effectively ending it, and obtained dismissal of a second that was affirmed by the Second Circuit.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eVale S.A.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in another massive class action resulting from the collapse of the Brumadinho dam in Brazil. (Case still pending.)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented half the board of directors of \u003cstrong\u003eAeroJet RocketDyne\u003c/strong\u003e against the other half of the board in a proxy fight, including trial to verdict in Delaware Chancery.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefending\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eBlackRock\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a major suit\u0026nbsp;in Virgin Islands Superior Court by shareholders of two public companies alleging BlackRock fraudulently drove down the share price of the companies.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefending\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eFanDuel\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;and its directors in an action in New York State court brought by common shareholders challenging distribution of $550 million in merger proceeds.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefending a\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003emajor global bank\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a large arbitration brought by a corporate entity alleging breach of fiduciary duty and breach of contract in connection with the sale of a large energy asset.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefending\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eFareva S.A.\u003c/strong\u003e, a large European manufacturer, in a breach of contract suit brought by LG and Avon the Southern District of New York.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: normal !msorm;\"\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eGerald Metals\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/span\u003e, the largest privately owned metals trading firm in the world, in litigation in Connecticut Superior Court brought by former senior executives and shareholders alleging breach of fiduciary duty and breach of contract in connection with shareholding and other agreements.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eUBS\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in class actions alleging that primary dealers of the New York Federal Reserve Bank price-fixed the auction market for U.S. Treasury securities.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eUBS\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in multiple LIBOR-related actions alleging price fixing, including cases where class certification was denied in connection with three separate putative classes.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon a complete trial verdict for global investment adviser \u003cstrong\u003eInvestcorp\u003c/strong\u003e in a case brought by hedge fund Kortright Partners for $250 million for negligent misrepresentation.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eWon a significant trial verdict for a \u003cstrong\u003eSusquehanna fund and two senior executives\u003c/strong\u003e after a bench trial asserting fraud claims in the $115 million sale of Plimus to Great Hill.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eObtained complete dismissal of a shareholder class action for\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: normal !msorm;\"\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAmTrust Financial\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/span\u003e, a Fortune 500 insurer, alleging violations of Section 11 of the 1933 Act and Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act, despite the Company\u0026rsquo;s restatement of financials and a disclosed SEC investigation.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eServed as the co-lead lawyer for \u003cstrong\u003eLynn Tilton\u003c/strong\u003e, the \u0026ldquo;Diva of Distressed,\u0026rdquo; and defeated the SEC after a three-week trial in the SEC\u0026rsquo;s ALJ court, where the ALJ dismissed all fraud and negligence charges against Ms. Tilton.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eObtained a rare reversal of a denial of summary judgment from the New York Appellate Division, on behalf of \u003cstrong\u003eTrust Company of the West\u003c/strong\u003e, on grounds the plaintiff hedge fund failed to establish loss causation in a case where TCW was the collateral manager for a large portfolio of mortgage-backed securities that failed to perform in the wake of the global financial crisis. TCW successfully argued the financial crisis caused the loss, not TCW\u0026rsquo;s management.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eObtained affirmance by the New Jersey Appellate Division of a dismissal from the bench after oral argument of a complaint against \u003cstrong\u003eMerck\u003c/strong\u003e challenging its tax disclosures.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended \u003cstrong\u003eCorvex Management\u003c/strong\u003e and \u003cstrong\u003eThe Related Companies\u003c/strong\u003e in a two-week arbitration (the result of which was publicly disclosed) that resulted in invalidating all material anti-shareholder defenses of CommonWealth REIT, whose Trustees Corvex/Related ultimately removed in a consent solicitation.\u0026nbsp; Many major media outlets described the outcome as a \u0026ldquo;major victory\u0026rdquo; for Corvex/Related.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eObtained the voluntary dismissal of a putative class action on behalf of \u003cstrong\u003eGoldman Sachs, Citigroup, Merrill Lynch, Morgan Stanley, UBS and BNY Mellon Capital Markets\u003c/strong\u003e \u0026ndash; after three years of litigation \u0026ndash; arising from BNYM\u0026rsquo;s foreign exchange business, alleging violation of the federal securities laws in connection with underwriting $2 billion of securities for BNYM.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefended \u003cstrong\u003eGoldman Sachs, Citigroup, Bank of America, Merrill Lynch, J.P. Morgan, Deutsche Bank and Royal Bank of Scotland\u003c/strong\u003e in a putative class action alleging violation of the federal securities laws in connection with underwriting $900 million of notes for MF Global Holdings.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eResolved favorably for \u003cstrong\u003eMoody\u0026rsquo;s\u003c/strong\u003e the two most significant cases it had faced concerning ratings of structured investment vehicles.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eObtained summary judgment for \u003cstrong\u003eCitigroup\u003c/strong\u003e in connection with a securities fraud claim for $13.2 billion brought by Parmalat investors after Parmalat\u0026rsquo;s collapse.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLed the team that achieved five significant victories for \u003cstrong\u003eAllianceBernstein\u003c/strong\u003e in securities litigation arising out of the Enron collapse, including a seven-week state court jury trial in which Alliance defeated the Florida state pension fund\u0026rsquo;s attempt to recover $3.2 billion in losses the fund sustained in Enron and other stocks, and AllianceBernstein won its damages counterclaim and costs.\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eThe National Law Journal\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;selected the trial victory as one of its \u0026ldquo;Top 10 Defense Verdicts of 2006.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented \u003cstrong\u003eAllianceBernstein\u003c/strong\u003e in the\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eNewby\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;securities class action in Houston, in which Enron shareholders and bondholders sought over $1 billion in damages against the company. Obtained summary judgment for AllianceBernstein and costs against plaintiffs\u0026rsquo; counsel, a victory written about twice by the\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eWall Street Journal\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;in editorials.\u003c/p\u003e"]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":9950}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2026-01-23T22:00:07.000Z","updated_at":"2026-01-23T22:00:07.000Z","searchable_text":"Kirsch{{ FIELD }}Represent Rio Tinto, the world’s second largest mining company, in an SEC suit alleging violations of Section 10(b), 17(a), internal controls requirements and books and records requirements, concerning the timing of a more than $3 billion impairment taken in connection with a mining project in Mozambique. Prior to trial the SEC dropped the 10(b), 17(a) and all scienter-based charges, settling for non-scienter books and records violations, a historic outcome for Rio Tinto.{{ FIELD }}Represented Rio Tinto in defeating a Section 10(b) class action based on the same conduct as in the SEC case. The Second Circuit affirmed the dismissal by the District Court.{{ FIELD }}Represented Vale S.A. in massive class actions relating to the collapse of the Fundao dam in Brazil. Defeated class certification in one class action, effectively ending it, and obtained dismissal of a second that was affirmed by the Second Circuit.{{ FIELD }}Represented Vale S.A. in another massive class action resulting from the collapse of the Brumadinho dam in Brazil. (Case still pending.){{ FIELD }}Successfully represented half the board of directors of AeroJet RocketDyne against the other half of the board in a proxy fight, including trial to verdict in Delaware Chancery.{{ FIELD }}Defending BlackRock in a major suit in Virgin Islands Superior Court by shareholders of two public companies alleging BlackRock fraudulently drove down the share price of the companies.{{ FIELD }}Defending FanDuel and its directors in an action in New York State court brought by common shareholders challenging distribution of $550 million in merger proceeds.{{ FIELD }}Defending a major global bank in a large arbitration brought by a corporate entity alleging breach of fiduciary duty and breach of contract in connection with the sale of a large energy asset.{{ FIELD }}Defending Fareva S.A., a large European manufacturer, in a breach of contract suit brought by LG and Avon the Southern District of New York.{{ FIELD }}Gerald Metals, the largest privately owned metals trading firm in the world, in litigation in Connecticut Superior Court brought by former senior executives and shareholders alleging breach of fiduciary duty and breach of contract in connection with shareholding and other agreements.{{ FIELD }}Defended UBS in class actions alleging that primary dealers of the New York Federal Reserve Bank price-fixed the auction market for U.S. Treasury securities.{{ FIELD }}Defended UBS in multiple LIBOR-related actions alleging price fixing, including cases where class certification was denied in connection with three separate putative classes.{{ FIELD }}Won a complete trial verdict for global investment adviser Investcorp in a case brought by hedge fund Kortright Partners for $250 million for negligent misrepresentation.{{ FIELD }}Won a significant trial verdict for a Susquehanna fund and two senior executives after a bench trial asserting fraud claims in the $115 million sale of Plimus to Great Hill.{{ FIELD }}Obtained complete dismissal of a shareholder class action for AmTrust Financial, a Fortune 500 insurer, alleging violations of Section 11 of the 1933 Act and Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act, despite the Company’s restatement of financials and a disclosed SEC investigation.{{ FIELD }}Served as the co-lead lawyer for Lynn Tilton, the “Diva of Distressed,” and defeated the SEC after a three-week trial in the SEC’s ALJ court, where the ALJ dismissed all fraud and negligence charges against Ms. Tilton.{{ FIELD }}Obtained a rare reversal of a denial of summary judgment from the New York Appellate Division, on behalf of Trust Company of the West, on grounds the plaintiff hedge fund failed to establish loss causation in a case where TCW was the collateral manager for a large portfolio of mortgage-backed securities that failed to perform in the wake of the global financial crisis. TCW successfully argued the financial crisis caused the loss, not TCW’s management.{{ FIELD }}Obtained affirmance by the New Jersey Appellate Division of a dismissal from the bench after oral argument of a complaint against Merck challenging its tax disclosures.{{ FIELD }}Defended Corvex Management and The Related Companies in a two-week arbitration (the result of which was publicly disclosed) that resulted in invalidating all material anti-shareholder defenses of CommonWealth REIT, whose Trustees Corvex/Related ultimately removed in a consent solicitation.  Many major media outlets described the outcome as a “major victory” for Corvex/Related.{{ FIELD }}Obtained the voluntary dismissal of a putative class action on behalf of Goldman Sachs, Citigroup, Merrill Lynch, Morgan Stanley, UBS and BNY Mellon Capital Markets – after three years of litigation – arising from BNYM’s foreign exchange business, alleging violation of the federal securities laws in connection with underwriting $2 billion of securities for BNYM.{{ FIELD }}Defended Goldman Sachs, Citigroup, Bank of America, Merrill Lynch, J.P. Morgan, Deutsche Bank and Royal Bank of Scotland in a putative class action alleging violation of the federal securities laws in connection with underwriting $900 million of notes for MF Global Holdings.{{ FIELD }}Resolved favorably for Moody’s the two most significant cases it had faced concerning ratings of structured investment vehicles. {{ FIELD }}Obtained summary judgment for Citigroup in connection with a securities fraud claim for $13.2 billion brought by Parmalat investors after Parmalat’s collapse.{{ FIELD }}Led the team that achieved five significant victories for AllianceBernstein in securities litigation arising out of the Enron collapse, including a seven-week state court jury trial in which Alliance defeated the Florida state pension fund’s attempt to recover $3.2 billion in losses the fund sustained in Enron and other stocks, and AllianceBernstein won its damages counterclaim and costs.  The National Law Journal selected the trial victory as one of its “Top 10 Defense Verdicts of 2006.”{{ FIELD }}Represented AllianceBernstein in the Newby securities class action in Houston, in which Enron shareholders and bondholders sought over $1 billion in damages against the company. Obtained summary judgment for AllianceBernstein and costs against plaintiffs’ counsel, a victory written about twice by the Wall Street Journal in editorials.{{ FIELD }}Mark Kirsch is a partner in King \u0026amp; Spalding’s New York office. He is an experienced trial lawyer whose practice focuses on complex securities, white collar, commercial and antitrust litigation. He is routinely named one of the leading litigators in the United States. \nMark is ranked for Securities Litigation nationwide and in New York by Chambers USA: America’s Leading Lawyers for Business.  The 2022 edition of Chambers USA states that clients say he is “a very strategic thinker with a great demeanor in litigation, as well as providing good client service,” and that “he has incredible judgment, is very good on his feet and always prepared.”  The 2021 edition shares that clients believe he is “an amazingly quick study, and great at strategic decision-making.”  The 2020 edition notes that clients say Mark is “a brilliant lawyer and a great strategist, with excellent client service” and that “his way of handling cases and his ability to combine legal knowledge with the business risks is absolutely excellent.”  A client also comments that he has “fantastic cross-examination skills.”  Prior recent editions of Chambers USA refer to Mark as “one of the most extraordinary litigators I’ve seen,” “a very deep thinker who is always incredibly well prepared,” and who “does a fantastic job when arguing cases,” “is at the vanguard of the US securities litigation market and enjoys a stunning reputation,” is “a force to be reckoned with,” is “a great strategist who’s detail-oriented and fantastic on his feet,” is “very good at strategy and very responsive to client needs,” and who is “extremely pleasant to deal with.”  He is also recognized as a leading securities litigation attorney by The Legal 500 United States.  Mark is named as a leading commercial litigation attorney by The Best Lawyers in America®, and Benchmark Litigation’s Guide to America’s Leading Litigation Firms and Attorneys recognized him as a “Litigation Star.”  In both 2019 and 2016, Law360 named Mark as one of five Securities Litigation MVPs nationwide.  In addition, he was named to City \u0026amp; State’s “50 Over 50” list of the most distinguished public servants in New York in 2020, a “Life Sciences Star” by LMG Life Sciences 2017, and selected by The Lawyer as one of its “Global Hot 100 Attorneys” in 2006.\nMark currently serves on the Board of Trustees of the American Friends of Hebrew University.\nFrom 1991 to 1995, he served as Assistant United States Attorney in the Eastern District of New York, focusing on complex financial crimes.  In 1994, U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno personally awarded Mr. Kirsch the Justice Department Director’s Award for Superior Achievement as an Assistant U.S. Attorney.\nMark was previously a partner at Gibson, Dunn \u0026amp; Crutcher where he served on the Executive Committee, as Co-Partner in Charge of the New York Office, and as Global Co-Chair of Gibson Dunn’s litigation practice. Prior to that, he was a partner at Clifford Chance where he served as Global Chair of the Litigation Practice and as a member of the Global Management Committee.\nMark received his Juris Doctor from Yale University Law School, where he was Articles Editor of the Yale Law \u0026amp; Policy Review, and his Bachelor of Arts degree with distinction from Cornell University.  He clerked for the Honorable John M. Walker, Jr. in New York. Partner Cornell University Cornell Law School Yale University Yale Law School U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit U.S. Tax Court New York Board of Trustees of the American Friends of Hebrew University Judicial Clerk, Honorable John M. Waker, Jr., U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York Represent Rio Tinto, the world’s second largest mining company, in an SEC suit alleging violations of Section 10(b), 17(a), internal controls requirements and books and records requirements, concerning the timing of a more than $3 billion impairment taken in connection with a mining project in Mozambique. Prior to trial the SEC dropped the 10(b), 17(a) and all scienter-based charges, settling for non-scienter books and records violations, a historic outcome for Rio Tinto. Represented Rio Tinto in defeating a Section 10(b) class action based on the same conduct as in the SEC case. The Second Circuit affirmed the dismissal by the District Court. Represented Vale S.A. in massive class actions relating to the collapse of the Fundao dam in Brazil. Defeated class certification in one class action, effectively ending it, and obtained dismissal of a second that was affirmed by the Second Circuit. Represented Vale S.A. in another massive class action resulting from the collapse of the Brumadinho dam in Brazil. (Case still pending.) Successfully represented half the board of directors of AeroJet RocketDyne against the other half of the board in a proxy fight, including trial to verdict in Delaware Chancery. Defending BlackRock in a major suit in Virgin Islands Superior Court by shareholders of two public companies alleging BlackRock fraudulently drove down the share price of the companies. Defending FanDuel and its directors in an action in New York State court brought by common shareholders challenging distribution of $550 million in merger proceeds. Defending a major global bank in a large arbitration brought by a corporate entity alleging breach of fiduciary duty and breach of contract in connection with the sale of a large energy asset. Defending Fareva S.A., a large European manufacturer, in a breach of contract suit brought by LG and Avon the Southern District of New York. Gerald Metals, the largest privately owned metals trading firm in the world, in litigation in Connecticut Superior Court brought by former senior executives and shareholders alleging breach of fiduciary duty and breach of contract in connection with shareholding and other agreements. Defended UBS in class actions alleging that primary dealers of the New York Federal Reserve Bank price-fixed the auction market for U.S. Treasury securities. Defended UBS in multiple LIBOR-related actions alleging price fixing, including cases where class certification was denied in connection with three separate putative classes. Won a complete trial verdict for global investment adviser Investcorp in a case brought by hedge fund Kortright Partners for $250 million for negligent misrepresentation. Won a significant trial verdict for a Susquehanna fund and two senior executives after a bench trial asserting fraud claims in the $115 million sale of Plimus to Great Hill. Obtained complete dismissal of a shareholder class action for AmTrust Financial, a Fortune 500 insurer, alleging violations of Section 11 of the 1933 Act and Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act, despite the Company’s restatement of financials and a disclosed SEC investigation. Served as the co-lead lawyer for Lynn Tilton, the “Diva of Distressed,” and defeated the SEC after a three-week trial in the SEC’s ALJ court, where the ALJ dismissed all fraud and negligence charges against Ms. Tilton. Obtained a rare reversal of a denial of summary judgment from the New York Appellate Division, on behalf of Trust Company of the West, on grounds the plaintiff hedge fund failed to establish loss causation in a case where TCW was the collateral manager for a large portfolio of mortgage-backed securities that failed to perform in the wake of the global financial crisis. TCW successfully argued the financial crisis caused the loss, not TCW’s management. Obtained affirmance by the New Jersey Appellate Division of a dismissal from the bench after oral argument of a complaint against Merck challenging its tax disclosures. Defended Corvex Management and The Related Companies in a two-week arbitration (the result of which was publicly disclosed) that resulted in invalidating all material anti-shareholder defenses of CommonWealth REIT, whose Trustees Corvex/Related ultimately removed in a consent solicitation.  Many major media outlets described the outcome as a “major victory” for Corvex/Related. Obtained the voluntary dismissal of a putative class action on behalf of Goldman Sachs, Citigroup, Merrill Lynch, Morgan Stanley, UBS and BNY Mellon Capital Markets – after three years of litigation – arising from BNYM’s foreign exchange business, alleging violation of the federal securities laws in connection with underwriting $2 billion of securities for BNYM. Defended Goldman Sachs, Citigroup, Bank of America, Merrill Lynch, J.P. Morgan, Deutsche Bank and Royal Bank of Scotland in a putative class action alleging violation of the federal securities laws in connection with underwriting $900 million of notes for MF Global Holdings. Resolved favorably for Moody’s the two most significant cases it had faced concerning ratings of structured investment vehicles.  Obtained summary judgment for Citigroup in connection with a securities fraud claim for $13.2 billion brought by Parmalat investors after Parmalat’s collapse. Led the team that achieved five significant victories for AllianceBernstein in securities litigation arising out of the Enron collapse, including a seven-week state court jury trial in which Alliance defeated the Florida state pension fund’s attempt to recover $3.2 billion in losses the fund sustained in Enron and other stocks, and AllianceBernstein won its damages counterclaim and costs.  The National Law Journal selected the trial victory as one of its “Top 10 Defense Verdicts of 2006.” Represented AllianceBernstein in the Newby securities class action in Houston, in which Enron shareholders and bondholders sought over $1 billion in damages against the company. Obtained summary judgment for AllianceBernstein and costs against plaintiffs’ counsel, a victory written about twice by the Wall Street Journal in editorials.","searchable_name":"Mark A. Kirsch","is_active":true,"featured":null,"publish_date":null,"expiration_date":null,"blog_featured":null,"published_by":32,"capability_group_featured":null,"home_page_featured":null},{"id":442758,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":5296,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eLiv Kiser, a member of the federal trial bar, defends companies in high-stakes civil disputes arising from dangerous or toxic products or substances, consumer fraud, false advertising, breach of warranty, privacy violations, unfair competition and other torts.\u0026nbsp; A seasoned and vigorous advocate both in and outside of the courtroom, Liv's innovative approaches to complex legal questions have resulted in the development of new law favorable to her clients and entire industries.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eLiv proactively works with companies in the supply chain of highly-regulated, consumer-facing industries -- from automotive to food, financial services, healthcare, personal care products, real estate, telecommunications, utilities, and others -- to identify and manage their legal risks, developing creative and cost-effective strategies for furthering their business interests, protecting brands and preserving consumer goodwill.\u0026nbsp; Liv regularly resolves cases at the earliest stages of litigation through creative strategies that (for example) operate to moot a class action or render the case uncertifiable. Liv has persuaded opposing counsel to dismiss cases without compensation by persuasively explaining applicable law.\u0026nbsp; Liv has successfully defeated class certification in cases that prior counsel believed to be unwinnable.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eLiv has defended some of the world's largest multi-national companies in high-stakes commercial, viral and multidistrict litigation, managing crisis situations in which simultaneous inquiries by state and federal regulators, international and local law enforcement and Congress are taking place. Liv has appeared in state and federal courts across the nation, and understands how courts are likely to apply the consumer protection laws in any given dispute.\u0026nbsp; Her clients consider her predictive skills as to how matters are likely to unfold and resolve as \"uncanny.\"\u0026nbsp; Protecting company reputations and preserving trust is a central focus of Liv\u0026rsquo;s practice.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eLiv routinely and successfully defends companies facing\u0026nbsp;claims asserted under the laws of California\u0026nbsp;(including Cal. Bus. \u0026amp; Prof. Code 17200 (UCL), 17500, CLRA, CCPA, Prop 65) and other states (including the Illinois Biometric Privacy Act (BIPA)).\u0026nbsp; She has defeated numerous claims under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA), the Americans with Disabilities' Act (ADA) and other state and federal laws.\u0026nbsp; She has substantial experience successfully defeating cases where plaintiffs seek recovery for alleged \"price premiums\" and/or \"overpayments.\"\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eLiv also has a very active pro bono practice, obtaining asylum for persecuted individuals and ensuring children with disabilities obtain necessary services.\u0026nbsp; She also represents incarcerated defendants in Constitutional cases.\u0026nbsp; Liv serves on the firm's Diversity Committee, and on committees within the Chicago office.\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"livia-kiser","email":"lkiser@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":["\u003cp\u003eLead counsel is a proposed class action alleging arsenic in spices caused harm to consumers who purchased the products. Case resolved for\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003ede minimis\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;amount after recall implemented.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel in a series of Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986 (California's \"Proposition 65\") relating to a variety of allegedly carcinogenic and toxic substances in food and other consumer products. Cases resolved on very favorable terms through informal negotiations.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel in a proposed class action alleging the engine compartments of certain model vehicles emit noxious and toxic substances into the vehicles' passenger cabins, allegedly rendering the vehicles undrivable and causing vehicle occupants to require medical treatment.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel in a proposed class action brought under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) seeking more than $600 million in damages as a result of defendant allegedly having sent facsimiles to recipients that purportedly lacked legally-sufficient opt-out notices. Successfully defeated class certification on predominance grounds.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel in a proposed class action alleging vehicle transmissions are defective; persuaded Court to dismiss the Magnuson Moss Warranty Act claim for failing to name at least 100 named plaintiffs; Court rejected the notion it had jurisdiction over the MMWA claim based on diversity.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel in a proposed class action alleging violations of state and federal warranty laws brought on behalf of a Wisconsin resident. Liv successfully obtained dismissal of the case on grounds that Illinois lacked sufficient contacts to confer general personal jurisdiction over American Honda.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel in a proposed class action alleging violations to the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) that was successfully resolved on very favorable terms prior to the filing of a responsive pleading.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eCo-lead counsel in a proposed class action against Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A. alleging excessive oil consumption in certain Toyota vehicles; successfully argued Plaintiff lacked standing; case was dismissed, with costs awarded to Toyota.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eIn a proposed class action brought by Oregon and Washington residents against Ford Motor Co., Inc. in California, successfully argued that the State of California lacked sufficient contacts to assert general personal jurisdiction over Ford. Plaintiffs declined to appeal the district court\u0026rsquo;s dismissal of Ford.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel in an MDL consolidating nine consumer class actions filed throughout the U.S. alleging 2015 Honda CR-Vs vibrate excessively. Resolved favorably through a Rule 23(b)(2) settlement where the remedy is to provide \u0026ldquo;enhanced\u0026rdquo; notice of pre-existing, effective countermeasures to the relatively few consumers who complained.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel in a proposed class action alleging an internet advertising service provider breached its service agreements by invoicing allegedly misleading charges; successfully resolved after preliminary motion practice and targeted discovery of plaintiff.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel in a proposed class action against U.S. automotive distributor and foreign parent alleging the pedal bracket assembly in certain vehicles was defective; Plaintiffs sought to certify classes and subclasses in more than ten states. Resolved on favorable terms after a favorable ruling on a motion to dismiss and targeted discovery of plaintiffs.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel in a proposed class action alleging Defendants sent unwanted facsimile advertisements to Plaintiff and members of the proposed classes. Defeated class certification by successfully proving Plaintiff and all of its counsel (more than 10 lawyers and 3 law firms) were inadequate.\u003c/p\u003e"],"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[{"id":3191}]},"expertise":[{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":764,"guid":"764.smart_tags","index":1,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":105,"guid":"105.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":3,"guid":"3.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":6,"guid":"6.capabilities","index":4,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":71,"guid":"71.capabilities","index":5,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":5,"guid":"5.capabilities","index":6,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":762,"guid":"762.smart_tags","index":7,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":106,"guid":"106.capabilities","index":8,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":103,"guid":"103.capabilities","index":9,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":1015,"guid":"1015.smart_tags","index":10,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":761,"guid":"761.smart_tags","index":11,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1199,"guid":"1199.smart_tags","index":12,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1202,"guid":"1202.smart_tags","index":13,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1233,"guid":"1233.smart_tags","index":14,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1256,"guid":"1256.smart_tags","index":15,"source":"smartTags"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Kiser","nick_name":"Liv","clerkships":[],"first_name":"Livia","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":202,"law_schools":[{"id":1451,"meta":{"degree":"J.D.","honors":"cum laude, Order of the Coif","is_law_school":"1","graduation_date":null},"order":1,"pin_order":null,"pin_expiration":null}],"middle_name":"M.","name_suffix":"","recognitions":[{"title":"Named to 2025 Lawdragon 500 Leading Global Cyber Lawyers","detail":"Lawdragon"},{"title":"Named to 2025 Leading Lawyers ","detail":"Leading Lawyers"},{"title":"Named to Chambers 2024 Leading Lawyers in America","detail":"Chambers"},{"title":"Tier 2 - Leading Lawyer in 2024 for Transport\u003eRail and Road: Litigation and Regulation","detail":"Legal 500"},{"title":"Tier 1-Key Lawyer in 2024 for Dispute Resolution\u003eProduct Liability, Mass Tort \u0026 Class Actions-Defense: Consumer Products","detail":"Legal 500"},{"title":"Tier 1-Key Lawyer in 2024 for Dispute Resolution\u003eProduct Liability, Mass Tort \u0026 Class Actions-Defense: Auto/Transport","detail":"Legal 500"},{"title":"Named to Chambers 2024 General Commercial Litigation List","detail":"Chambers"},{"title":"Member of 2024 Lawdragon 500 Leading Global Cyber Lawyers","detail":"Lawdragon"},{"title":"Stand-Out Lawyer ","detail":"Thomson Reuters 2024"},{"title":"Leading Lawyer in 2023 in Transport: Rail and Road, Litigation and Regulatory","detail":"Legal 500"},{"title":"Recommended Lawyer in 2023 in Product Liability, Mass Tort, and Class Actions: Consumer Products: Defense ","detail":"Legal 500"},{"title":"Recommended Lawyer in 2022 in Product Liability, Mass Tort, and Class Actions: Consumer Products: Defense","detail":"Legal 500"},{"title":"Recommended Lawyer in 2022 in Product Liability, Mass Tort, and Class Actions: Auto/Transport: Defense","detail":"Legal 500"},{"title":"Named to Crain's Chicago Business's 2023 Notable Litigators and Trial Attorneys List","detail":"Crain's Chicago Business"},{"title":"Named to Chicago Lawyer's 2021 Top 50 Women in Law ","detail":"Chicago Lawyer"},{"title":"Named to Crain's Chicago Business's 2020 Notable Women in Law","detail":"Crain's Chicago Business"},{"title":"Leading Lawyer in 2022 in Transport: Rail and Road, Litigation and Regulatory ","detail":"Legal 500"},{"title":"Named to The Best Lawyers in America for Consumer Law","detail":"Best Lawyers In America"},{"title":"Recognized as a \"Leading Lawyer\"","detail":"Leading Lawyers Network"},{"title":"Named among the “Top Lawyers in Illinois” in Advertising \u0026 Media Law and Class Action Mass Tort Defense Law","detail":"Illinois Super Lawyer"}],"linked_in_url":"https://www.linkedin.com/in/livia-kiser-9a1b675/","seodescription":"Livia M. Kiser (Liv) is a lawyer of our Business Litigation Practice Group. Read more.","primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eLiv Kiser, a member of the federal trial bar, defends companies in high-stakes civil disputes arising from dangerous or toxic products or substances, consumer fraud, false advertising, breach of warranty, privacy violations, unfair competition and other torts.\u0026nbsp; A seasoned and vigorous advocate both in and outside of the courtroom, Liv's innovative approaches to complex legal questions have resulted in the development of new law favorable to her clients and entire industries.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eLiv proactively works with companies in the supply chain of highly-regulated, consumer-facing industries -- from automotive to food, financial services, healthcare, personal care products, real estate, telecommunications, utilities, and others -- to identify and manage their legal risks, developing creative and cost-effective strategies for furthering their business interests, protecting brands and preserving consumer goodwill.\u0026nbsp; Liv regularly resolves cases at the earliest stages of litigation through creative strategies that (for example) operate to moot a class action or render the case uncertifiable. Liv has persuaded opposing counsel to dismiss cases without compensation by persuasively explaining applicable law.\u0026nbsp; Liv has successfully defeated class certification in cases that prior counsel believed to be unwinnable.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eLiv has defended some of the world's largest multi-national companies in high-stakes commercial, viral and multidistrict litigation, managing crisis situations in which simultaneous inquiries by state and federal regulators, international and local law enforcement and Congress are taking place. Liv has appeared in state and federal courts across the nation, and understands how courts are likely to apply the consumer protection laws in any given dispute.\u0026nbsp; Her clients consider her predictive skills as to how matters are likely to unfold and resolve as \"uncanny.\"\u0026nbsp; Protecting company reputations and preserving trust is a central focus of Liv\u0026rsquo;s practice.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eLiv routinely and successfully defends companies facing\u0026nbsp;claims asserted under the laws of California\u0026nbsp;(including Cal. Bus. \u0026amp; Prof. Code 17200 (UCL), 17500, CLRA, CCPA, Prop 65) and other states (including the Illinois Biometric Privacy Act (BIPA)).\u0026nbsp; She has defeated numerous claims under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA), the Americans with Disabilities' Act (ADA) and other state and federal laws.\u0026nbsp; She has substantial experience successfully defeating cases where plaintiffs seek recovery for alleged \"price premiums\" and/or \"overpayments.\"\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eLiv also has a very active pro bono practice, obtaining asylum for persecuted individuals and ensuring children with disabilities obtain necessary services.\u0026nbsp; She also represents incarcerated defendants in Constitutional cases.\u0026nbsp; Liv serves on the firm's Diversity Committee, and on committees within the Chicago office.\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e","matters":["\u003cp\u003eLead counsel is a proposed class action alleging arsenic in spices caused harm to consumers who purchased the products. Case resolved for\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003ede minimis\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;amount after recall implemented.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel in a series of Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986 (California's \"Proposition 65\") relating to a variety of allegedly carcinogenic and toxic substances in food and other consumer products. Cases resolved on very favorable terms through informal negotiations.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel in a proposed class action alleging the engine compartments of certain model vehicles emit noxious and toxic substances into the vehicles' passenger cabins, allegedly rendering the vehicles undrivable and causing vehicle occupants to require medical treatment.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel in a proposed class action brought under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) seeking more than $600 million in damages as a result of defendant allegedly having sent facsimiles to recipients that purportedly lacked legally-sufficient opt-out notices. Successfully defeated class certification on predominance grounds.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel in a proposed class action alleging vehicle transmissions are defective; persuaded Court to dismiss the Magnuson Moss Warranty Act claim for failing to name at least 100 named plaintiffs; Court rejected the notion it had jurisdiction over the MMWA claim based on diversity.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel in a proposed class action alleging violations of state and federal warranty laws brought on behalf of a Wisconsin resident. Liv successfully obtained dismissal of the case on grounds that Illinois lacked sufficient contacts to confer general personal jurisdiction over American Honda.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel in a proposed class action alleging violations to the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) that was successfully resolved on very favorable terms prior to the filing of a responsive pleading.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eCo-lead counsel in a proposed class action against Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A. alleging excessive oil consumption in certain Toyota vehicles; successfully argued Plaintiff lacked standing; case was dismissed, with costs awarded to Toyota.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eIn a proposed class action brought by Oregon and Washington residents against Ford Motor Co., Inc. in California, successfully argued that the State of California lacked sufficient contacts to assert general personal jurisdiction over Ford. Plaintiffs declined to appeal the district court\u0026rsquo;s dismissal of Ford.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel in an MDL consolidating nine consumer class actions filed throughout the U.S. alleging 2015 Honda CR-Vs vibrate excessively. Resolved favorably through a Rule 23(b)(2) settlement where the remedy is to provide \u0026ldquo;enhanced\u0026rdquo; notice of pre-existing, effective countermeasures to the relatively few consumers who complained.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel in a proposed class action alleging an internet advertising service provider breached its service agreements by invoicing allegedly misleading charges; successfully resolved after preliminary motion practice and targeted discovery of plaintiff.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel in a proposed class action against U.S. automotive distributor and foreign parent alleging the pedal bracket assembly in certain vehicles was defective; Plaintiffs sought to certify classes and subclasses in more than ten states. Resolved on favorable terms after a favorable ruling on a motion to dismiss and targeted discovery of plaintiffs.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eLead counsel in a proposed class action alleging Defendants sent unwanted facsimile advertisements to Plaintiff and members of the proposed classes. Defeated class certification by successfully proving Plaintiff and all of its counsel (more than 10 lawyers and 3 law firms) were inadequate.\u003c/p\u003e"],"recognitions":[{"title":"Named to 2025 Lawdragon 500 Leading Global Cyber Lawyers","detail":"Lawdragon"},{"title":"Named to 2025 Leading Lawyers ","detail":"Leading Lawyers"},{"title":"Named to Chambers 2024 Leading Lawyers in America","detail":"Chambers"},{"title":"Tier 2 - Leading Lawyer in 2024 for Transport\u003eRail and Road: Litigation and Regulation","detail":"Legal 500"},{"title":"Tier 1-Key Lawyer in 2024 for Dispute Resolution\u003eProduct Liability, Mass Tort \u0026 Class Actions-Defense: Consumer Products","detail":"Legal 500"},{"title":"Tier 1-Key Lawyer in 2024 for Dispute Resolution\u003eProduct Liability, Mass Tort \u0026 Class Actions-Defense: Auto/Transport","detail":"Legal 500"},{"title":"Named to Chambers 2024 General Commercial Litigation List","detail":"Chambers"},{"title":"Member of 2024 Lawdragon 500 Leading Global Cyber Lawyers","detail":"Lawdragon"},{"title":"Stand-Out Lawyer ","detail":"Thomson Reuters 2024"},{"title":"Leading Lawyer in 2023 in Transport: Rail and Road, Litigation and Regulatory","detail":"Legal 500"},{"title":"Recommended Lawyer in 2023 in Product Liability, Mass Tort, and Class Actions: Consumer Products: Defense ","detail":"Legal 500"},{"title":"Recommended Lawyer in 2022 in Product Liability, Mass Tort, and Class Actions: Consumer Products: Defense","detail":"Legal 500"},{"title":"Recommended Lawyer in 2022 in Product Liability, Mass Tort, and Class Actions: Auto/Transport: Defense","detail":"Legal 500"},{"title":"Named to Crain's Chicago Business's 2023 Notable Litigators and Trial Attorneys List","detail":"Crain's Chicago Business"},{"title":"Named to Chicago Lawyer's 2021 Top 50 Women in Law ","detail":"Chicago Lawyer"},{"title":"Named to Crain's Chicago Business's 2020 Notable Women in Law","detail":"Crain's Chicago Business"},{"title":"Leading Lawyer in 2022 in Transport: Rail and Road, Litigation and Regulatory ","detail":"Legal 500"},{"title":"Named to The Best Lawyers in America for Consumer Law","detail":"Best Lawyers In America"},{"title":"Recognized as a \"Leading Lawyer\"","detail":"Leading Lawyers Network"},{"title":"Named among the “Top Lawyers in Illinois” in Advertising \u0026 Media Law and Class Action Mass Tort Defense Law","detail":"Illinois Super Lawyer"}]},"ja":{"matters":[""]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":6111}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2025-11-13T04:56:28.000Z","updated_at":"2025-11-13T04:56:28.000Z","searchable_text":"Kiser{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named to 2025 Lawdragon 500 Leading Global Cyber Lawyers\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Lawdragon\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named to 2025 Leading Lawyers \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Leading Lawyers\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named to Chambers 2024 Leading Lawyers in America\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Tier 2 - Leading Lawyer in 2024 for Transport\u0026gt;Rail and Road: Litigation and Regulation\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Tier 1-Key Lawyer in 2024 for Dispute Resolution\u0026gt;Product Liability, Mass Tort \u0026amp; Class Actions-Defense: Consumer Products\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Tier 1-Key Lawyer in 2024 for Dispute Resolution\u0026gt;Product Liability, Mass Tort \u0026amp; Class Actions-Defense: Auto/Transport\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named to Chambers 2024 General Commercial Litigation List\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chambers\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Member of 2024 Lawdragon 500 Leading Global Cyber Lawyers\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Lawdragon\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Stand-Out Lawyer \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Thomson Reuters 2024\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Leading Lawyer in 2023 in Transport: Rail and Road, Litigation and Regulatory\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Recommended Lawyer in 2023 in Product Liability, Mass Tort, and Class Actions: Consumer Products: Defense \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Recommended Lawyer in 2022 in Product Liability, Mass Tort, and Class Actions: Consumer Products: Defense\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Recommended Lawyer in 2022 in Product Liability, Mass Tort, and Class Actions: Auto/Transport: Defense\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named to Crain's Chicago Business's 2023 Notable Litigators and Trial Attorneys List\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Crain's Chicago Business\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named to Chicago Lawyer's 2021 Top 50 Women in Law \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Chicago Lawyer\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named to Crain's Chicago Business's 2020 Notable Women in Law\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Crain's Chicago Business\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Leading Lawyer in 2022 in Transport: Rail and Road, Litigation and Regulatory \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Legal 500\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named to The Best Lawyers in America for Consumer Law\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Best Lawyers In America\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Recognized as a \\\"Leading Lawyer\\\"\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Leading Lawyers Network\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named among the “Top Lawyers in Illinois” in Advertising \u0026amp; Media Law and Class Action Mass Tort Defense Law\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Illinois Super Lawyer\"}{{ FIELD }}Lead counsel is a proposed class action alleging arsenic in spices caused harm to consumers who purchased the products. Case resolved for de minimis amount after recall implemented.{{ FIELD }}Lead counsel in a series of Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986 (California's \"Proposition 65\") relating to a variety of allegedly carcinogenic and toxic substances in food and other consumer products. Cases resolved on very favorable terms through informal negotiations.{{ FIELD }}Lead counsel in a proposed class action alleging the engine compartments of certain model vehicles emit noxious and toxic substances into the vehicles' passenger cabins, allegedly rendering the vehicles undrivable and causing vehicle occupants to require medical treatment.{{ FIELD }}Lead counsel in a proposed class action brought under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) seeking more than $600 million in damages as a result of defendant allegedly having sent facsimiles to recipients that purportedly lacked legally-sufficient opt-out notices. Successfully defeated class certification on predominance grounds.{{ FIELD }}Lead counsel in a proposed class action alleging vehicle transmissions are defective; persuaded Court to dismiss the Magnuson Moss Warranty Act claim for failing to name at least 100 named plaintiffs; Court rejected the notion it had jurisdiction over the MMWA claim based on diversity.{{ FIELD }}Lead counsel in a proposed class action alleging violations of state and federal warranty laws brought on behalf of a Wisconsin resident. Liv successfully obtained dismissal of the case on grounds that Illinois lacked sufficient contacts to confer general personal jurisdiction over American Honda.{{ FIELD }}Lead counsel in a proposed class action alleging violations to the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) that was successfully resolved on very favorable terms prior to the filing of a responsive pleading.{{ FIELD }}Co-lead counsel in a proposed class action against Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A. alleging excessive oil consumption in certain Toyota vehicles; successfully argued Plaintiff lacked standing; case was dismissed, with costs awarded to Toyota.{{ FIELD }}In a proposed class action brought by Oregon and Washington residents against Ford Motor Co., Inc. in California, successfully argued that the State of California lacked sufficient contacts to assert general personal jurisdiction over Ford. Plaintiffs declined to appeal the district court’s dismissal of Ford.{{ FIELD }}Lead counsel in an MDL consolidating nine consumer class actions filed throughout the U.S. alleging 2015 Honda CR-Vs vibrate excessively. Resolved favorably through a Rule 23(b)(2) settlement where the remedy is to provide “enhanced” notice of pre-existing, effective countermeasures to the relatively few consumers who complained.{{ FIELD }}Lead counsel in a proposed class action alleging an internet advertising service provider breached its service agreements by invoicing allegedly misleading charges; successfully resolved after preliminary motion practice and targeted discovery of plaintiff.{{ FIELD }}Lead counsel in a proposed class action against U.S. automotive distributor and foreign parent alleging the pedal bracket assembly in certain vehicles was defective; Plaintiffs sought to certify classes and subclasses in more than ten states. Resolved on favorable terms after a favorable ruling on a motion to dismiss and targeted discovery of plaintiffs.{{ FIELD }}Lead counsel in a proposed class action alleging Defendants sent unwanted facsimile advertisements to Plaintiff and members of the proposed classes. Defeated class certification by successfully proving Plaintiff and all of its counsel (more than 10 lawyers and 3 law firms) were inadequate.{{ FIELD }}Liv Kiser, a member of the federal trial bar, defends companies in high-stakes civil disputes arising from dangerous or toxic products or substances, consumer fraud, false advertising, breach of warranty, privacy violations, unfair competition and other torts.  A seasoned and vigorous advocate both in and outside of the courtroom, Liv's innovative approaches to complex legal questions have resulted in the development of new law favorable to her clients and entire industries.\nLiv proactively works with companies in the supply chain of highly-regulated, consumer-facing industries -- from automotive to food, financial services, healthcare, personal care products, real estate, telecommunications, utilities, and others -- to identify and manage their legal risks, developing creative and cost-effective strategies for furthering their business interests, protecting brands and preserving consumer goodwill.  Liv regularly resolves cases at the earliest stages of litigation through creative strategies that (for example) operate to moot a class action or render the case uncertifiable. Liv has persuaded opposing counsel to dismiss cases without compensation by persuasively explaining applicable law.  Liv has successfully defeated class certification in cases that prior counsel believed to be unwinnable.\nLiv has defended some of the world's largest multi-national companies in high-stakes commercial, viral and multidistrict litigation, managing crisis situations in which simultaneous inquiries by state and federal regulators, international and local law enforcement and Congress are taking place. Liv has appeared in state and federal courts across the nation, and understands how courts are likely to apply the consumer protection laws in any given dispute.  Her clients consider her predictive skills as to how matters are likely to unfold and resolve as \"uncanny.\"  Protecting company reputations and preserving trust is a central focus of Liv’s practice.\nLiv routinely and successfully defends companies facing claims asserted under the laws of California (including Cal. Bus. \u0026amp; Prof. Code 17200 (UCL), 17500, CLRA, CCPA, Prop 65) and other states (including the Illinois Biometric Privacy Act (BIPA)).  She has defeated numerous claims under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA), the Americans with Disabilities' Act (ADA) and other state and federal laws.  She has substantial experience successfully defeating cases where plaintiffs seek recovery for alleged \"price premiums\" and/or \"overpayments.\" \nLiv also has a very active pro bono practice, obtaining asylum for persecuted individuals and ensuring children with disabilities obtain necessary services.  She also represents incarcerated defendants in Constitutional cases.  Liv serves on the firm's Diversity Committee, and on committees within the Chicago office.   Livia Kiser lawyer Partner Named to 2025 Lawdragon 500 Leading Global Cyber Lawyers Lawdragon Named to 2025 Leading Lawyers  Leading Lawyers Named to Chambers 2024 Leading Lawyers in America Chambers Tier 2 - Leading Lawyer in 2024 for Transport\u0026gt;Rail and Road: Litigation and Regulation Legal 500 Tier 1-Key Lawyer in 2024 for Dispute Resolution\u0026gt;Product Liability, Mass Tort \u0026amp; Class Actions-Defense: Consumer Products Legal 500 Tier 1-Key Lawyer in 2024 for Dispute Resolution\u0026gt;Product Liability, Mass Tort \u0026amp; Class Actions-Defense: Auto/Transport Legal 500 Named to Chambers 2024 General Commercial Litigation List Chambers Member of 2024 Lawdragon 500 Leading Global Cyber Lawyers Lawdragon Stand-Out Lawyer  Thomson Reuters 2024 Leading Lawyer in 2023 in Transport: Rail and Road, Litigation and Regulatory Legal 500 Recommended Lawyer in 2023 in Product Liability, Mass Tort, and Class Actions: Consumer Products: Defense  Legal 500 Recommended Lawyer in 2022 in Product Liability, Mass Tort, and Class Actions: Consumer Products: Defense Legal 500 Recommended Lawyer in 2022 in Product Liability, Mass Tort, and Class Actions: Auto/Transport: Defense Legal 500 Named to Crain's Chicago Business's 2023 Notable Litigators and Trial Attorneys List Crain's Chicago Business Named to Chicago Lawyer's 2021 Top 50 Women in Law  Chicago Lawyer Named to Crain's Chicago Business's 2020 Notable Women in Law Crain's Chicago Business Leading Lawyer in 2022 in Transport: Rail and Road, Litigation and Regulatory  Legal 500 Named to The Best Lawyers in America for Consumer Law Best Lawyers In America Recognized as a \"Leading Lawyer\" Leading Lawyers Network Named among the “Top Lawyers in Illinois” in Advertising \u0026amp; Media Law and Class Action Mass Tort Defense Law Illinois Super Lawyer University of Illinois  Northwestern University Northwestern Pritzker 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 Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Indiana U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas U.S. District Court for the Western District of Arkansas 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 Illinois Member, American Bar Association, Litigation Section Member, Illinois State Bar Association Member, The State Bar of California Lead counsel is a proposed class action alleging arsenic in spices caused harm to consumers who purchased the products. Case resolved for de minimis amount after recall implemented. Lead counsel in a series of Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986 (California's \"Proposition 65\") relating to a variety of allegedly carcinogenic and toxic substances in food and other consumer products. Cases resolved on very favorable terms through informal negotiations. Lead counsel in a proposed class action alleging the engine compartments of certain model vehicles emit noxious and toxic substances into the vehicles' passenger cabins, allegedly rendering the vehicles undrivable and causing vehicle occupants to require medical treatment. Lead counsel in a proposed class action brought under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) seeking more than $600 million in damages as a result of defendant allegedly having sent facsimiles to recipients that purportedly lacked legally-sufficient opt-out notices. Successfully defeated class certification on predominance grounds. Lead counsel in a proposed class action alleging vehicle transmissions are defective; persuaded Court to dismiss the Magnuson Moss Warranty Act claim for failing to name at least 100 named plaintiffs; Court rejected the notion it had jurisdiction over the MMWA claim based on diversity. Lead counsel in a proposed class action alleging violations of state and federal warranty laws brought on behalf of a Wisconsin resident. Liv successfully obtained dismissal of the case on grounds that Illinois lacked sufficient contacts to confer general personal jurisdiction over American Honda. Lead counsel in a proposed class action alleging violations to the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) that was successfully resolved on very favorable terms prior to the filing of a responsive pleading. Co-lead counsel in a proposed class action against Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A. alleging excessive oil consumption in certain Toyota vehicles; successfully argued Plaintiff lacked standing; case was dismissed, with costs awarded to Toyota. In a proposed class action brought by Oregon and Washington residents against Ford Motor Co., Inc. in California, successfully argued that the State of California lacked sufficient contacts to assert general personal jurisdiction over Ford. Plaintiffs declined to appeal the district court’s dismissal of Ford. Lead counsel in an MDL consolidating nine consumer class actions filed throughout the U.S. alleging 2015 Honda CR-Vs vibrate excessively. Resolved favorably through a Rule 23(b)(2) settlement where the remedy is to provide “enhanced” notice of pre-existing, effective countermeasures to the relatively few consumers who complained. Lead counsel in a proposed class action alleging an internet advertising service provider breached its service agreements by invoicing allegedly misleading charges; successfully resolved after preliminary motion practice and targeted discovery of plaintiff. Lead counsel in a proposed class action against U.S. automotive distributor and foreign parent alleging the pedal bracket assembly in certain vehicles was defective; Plaintiffs sought to certify classes and subclasses in more than ten states. Resolved on favorable terms after a favorable ruling on a motion to dismiss and targeted discovery of plaintiffs. Lead counsel in a proposed class action alleging Defendants sent unwanted facsimile advertisements to Plaintiff and members of the proposed classes. Defeated class certification by successfully proving Plaintiff and all of its counsel (more than 10 lawyers and 3 law firms) were inadequate.","searchable_name":"Livia M. Kiser (Liv)","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":436377,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":2589,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eMadison Kitchens specializes in defending product manufacturers in the pharmaceutical, medical device, automotive,\u0026nbsp;consumer goods, and energy industries against class action and mass tort claims brought by plaintiffs across the United States.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMadison is a frequent author and speaker on class actions, complex litigation, and product liability.\u0026nbsp; He is the Co-Editor of the Fifth Edition of\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eThe\u0026nbsp;Product Regulation and Liability\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(eds. Varner \u0026amp; Kitchens), which analyzes the landscape of product liability law in 18 countries.\u0026nbsp; Additionally, he has written chapters in numerous practitioner treatises, including the ABA\u0026rsquo;s\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eBusiness \u0026amp; Commercial Litigation in the Federal Courts\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(4th ed.)\u0026nbsp;and\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eDrug and Device Product Liability Litigation Strategy\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(2d ed.).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMadison maintains an active appellate practice in addition to his trial work, and has authored briefs filed in the U.S. Supreme Court, U.S. Courts of Appeals, and state supreme courts.\u0026nbsp; Additionally, Madison has served as an instructor for Emory University School of Law\u0026rsquo;s Trial Advocacy Workshop and as a Barrister in the Bleckley Inn of Court.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMadison graduated from Duke University,\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003emagna cum laude\u003c/em\u003e, in 2004 with a B.A. in Economics.\u0026nbsp; He earned his J.D. from Harvard Law School, with honors, in 2010.\u0026nbsp; While in law school, Madison served as Chief Articles Editor for the\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eHarvard Journal of Law \u0026amp; Public Policy\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;and was a semifinalist in Harvard\u0026rsquo;s Ames Moot Court competition.\u0026nbsp; After law school, he clerked for the Honorable Frank M. Hull of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit.\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"madison-kitchens","email":"mkitchens@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":["\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eKimberly-Clark\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;and\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eHalyard Health\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in class action litigation, parallel qui tam suits, government investigations, and a Lanham Act competitor suit challenging the design, labeling and advertising of Class II medical devices.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eSmileDirectClub\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in suit filed against the Georgia Board of Dentistry for alleged antitrust and constitutional violations.\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eDaimler AG\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eand\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eMercedes-Benz USA\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a putative class action pending in Georgia federal court alleging that the HVAC systems in various Mercedes-Benz vehicles are defective.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eSEC university\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a putative class action pending in an MDL before the Northern District of Illinois that alleges the university failed to protect football players from concussion-related injuries.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eObtained summary judgment on behalf of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eHighstar Capital\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;against minority shareholders\u0026rsquo; fraud and aiding and abetting claims arising out of $470 million acquisition.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003einternational automotive company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;and obtained final approval of class settlement\u0026nbsp;involving over 9 million class members in\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eIn re: Takata Airbag Products Liability Litigation\u003c/em\u003e, 15-02599-MD-MORENO (S.D. Fla.).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eFord Motor Company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in putative class actions filed in the Central District of California and Western District of Kentucky.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eObtained dismissal of putative class action at motion to dismiss stage on behalf of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eR.J. Reynolds Vapor Company\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003ein case alleging that its e-cigarette products exposed users to undisclosed and harmful levels of chemicals, in violation of Proposition 65 and California consumer protection statutes.\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eHarris v. R.J. Reynolds Vapor Co.\u003c/em\u003e, 2017 WL 3617061 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 23, 2017).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eMerck\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003ein multidistrict litigation involving allegations of injuries from use of the company\u0026rsquo;s osteoporosis medication, including in two bellwether trials in two different MDLs pending in federal courts in New York and New Jersey. \u0026nbsp;In\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\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\u003eDefeated two proposed consumer class actions claiming that\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eDaimler AG and Mercedes-Benz USA\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003ehad defrauded Mercedes E-Class owners in California, Texas, Florida, Georgia, New Jersey, Illinois, and Virginia by failing to disclose alleged defects in their fuel systems.\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eMcCabe v. Daimler AG\u003c/em\u003e, 160 F. Supp. 3d 1337 (N.D. Ga. 2015);\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eBarinova v. Daimler AG, et al.\u003c/em\u003e, 2:14-cv-07684 (D. N.J. Apr. 21, 2015).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefeated class certification motion on behalf of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eHalliburton\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003ein class action and mass joinder cases in Oklahoma federal court brought by hundreds of plaintiffs alleging personal injuries and/or property damage from exposure to ammonium perchlorate.\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eMcCormick v. Halliburton Energy Servs., Inc.\u003c/em\u003e, 2015 WL 918767 (W.D. Okla. Mar. 3, 2015).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefeated expedited motion for preliminary injunction in Texas federal court seeking to require\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eGeneral Motors\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;to issue a nationwide \u0026ldquo;Park It Now\u0026rdquo; notice in connection with the GM ignition switch recall litigation.\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eSilvas v. Gen. Motors\u003c/em\u003e, LLC, 2014 WL 1572590 (S.D. Tex. Apr. 17, 2014).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eKimberly-Clark\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in putative class actions in New York and California federal courts challenging the labeling and advertising of FDA-regulated products under state consumer protection laws and the FTC\u0026rsquo;s Green Guides.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\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\u003eObtained dismissal of medical monitoring claims in groundwater contamination mass joinder cases in Oklahoma federal court.\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eMcCormick v. Halliburton Co.\u003c/em\u003e, 895 F. Supp. 2d 1152 (W.D. Okla. 2012).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e"],"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[]},"expertise":[{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":3,"guid":"3.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":103,"guid":"103.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"},{"id":1256,"guid":"1256.smart_tags","index":6,"source":"smartTags"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Kitchens","nick_name":"Madison","clerkships":[{"name":"Law Clerk, Hon. Frank M. Hull, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit","years_held":"2010-2011"}],"first_name":"Madison","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":202,"law_schools":[],"middle_name":"H.","name_suffix":"","recognitions":null,"linked_in_url":"https://www.linkedin.com/in/madison-kitchens-8ab3a0147/","seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eMadison Kitchens specializes in defending product manufacturers in the pharmaceutical, medical device, automotive,\u0026nbsp;consumer goods, and energy industries against class action and mass tort claims brought by plaintiffs across the United States.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMadison is a frequent author and speaker on class actions, complex litigation, and product liability.\u0026nbsp; He is the Co-Editor of the Fifth Edition of\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eThe\u0026nbsp;Product Regulation and Liability\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(eds. Varner \u0026amp; Kitchens), which analyzes the landscape of product liability law in 18 countries.\u0026nbsp; Additionally, he has written chapters in numerous practitioner treatises, including the ABA\u0026rsquo;s\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eBusiness \u0026amp; Commercial Litigation in the Federal Courts\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(4th ed.)\u0026nbsp;and\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eDrug and Device Product Liability Litigation Strategy\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(2d ed.).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMadison maintains an active appellate practice in addition to his trial work, and has authored briefs filed in the U.S. Supreme Court, U.S. Courts of Appeals, and state supreme courts.\u0026nbsp; Additionally, Madison has served as an instructor for Emory University School of Law\u0026rsquo;s Trial Advocacy Workshop and as a Barrister in the Bleckley Inn of Court.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMadison graduated from Duke University,\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003emagna cum laude\u003c/em\u003e, in 2004 with a B.A. in Economics.\u0026nbsp; He earned his J.D. from Harvard Law School, with honors, in 2010.\u0026nbsp; While in law school, Madison served as Chief Articles Editor for the\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eHarvard Journal of Law \u0026amp; Public Policy\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;and was a semifinalist in Harvard\u0026rsquo;s Ames Moot Court competition.\u0026nbsp; After law school, he clerked for the Honorable Frank M. Hull of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit.\u003c/p\u003e","matters":["\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eKimberly-Clark\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;and\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eHalyard Health\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in class action litigation, parallel qui tam suits, government investigations, and a Lanham Act competitor suit challenging the design, labeling and advertising of Class II medical devices.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eSmileDirectClub\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in suit filed against the Georgia Board of Dentistry for alleged antitrust and constitutional violations.\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eDaimler AG\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eand\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eMercedes-Benz USA\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a putative class action pending in Georgia federal court alleging that the HVAC systems in various Mercedes-Benz vehicles are defective.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresenting an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eSEC university\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in a putative class action pending in an MDL before the Northern District of Illinois that alleges the university failed to protect football players from concussion-related injuries.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eObtained summary judgment on behalf of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eHighstar Capital\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;against minority shareholders\u0026rsquo; fraud and aiding and abetting claims arising out of $470 million acquisition.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;an\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003einternational automotive company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;and obtained final approval of class settlement\u0026nbsp;involving over 9 million class members in\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eIn re: Takata Airbag Products Liability Litigation\u003c/em\u003e, 15-02599-MD-MORENO (S.D. Fla.).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eFord Motor Company\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in putative class actions filed in the Central District of California and Western District of Kentucky.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eObtained dismissal of putative class action at motion to dismiss stage on behalf of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eR.J. Reynolds Vapor Company\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003ein case alleging that its e-cigarette products exposed users to undisclosed and harmful levels of chemicals, in violation of Proposition 65 and California consumer protection statutes.\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eHarris v. R.J. Reynolds Vapor Co.\u003c/em\u003e, 2017 WL 3617061 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 23, 2017).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eMerck\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003ein multidistrict litigation involving allegations of injuries from use of the company\u0026rsquo;s osteoporosis medication, including in two bellwether trials in two different MDLs pending in federal courts in New York and New Jersey. \u0026nbsp;In\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\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\u003eDefeated two proposed consumer class actions claiming that\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eDaimler AG and Mercedes-Benz USA\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003ehad defrauded Mercedes E-Class owners in California, Texas, Florida, Georgia, New Jersey, Illinois, and Virginia by failing to disclose alleged defects in their fuel systems.\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eMcCabe v. Daimler AG\u003c/em\u003e, 160 F. Supp. 3d 1337 (N.D. Ga. 2015);\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eBarinova v. Daimler AG, et al.\u003c/em\u003e, 2:14-cv-07684 (D. N.J. Apr. 21, 2015).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefeated class certification motion on behalf of\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eHalliburton\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003ein class action and mass joinder cases in Oklahoma federal court brought by hundreds of plaintiffs alleging personal injuries and/or property damage from exposure to ammonium perchlorate.\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eMcCormick v. Halliburton Energy Servs., Inc.\u003c/em\u003e, 2015 WL 918767 (W.D. Okla. Mar. 3, 2015).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eDefeated expedited motion for preliminary injunction in Texas federal court seeking to require\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eGeneral Motors\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;to issue a nationwide \u0026ldquo;Park It Now\u0026rdquo; notice in connection with the GM ignition switch recall litigation.\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eSilvas v. Gen. Motors\u003c/em\u003e, LLC, 2014 WL 1572590 (S.D. Tex. Apr. 17, 2014).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eKimberly-Clark\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;in putative class actions in New York and California federal courts challenging the labeling and advertising of FDA-regulated products under state consumer protection laws and the FTC\u0026rsquo;s Green Guides.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\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\u003eObtained dismissal of medical monitoring claims in groundwater contamination mass joinder cases in Oklahoma federal court.\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eMcCormick v. Halliburton Co.\u003c/em\u003e, 895 F. Supp. 2d 1152 (W.D. Okla. 2012).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e"]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":12349}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2025-09-02T04:51:10.000Z","updated_at":"2025-09-02T04:51:10.000Z","searchable_text":"Kitchens{{ FIELD }}Representing Kimberly-Clark and Halyard Health in class action litigation, parallel qui tam suits, government investigations, and a Lanham Act competitor suit challenging the design, labeling and advertising of Class II medical devices.{{ FIELD }}Representing SmileDirectClub in suit filed against the Georgia Board of Dentistry for alleged antitrust and constitutional violations.  {{ FIELD }}Representing Daimler AG and Mercedes-Benz USA in a putative class action pending in Georgia federal court alleging that the HVAC systems in various Mercedes-Benz vehicles are defective.{{ FIELD }}Representing an SEC university in a putative class action pending in an MDL before the Northern District of Illinois that alleges the university failed to protect football players from concussion-related injuries.{{ FIELD }}Obtained summary judgment on behalf of Highstar Capital against minority shareholders’ fraud and aiding and abetting claims arising out of $470 million acquisition. {{ FIELD }}Represented an international automotive company and obtained final approval of class settlement involving over 9 million class members in In re: Takata Airbag Products Liability Litigation, 15-02599-MD-MORENO (S.D. Fla.).{{ FIELD }}Represented Ford Motor Company in putative class actions filed in the Central District of California and Western District of Kentucky. {{ FIELD }}Obtained dismissal of putative class action at motion to dismiss stage on behalf of R.J. Reynolds Vapor Company in case alleging that its e-cigarette products exposed users to undisclosed and harmful levels of chemicals, in violation of Proposition 65 and California consumer protection statutes.  Harris v. R.J. Reynolds Vapor Co., 2017 WL 3617061 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 23, 2017). {{ FIELD }}Represented Merck in multidistrict litigation involving allegations of injuries from use of the company’s osteoporosis medication, including in two bellwether trials in two different MDLs pending in federal courts in New York and New Jersey.  In Glynn v. Merck, the jury returned a complete defense verdict, after which the court granted judgment based on federal preemption.{{ FIELD }}Defeated two proposed consumer class actions claiming that Daimler AG and Mercedes-Benz USA had defrauded Mercedes E-Class owners in California, Texas, Florida, Georgia, New Jersey, Illinois, and Virginia by failing to disclose alleged defects in their fuel systems.  McCabe v. Daimler AG, 160 F. Supp. 3d 1337 (N.D. Ga. 2015); Barinova v. Daimler AG, et al., 2:14-cv-07684 (D. N.J. Apr. 21, 2015).{{ FIELD }}Defeated class certification motion on behalf of Halliburton in class action and mass joinder cases in Oklahoma federal court brought by hundreds of plaintiffs alleging personal injuries and/or property damage from exposure to ammonium perchlorate.  McCormick v. Halliburton Energy Servs., Inc., 2015 WL 918767 (W.D. Okla. Mar. 3, 2015).{{ FIELD }}Defeated expedited motion for preliminary injunction in Texas federal court seeking to require General Motors to issue a nationwide “Park It Now” notice in connection with the GM ignition switch recall litigation.  Silvas v. Gen. Motors, LLC, 2014 WL 1572590 (S.D. Tex. Apr. 17, 2014). {{ FIELD }}Represented Kimberly-Clark in putative class actions in New York and California federal courts challenging the labeling and advertising of FDA-regulated products under state consumer protection laws and the FTC’s Green Guides.{{ 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 }}Obtained dismissal of medical monitoring claims in groundwater contamination mass joinder cases in Oklahoma federal court.  McCormick v. Halliburton Co., 895 F. Supp. 2d 1152 (W.D. Okla. 2012). {{ FIELD }}Madison Kitchens specializes in defending product manufacturers in the pharmaceutical, medical device, automotive, consumer goods, and energy industries against class action and mass tort claims brought by plaintiffs across the United States.\nMadison is a frequent author and speaker on class actions, complex litigation, and product liability.  He is the Co-Editor of the Fifth Edition of The Product Regulation and Liability (eds. Varner \u0026amp; Kitchens), which analyzes the landscape of product liability law in 18 countries.  Additionally, he has written chapters in numerous practitioner treatises, including the ABA’s Business \u0026amp; Commercial Litigation in the Federal Courts (4th ed.) and Drug and Device Product Liability Litigation Strategy (2d ed.). \nMadison maintains an active appellate practice in addition to his trial work, and has authored briefs filed in the U.S. Supreme Court, U.S. Courts of Appeals, and state supreme courts.  Additionally, Madison has served as an instructor for Emory University School of Law’s Trial Advocacy Workshop and as a Barrister in the Bleckley Inn of Court. \nMadison graduated from Duke University, magna cum laude, in 2004 with a B.A. in Economics.  He earned his J.D. from Harvard Law School, with honors, in 2010.  While in law school, Madison served as Chief Articles Editor for the Harvard Journal of Law \u0026amp; Public Policy and was a semifinalist in Harvard’s Ames Moot Court competition.  After law school, he clerked for the Honorable Frank M. Hull of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. Partner Duke University Duke University School of Law Harvard University Harvard Law School U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth 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 Northern District of Georgia Georgia Court of Appeals of Georgia Supreme Court of Georgia Georgia Defense Lawyers Association Defense Research Institute (DRI) Executive Board, Federalist Society -- Atlanta Lawyers Chapter Law Clerk, Hon. Frank M. Hull, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit Representing Kimberly-Clark and Halyard Health in class action litigation, parallel qui tam suits, government investigations, and a Lanham Act competitor suit challenging the design, labeling and advertising of Class II medical devices. Representing SmileDirectClub in suit filed against the Georgia Board of Dentistry for alleged antitrust and constitutional violations.   Representing Daimler AG and Mercedes-Benz USA in a putative class action pending in Georgia federal court alleging that the HVAC systems in various Mercedes-Benz vehicles are defective. Representing an SEC university in a putative class action pending in an MDL before the Northern District of Illinois that alleges the university failed to protect football players from concussion-related injuries. Obtained summary judgment on behalf of Highstar Capital against minority shareholders’ fraud and aiding and abetting claims arising out of $470 million acquisition.  Represented an international automotive company and obtained final approval of class settlement involving over 9 million class members in In re: Takata Airbag Products Liability Litigation, 15-02599-MD-MORENO (S.D. Fla.). Represented Ford Motor Company in putative class actions filed in the Central District of California and Western District of Kentucky.  Obtained dismissal of putative class action at motion to dismiss stage on behalf of R.J. Reynolds Vapor Company in case alleging that its e-cigarette products exposed users to undisclosed and harmful levels of chemicals, in violation of Proposition 65 and California consumer protection statutes.  Harris v. R.J. Reynolds Vapor Co., 2017 WL 3617061 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 23, 2017).  Represented Merck in multidistrict litigation involving allegations of injuries from use of the company’s osteoporosis medication, including in two bellwether trials in two different MDLs pending in federal courts in New York and New Jersey.  In Glynn v. Merck, the jury returned a complete defense verdict, after which the court granted judgment based on federal preemption. Defeated two proposed consumer class actions claiming that Daimler AG and Mercedes-Benz USA had defrauded Mercedes E-Class owners in California, Texas, Florida, Georgia, New Jersey, Illinois, and Virginia by failing to disclose alleged defects in their fuel systems.  McCabe v. Daimler AG, 160 F. Supp. 3d 1337 (N.D. Ga. 2015); Barinova v. Daimler AG, et al., 2:14-cv-07684 (D. N.J. Apr. 21, 2015). Defeated class certification motion on behalf of Halliburton in class action and mass joinder cases in Oklahoma federal court brought by hundreds of plaintiffs alleging personal injuries and/or property damage from exposure to ammonium perchlorate.  McCormick v. Halliburton Energy Servs., Inc., 2015 WL 918767 (W.D. Okla. Mar. 3, 2015). Defeated expedited motion for preliminary injunction in Texas federal court seeking to require General Motors to issue a nationwide “Park It Now” notice in connection with the GM ignition switch recall litigation.  Silvas v. Gen. Motors, LLC, 2014 WL 1572590 (S.D. Tex. Apr. 17, 2014).  Represented Kimberly-Clark in putative class actions in New York and California federal courts challenging the labeling and advertising of FDA-regulated products under state consumer protection laws and the FTC’s Green Guides. 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. Obtained dismissal of medical monitoring claims in groundwater contamination mass joinder cases in Oklahoma federal court.  McCormick v. Halliburton Co., 895 F. Supp. 2d 1152 (W.D. Okla. 2012). ","searchable_name":"Madison H. Kitchens","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":443942,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":6678,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eDavid H. Kupfer is a trial lawyer with extensive experience litigating complex commercial disputes and representing plaintiffs and defendants in civil and criminal matters and regulatory investigations. David has represented real estate and hospitality developers, lenders, and operators, financial institutions, life sciences, and technology firms, and venture and private equity funds in bankruptcy, state and federal courts, as well as in arbitration. He has also represented creditors in complex restructuring proceedings including the restructurings of Mallinckrodt Pharmaceuticals, JCPenney, and Claire\u0026rsquo;s.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDavid devotes significant time to pro bono work, and regularly represents low-income clients in fair housing and felony criminal matters.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDavid clerked for the Honorable Henry B. Pitman, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"david-kupfer","email":"dkupfer@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":["\u003cp\u003eRepresenting Bath Club Entertainment and developer R. Donahue Peebles in actions against members of a neighboring condominium association and others \u0026ldquo;determined to interfere with the successful management of the historic Bath Club on Miami Beach.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented private-equity magnate David Storper in several actions against Wilbur Ross and WL Ross \u0026amp; Co. involving breach of contract and breach of fiduciary duties related to WL Ross\u0026rsquo;s flagship private equity funds.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented AIB Group in an action against its prime broker, related to a five-year, $700 million foreign-exchange fraud.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented JPMorgan Chase in numerous actions in state and federal court related to mortgage-backed securities.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented Moody\u0026rsquo;s in a Department of Justice investigation.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented Fidelity National Financial\u0026rsquo;s Black Knight Unit in a securities opt-out action brought by Maverick Funds.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented Newlink Genetics in a 10b-5 class action related to a failed drug trial.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented ChromaDex in multiple actions in federal court against Elysium Health, related to false advertising, trade libel, and deceptive practices.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented Olo in a contract dispute with DoorDash.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented the Official Committee of Talc Creditors II in bankruptcy proceedings of LTL Management related to mass torts by Johnson \u0026amp; Johnson.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors in bankruptcy proceeding of pharmaceutical giant Mallinckrodt.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors in bankruptcy proceeding of JCPenney.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented liquidating trustee in fiduciary duty action against founders of Fuhu.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors in bankruptcy proceeding of Videology.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors in bankruptcy proceeding of Claire\u0026rsquo;s.\u003c/p\u003e"],"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[]},"expertise":[{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":38,"guid":"38.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":5,"guid":"5.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":19,"guid":"19.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":118,"guid":"118.capabilities","index":4,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":107,"guid":"107.capabilities","index":5,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":103,"guid":"103.capabilities","index":6,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":36,"guid":"36.capabilities","index":7,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":1064,"guid":"1064.smart_tags","index":8,"source":"smartTags"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Kupfer","nick_name":"David","clerkships":[{"name":"Law Clerk, Honorable Henry B. Pitman, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York","years_held":"2011 - 2012"}],"first_name":"David","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":35,"law_schools":[{"id":722,"meta":{"degree":"J.D.","honors":"summa cum laude, Order of the Coif","is_law_school":"1","graduation_date":"2011-01-01 00:00:00"},"order":1,"pin_order":null,"pin_expiration":null}],"middle_name":" ","name_suffix":"","recognitions":[{"title":"Named a Rising Star","detail":"Super Lawyers, 2020-2023"}],"linked_in_url":"https://www.linkedin.com/in/david-kupfer-08710134/","seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eDavid H. Kupfer is a trial lawyer with extensive experience litigating complex commercial disputes and representing plaintiffs and defendants in civil and criminal matters and regulatory investigations. David has represented real estate and hospitality developers, lenders, and operators, financial institutions, life sciences, and technology firms, and venture and private equity funds in bankruptcy, state and federal courts, as well as in arbitration. He has also represented creditors in complex restructuring proceedings including the restructurings of Mallinckrodt Pharmaceuticals, JCPenney, and Claire\u0026rsquo;s.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDavid devotes significant time to pro bono work, and regularly represents low-income clients in fair housing and felony criminal matters.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDavid clerked for the Honorable Henry B. Pitman, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.\u003c/p\u003e","matters":["\u003cp\u003eRepresenting Bath Club Entertainment and developer R. Donahue Peebles in actions against members of a neighboring condominium association and others \u0026ldquo;determined to interfere with the successful management of the historic Bath Club on Miami Beach.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented private-equity magnate David Storper in several actions against Wilbur Ross and WL Ross \u0026amp; Co. involving breach of contract and breach of fiduciary duties related to WL Ross\u0026rsquo;s flagship private equity funds.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented AIB Group in an action against its prime broker, related to a five-year, $700 million foreign-exchange fraud.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented JPMorgan Chase in numerous actions in state and federal court related to mortgage-backed securities.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented Moody\u0026rsquo;s in a Department of Justice investigation.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented Fidelity National Financial\u0026rsquo;s Black Knight Unit in a securities opt-out action brought by Maverick Funds.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented Newlink Genetics in a 10b-5 class action related to a failed drug trial.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented ChromaDex in multiple actions in federal court against Elysium Health, related to false advertising, trade libel, and deceptive practices.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented Olo in a contract dispute with DoorDash.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented the Official Committee of Talc Creditors II in bankruptcy proceedings of LTL Management related to mass torts by Johnson \u0026amp; Johnson.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors in bankruptcy proceeding of pharmaceutical giant Mallinckrodt.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors in bankruptcy proceeding of JCPenney.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented liquidating trustee in fiduciary duty action against founders of Fuhu.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors in bankruptcy proceeding of Videology.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eRepresented the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors in bankruptcy proceeding of Claire\u0026rsquo;s.\u003c/p\u003e"],"recognitions":[{"title":"Named a Rising Star","detail":"Super Lawyers, 2020-2023"}]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":11629}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2025-12-05T05:01:42.000Z","updated_at":"2025-12-05T05:01:42.000Z","searchable_text":"Kupfer{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named a Rising Star\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Super Lawyers, 2020-2023\"}{{ FIELD }}Representing Bath Club Entertainment and developer R. Donahue Peebles in actions against members of a neighboring condominium association and others “determined to interfere with the successful management of the historic Bath Club on Miami Beach.”{{ FIELD }}Represented private-equity magnate David Storper in several actions against Wilbur Ross and WL Ross \u0026amp; Co. involving breach of contract and breach of fiduciary duties related to WL Ross’s flagship private equity funds.{{ FIELD }}Represented AIB Group in an action against its prime broker, related to a five-year, $700 million foreign-exchange fraud.{{ FIELD }}Represented JPMorgan Chase in numerous actions in state and federal court related to mortgage-backed securities.{{ FIELD }}Represented Moody’s in a Department of Justice investigation.{{ FIELD }}Represented Fidelity National Financial’s Black Knight Unit in a securities opt-out action brought by Maverick Funds.{{ FIELD }}Represented Newlink Genetics in a 10b-5 class action related to a failed drug trial.{{ FIELD }}Represented ChromaDex in multiple actions in federal court against Elysium Health, related to false advertising, trade libel, and deceptive practices.{{ FIELD }}Represented Olo in a contract dispute with DoorDash.{{ FIELD }}Represented the Official Committee of Talc Creditors II in bankruptcy proceedings of LTL Management related to mass torts by Johnson \u0026amp; Johnson.{{ FIELD }}Represented the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors in bankruptcy proceeding of pharmaceutical giant Mallinckrodt.{{ FIELD }}Represented the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors in bankruptcy proceeding of JCPenney.{{ FIELD }}Represented liquidating trustee in fiduciary duty action against founders of Fuhu.{{ FIELD }}Represented the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors in bankruptcy proceeding of Videology.{{ FIELD }}Represented the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors in bankruptcy proceeding of Claire’s.{{ FIELD }}David H. Kupfer is a trial lawyer with extensive experience litigating complex commercial disputes and representing plaintiffs and defendants in civil and criminal matters and regulatory investigations. David has represented real estate and hospitality developers, lenders, and operators, financial institutions, life sciences, and technology firms, and venture and private equity funds in bankruptcy, state and federal courts, as well as in arbitration. He has also represented creditors in complex restructuring proceedings including the restructurings of Mallinckrodt Pharmaceuticals, JCPenney, and Claire’s.\nDavid devotes significant time to pro bono work, and regularly represents low-income clients in fair housing and felony criminal matters.\nDavid clerked for the Honorable Henry B. Pitman, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. Partner Named a Rising Star Super Lawyers, 2020-2023 Touro College  Fordham University Fordham University School of Law Florida New Jersey New York New York City Bar Association UJA Young Leadership Committee Law Clerk, Honorable Henry B. Pitman, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York Representing Bath Club Entertainment and developer R. Donahue Peebles in actions against members of a neighboring condominium association and others “determined to interfere with the successful management of the historic Bath Club on Miami Beach.” Represented private-equity magnate David Storper in several actions against Wilbur Ross and WL Ross \u0026amp; Co. involving breach of contract and breach of fiduciary duties related to WL Ross’s flagship private equity funds. Represented AIB Group in an action against its prime broker, related to a five-year, $700 million foreign-exchange fraud. Represented JPMorgan Chase in numerous actions in state and federal court related to mortgage-backed securities. Represented Moody’s in a Department of Justice investigation. Represented Fidelity National Financial’s Black Knight Unit in a securities opt-out action brought by Maverick Funds. Represented Newlink Genetics in a 10b-5 class action related to a failed drug trial. Represented ChromaDex in multiple actions in federal court against Elysium Health, related to false advertising, trade libel, and deceptive practices. Represented Olo in a contract dispute with DoorDash. Represented the Official Committee of Talc Creditors II in bankruptcy proceedings of LTL Management related to mass torts by Johnson \u0026amp; Johnson. Represented the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors in bankruptcy proceeding of pharmaceutical giant Mallinckrodt. Represented the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors in bankruptcy proceeding of JCPenney. Represented liquidating trustee in fiduciary duty action against founders of Fuhu. Represented the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors in bankruptcy proceeding of Videology. Represented the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors in bankruptcy proceeding of Claire’s.","searchable_name":"David Kupfer","is_active":true,"featured":null,"publish_date":null,"expiration_date":null,"blog_featured":null,"published_by":35,"capability_group_featured":null,"home_page_featured":null},{"id":444364,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":5488,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eDara Kurlancheek is a first chair trial attorney with nearly 20 years of experience in complex patent litigation. A registered patent attorney with a degree in electrical engineering, Dara has built a reputation for managing high-stakes cases across the financial services, technology, pharmaceutical and airline industries. Over her career, Dara has had significant victories on both sides of the aisle, having won tens of millions of dollars for clients and also obtaining a complete jury verdict defending against a $2.3 billion-dollar claim. Her litigation successes include district court trials, ITC cases, and arbitrations.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe technology in the cases that Dara has handled spans a wide range, including electronic banking systems, computer memory systems, mammography systems; customer service and payment acceptance technologies, video analytics, bladder cancer treatments, sonar imaging systems, aviation weather detection and navigation systems; computer systems for backup of internet-based data processing.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eShe also advises on international and domestic disputes involving patent licensing, trade secrets, contract breaches, and unfair competition. Dara regularly counsels on issues like trade secret protection, non-compete agreements, and franchise or third-party contract disputes.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDara previously served as Deputy Chair of King \u0026amp; Spalding's Intellectual Property team and is a recurring guest lecturer at The Pennsylvania State University Smeal College of Business.\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"dara-kurlancheek","email":"dkurlancheek@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":["\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCapital Security Systems Corporation v. CapitalOne and ABNB Financial Services\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/em\u003e(Eastern District of Virginia);\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ev. SunTrust and NCR Corporation\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(Northern District of Georgia). Counsel in matter involving the use of ATM\u0026rsquo;s and specifically hardware and software functionality allowing customers to make deposits via an ATM without the need of an envelope or other documents. The trial team obtained an extremely favorable Markman ruling resulting in plaintiff conceding non-infringement, and also successfully invalidated several of the asserted claims. On appeal, The Federal Circuit issued a Rule 36 affirmance on the non-infringement/Markman appeal, which yielded a complete win on non-infringement for the team.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eEcoServices, LLC v. Certified Aviation Services, LLC\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;(Central District of California). Counsel for the defendant, Certified Aviation Services, LLC, in a patent infringement matter between competitors in the aircraft engine wash industry. The patents involve specific features and technical measurements for use of atomized spray, and also directed to the technical features and use of the system for detecting engine type utilizing specific detection related technology.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eNCR Corporation v. Pendum, LLC et al\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;(Northern District of Georgia). Representing NCR Corporation in the Northern District of Georgia in a trademark and copyright infringement and misappropriation of trade secrets matter against Pendum, LLC and Burroughs, Inc.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eAnuwave, LLC v. Jacksboro National Bancshares, Inc. et al\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;(Eastern District of Texas). Defended Jacksonboro National Bancshares, Inc. in a patent infringement matter against Anuwave LLC in which alleged infringement of a patent that allowed users to receive bank services via SMS messages.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eSt. Isidore Research, LLC v. LegacyTexas Group, Inc. et al\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;(Eastern District of Texas). Represented LegacyTexas Group in the Eastern District of Texas in a patent infringement matter involving systems and methods for verifying, authenticating, and providing notification of a transaction, such as a commercial or financial transaction.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eOlivistar LLC. Regions Bank\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(Eastern District of Texas). Represented Regions Bank in a patent infringement matter involving cloud storage systems.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003ebuySAFE Inc. v. Google Inc\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e. Represented Google against buySAFE\u0026rsquo;s claims of patent infringement. The technology includes online transaction performance guarantees. Successfully argued the claims covered unpatentable subject matter under 35 USC \u0026sect; 101 and won judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eLoyalty Conversion Systems Corporation v. American Airlines, Inc\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: normal !msorm; font-style: normal !msorm;\"\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003e. \u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;(Eastern District of Texas). Counsel for American Airlines, United Airlines, US Airways, Frontier Airlines and other major international airlines against Loyalty Conversion Systems Corporation in a patent infringement case filed in the Eastern District of Texas. The technology included converting loyalty points into other forms of credits and/or currency for purchase of good and/or services. Successfully argued that the claims covered unpatentable subject matter under 35 USC 101 and won judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c). In addition, filed two Covered Business Method Patent Review Petitions that were instituted on 101 grounds.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eGemalto, Inc. v. Merchant Customer Exchange\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e. Commercial arbitration in which our client claimed improper termination of a service contract for the provision of a mobile payment platform. After a week-long arbitration before a three-judge panel, won $45.8 million (including attorney fees) for improper termination in a complete victory for our client.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eBrilliant Optical Solutions v. Google\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e. Represented Google Fiber, Inc. in a patent infringement case filed in the Western District of Missouri where the Google Fiber System has been accused of infringement.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eBrilliant Optical Solutions, LLC v. Google Inc\u003c/em\u003e., No. 4:13-cv-00356 (W.D. Minn., filed April 10, 2013).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eAeritas LLC v. US Airways\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e. Defended multiple major airlines in actions brought in the District of Delaware alleging infringement of the use of an electronic mobile boarding pass to gain entry on a flight.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eAeritas, LLC v. \u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003eUS Airways Group, Inc. et al\u003c/em\u003e., No. 1:11-cv-01267 (D. Del., filed December 21, 2011).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eCreateads v. Web.com, Network Solutions and Register.com\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e. Represented Web.com et. al in a patent infringement case in the D. of Delaware involving web development technology.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eCreateAds LLC v. Web.com Group Inc., et al.\u003c/em\u003e, No. 1:12-cv-01612 (D. Del., filed November 29, 2012).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eCreateads v. Media Temple\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e. Defended Media Temple in a patent infringement case in the D. of Delaware involving web development technology.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eCreateAds LLC v. Media Temple, Inc\u003c/em\u003e., No. 1:13-cv-00115 (D. Del., filed January 18, 2013).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully obtained a judgment of priority on behalf of client in a patent interference related to computers that use point-to-point links to transfer data between a memory controller and buffered memory. (B.P.A.I. Decision 2010).\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":80,"guid":"80.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":122,"guid":"122.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":1202,"guid":"1202.smart_tags","index":4,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1240,"guid":"1240.smart_tags","index":5,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":107,"guid":"107.capabilities","index":6,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":765,"guid":"765.smart_tags","index":7,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1270,"guid":"1270.smart_tags","index":8,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1409,"guid":"1409.smart_tags","index":9,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1248,"guid":"1248.smart_tags","index":10,"source":"smartTags"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Kurlancheek","nick_name":"Dara","clerkships":[],"first_name":"Dara","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":202,"law_schools":[{"id":734,"meta":{"degree":"J.D.","honors":"","is_law_school":"1","graduation_date":"2008-01-01 00:00:00"},"order":1,"pin_order":null,"pin_expiration":null}],"middle_name":"M.","name_suffix":"","recognitions":[{"title":"Named Washington, D.C., “Rising Star”","detail":"Super Lawyers, 2015-2019"}],"linked_in_url":null,"seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eDara Kurlancheek is a first chair trial attorney with nearly 20 years of experience in complex patent litigation. A registered patent attorney with a degree in electrical engineering, Dara has built a reputation for managing high-stakes cases across the financial services, technology, pharmaceutical and airline industries. Over her career, Dara has had significant victories on both sides of the aisle, having won tens of millions of dollars for clients and also obtaining a complete jury verdict defending against a $2.3 billion-dollar claim. Her litigation successes include district court trials, ITC cases, and arbitrations.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe technology in the cases that Dara has handled spans a wide range, including electronic banking systems, computer memory systems, mammography systems; customer service and payment acceptance technologies, video analytics, bladder cancer treatments, sonar imaging systems, aviation weather detection and navigation systems; computer systems for backup of internet-based data processing.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eShe also advises on international and domestic disputes involving patent licensing, trade secrets, contract breaches, and unfair competition. Dara regularly counsels on issues like trade secret protection, non-compete agreements, and franchise or third-party contract disputes.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDara previously served as Deputy Chair of King \u0026amp; Spalding's Intellectual Property team and is a recurring guest lecturer at The Pennsylvania State University Smeal College of Business.\u003c/p\u003e","matters":["\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCapital Security Systems Corporation v. CapitalOne and ABNB Financial Services\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/em\u003e(Eastern District of Virginia);\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ev. SunTrust and NCR Corporation\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;(Northern District of Georgia). Counsel in matter involving the use of ATM\u0026rsquo;s and specifically hardware and software functionality allowing customers to make deposits via an ATM without the need of an envelope or other documents. The trial team obtained an extremely favorable Markman ruling resulting in plaintiff conceding non-infringement, and also successfully invalidated several of the asserted claims. On appeal, The Federal Circuit issued a Rule 36 affirmance on the non-infringement/Markman appeal, which yielded a complete win on non-infringement for the team.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eEcoServices, LLC v. Certified Aviation Services, LLC\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;(Central District of California). Counsel for the defendant, Certified Aviation Services, LLC, in a patent infringement matter between competitors in the aircraft engine wash industry. The patents involve specific features and technical measurements for use of atomized spray, and also directed to the technical features and use of the system for detecting engine type utilizing specific detection related technology.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eNCR Corporation v. Pendum, LLC et al\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;(Northern District of Georgia). Representing NCR Corporation in the Northern District of Georgia in a trademark and copyright infringement and misappropriation of trade secrets matter against Pendum, LLC and Burroughs, Inc.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eAnuwave, LLC v. Jacksboro National Bancshares, Inc. et al\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;(Eastern District of Texas). Defended Jacksonboro National Bancshares, Inc. in a patent infringement matter against Anuwave LLC in which alleged infringement of a patent that allowed users to receive bank services via SMS messages.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eSt. Isidore Research, LLC v. LegacyTexas Group, Inc. et al\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;(Eastern District of Texas). Represented LegacyTexas Group in the Eastern District of Texas in a patent infringement matter involving systems and methods for verifying, authenticating, and providing notification of a transaction, such as a commercial or financial transaction.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eOlivistar LLC. Regions Bank\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(Eastern District of Texas). Represented Regions Bank in a patent infringement matter involving cloud storage systems.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003ebuySAFE Inc. v. Google Inc\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e. Represented Google against buySAFE\u0026rsquo;s claims of patent infringement. The technology includes online transaction performance guarantees. Successfully argued the claims covered unpatentable subject matter under 35 USC \u0026sect; 101 and won judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eLoyalty Conversion Systems Corporation v. American Airlines, Inc\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cspan style=\"font-weight: normal !msorm; font-style: normal !msorm;\"\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003e. \u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;(Eastern District of Texas). Counsel for American Airlines, United Airlines, US Airways, Frontier Airlines and other major international airlines against Loyalty Conversion Systems Corporation in a patent infringement case filed in the Eastern District of Texas. The technology included converting loyalty points into other forms of credits and/or currency for purchase of good and/or services. Successfully argued that the claims covered unpatentable subject matter under 35 USC 101 and won judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c). In addition, filed two Covered Business Method Patent Review Petitions that were instituted on 101 grounds.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eGemalto, Inc. v. Merchant Customer Exchange\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e. Commercial arbitration in which our client claimed improper termination of a service contract for the provision of a mobile payment platform. After a week-long arbitration before a three-judge panel, won $45.8 million (including attorney fees) for improper termination in a complete victory for our client.\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eBrilliant Optical Solutions v. Google\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e. Represented Google Fiber, Inc. in a patent infringement case filed in the Western District of Missouri where the Google Fiber System has been accused of infringement.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eBrilliant Optical Solutions, LLC v. Google Inc\u003c/em\u003e., No. 4:13-cv-00356 (W.D. Minn., filed April 10, 2013).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eAeritas LLC v. US Airways\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e. Defended multiple major airlines in actions brought in the District of Delaware alleging infringement of the use of an electronic mobile boarding pass to gain entry on a flight.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eAeritas, LLC v. \u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003eUS Airways Group, Inc. et al\u003c/em\u003e., No. 1:11-cv-01267 (D. Del., filed December 21, 2011).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eCreateads v. Web.com, Network Solutions and Register.com\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e. Represented Web.com et. al in a patent infringement case in the D. of Delaware involving web development technology.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eCreateAds LLC v. Web.com Group Inc., et al.\u003c/em\u003e, No. 1:12-cv-01612 (D. Del., filed November 29, 2012).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eCreateads v. Media Temple\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e. Defended Media Temple in a patent infringement case in the D. of Delaware involving web development technology.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eCreateAds LLC v. Media Temple, Inc\u003c/em\u003e., No. 1:13-cv-00115 (D. Del., filed January 18, 2013).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully obtained a judgment of priority on behalf of client in a patent interference related to computers that use point-to-point links to transfer data between a memory controller and buffered memory. (B.P.A.I. Decision 2010).\u003c/p\u003e"],"recognitions":[{"title":"Named Washington, D.C., “Rising Star”","detail":"Super Lawyers, 2015-2019"}]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":10852}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2025-12-17T16:33:18.000Z","updated_at":"2025-12-17T16:33:18.000Z","searchable_text":"Kurlancheek{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named Washington, D.C., “Rising Star”\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Super Lawyers, 2015-2019\"}{{ FIELD }}Capital Security Systems Corporation v. CapitalOne and ABNB Financial Services (Eastern District of Virginia); v. SunTrust and NCR Corporation (Northern District of Georgia). Counsel in matter involving the use of ATM’s and specifically hardware and software functionality allowing customers to make deposits via an ATM without the need of an envelope or other documents. The trial team obtained an extremely favorable Markman ruling resulting in plaintiff conceding non-infringement, and also successfully invalidated several of the asserted claims. On appeal, The Federal Circuit issued a Rule 36 affirmance on the non-infringement/Markman appeal, which yielded a complete win on non-infringement for the team.{{ FIELD }}EcoServices, LLC v. Certified Aviation Services, LLC (Central District of California). Counsel for the defendant, Certified Aviation Services, LLC, in a patent infringement matter between competitors in the aircraft engine wash industry. The patents involve specific features and technical measurements for use of atomized spray, and also directed to the technical features and use of the system for detecting engine type utilizing specific detection related technology.{{ FIELD }}NCR Corporation v. Pendum, LLC et al (Northern District of Georgia). Representing NCR Corporation in the Northern District of Georgia in a trademark and copyright infringement and misappropriation of trade secrets matter against Pendum, LLC and Burroughs, Inc.{{ FIELD }}Anuwave, LLC v. Jacksboro National Bancshares, Inc. et al (Eastern District of Texas). Defended Jacksonboro National Bancshares, Inc. in a patent infringement matter against Anuwave LLC in which alleged infringement of a patent that allowed users to receive bank services via SMS messages.{{ FIELD }}St. Isidore Research, LLC v. LegacyTexas Group, Inc. et al (Eastern District of Texas). Represented LegacyTexas Group in the Eastern District of Texas in a patent infringement matter involving systems and methods for verifying, authenticating, and providing notification of a transaction, such as a commercial or financial transaction.{{ FIELD }}Olivistar LLC. Regions Bank (Eastern District of Texas). Represented Regions Bank in a patent infringement matter involving cloud storage systems.{{ FIELD }}buySAFE Inc. v. Google Inc. Represented Google against buySAFE’s claims of patent infringement. The technology includes online transaction performance guarantees. Successfully argued the claims covered unpatentable subject matter under 35 USC § 101 and won judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c).{{ FIELD }}Loyalty Conversion Systems Corporation v. American Airlines, Inc. et al. (Eastern District of Texas). Counsel for American Airlines, United Airlines, US Airways, Frontier Airlines and other major international airlines against Loyalty Conversion Systems Corporation in a patent infringement case filed in the Eastern District of Texas. The technology included converting loyalty points into other forms of credits and/or currency for purchase of good and/or services. Successfully argued that the claims covered unpatentable subject matter under 35 USC 101 and won judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c). In addition, filed two Covered Business Method Patent Review Petitions that were instituted on 101 grounds.{{ FIELD }}Gemalto, Inc. v. Merchant Customer Exchange. Commercial arbitration in which our client claimed improper termination of a service contract for the provision of a mobile payment platform. After a week-long arbitration before a three-judge panel, won $45.8 million (including attorney fees) for improper termination in a complete victory for our client.{{ FIELD }}Brilliant Optical Solutions v. Google. Represented Google Fiber, Inc. in a patent infringement case filed in the Western District of Missouri where the Google Fiber System has been accused of infringement. Brilliant Optical Solutions, LLC v. Google Inc., No. 4:13-cv-00356 (W.D. Minn., filed April 10, 2013).{{ FIELD }}Aeritas LLC v. US Airways. Defended multiple major airlines in actions brought in the District of Delaware alleging infringement of the use of an electronic mobile boarding pass to gain entry on a flight. Aeritas, LLC v. US Airways Group, Inc. et al., No. 1:11-cv-01267 (D. Del., filed December 21, 2011).{{ FIELD }}Createads v. Web.com, Network Solutions and Register.com. Represented Web.com et. al in a patent infringement case in the D. of Delaware involving web development technology. CreateAds LLC v. Web.com Group Inc., et al., No. 1:12-cv-01612 (D. Del., filed November 29, 2012).{{ FIELD }}Createads v. Media Temple. Defended Media Temple in a patent infringement case in the D. of Delaware involving web development technology. CreateAds LLC v. Media Temple, Inc., No. 1:13-cv-00115 (D. Del., filed January 18, 2013).{{ FIELD }}Successfully obtained a judgment of priority on behalf of client in a patent interference related to computers that use point-to-point links to transfer data between a memory controller and buffered memory. (B.P.A.I. Decision 2010).{{ FIELD }}Dara Kurlancheek is a first chair trial attorney with nearly 20 years of experience in complex patent litigation. A registered patent attorney with a degree in electrical engineering, Dara has built a reputation for managing high-stakes cases across the financial services, technology, pharmaceutical and airline industries. Over her career, Dara has had significant victories on both sides of the aisle, having won tens of millions of dollars for clients and also obtaining a complete jury verdict defending against a $2.3 billion-dollar claim. Her litigation successes include district court trials, ITC cases, and arbitrations.\nThe technology in the cases that Dara has handled spans a wide range, including electronic banking systems, computer memory systems, mammography systems; customer service and payment acceptance technologies, video analytics, bladder cancer treatments, sonar imaging systems, aviation weather detection and navigation systems; computer systems for backup of internet-based data processing.\nShe also advises on international and domestic disputes involving patent licensing, trade secrets, contract breaches, and unfair competition. Dara regularly counsels on issues like trade secret protection, non-compete agreements, and franchise or third-party contract disputes.\nDara previously served as Deputy Chair of King \u0026amp; Spalding's Intellectual Property team and is a recurring guest lecturer at The Pennsylvania State University Smeal College of Business. Partner Named Washington, D.C., “Rising Star” Super Lawyers, 2015-2019 Pennsylvania State University Pennsylvania State University, Dickinson School of Law Franklin Pierce College Franklin Pierce Law Center U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit U.S. Patent and Trademark Office 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 Texas District of Columbia New York Capital Security Systems Corporation v. CapitalOne and ABNB Financial Services (Eastern District of Virginia); v. SunTrust and NCR Corporation (Northern District of Georgia). Counsel in matter involving the use of ATM’s and specifically hardware and software functionality allowing customers to make deposits via an ATM without the need of an envelope or other documents. The trial team obtained an extremely favorable Markman ruling resulting in plaintiff conceding non-infringement, and also successfully invalidated several of the asserted claims. On appeal, The Federal Circuit issued a Rule 36 affirmance on the non-infringement/Markman appeal, which yielded a complete win on non-infringement for the team. EcoServices, LLC v. Certified Aviation Services, LLC (Central District of California). Counsel for the defendant, Certified Aviation Services, LLC, in a patent infringement matter between competitors in the aircraft engine wash industry. The patents involve specific features and technical measurements for use of atomized spray, and also directed to the technical features and use of the system for detecting engine type utilizing specific detection related technology. NCR Corporation v. Pendum, LLC et al (Northern District of Georgia). Representing NCR Corporation in the Northern District of Georgia in a trademark and copyright infringement and misappropriation of trade secrets matter against Pendum, LLC and Burroughs, Inc. Anuwave, LLC v. Jacksboro National Bancshares, Inc. et al (Eastern District of Texas). Defended Jacksonboro National Bancshares, Inc. in a patent infringement matter against Anuwave LLC in which alleged infringement of a patent that allowed users to receive bank services via SMS messages. St. Isidore Research, LLC v. LegacyTexas Group, Inc. et al (Eastern District of Texas). Represented LegacyTexas Group in the Eastern District of Texas in a patent infringement matter involving systems and methods for verifying, authenticating, and providing notification of a transaction, such as a commercial or financial transaction. Olivistar LLC. Regions Bank (Eastern District of Texas). Represented Regions Bank in a patent infringement matter involving cloud storage systems. buySAFE Inc. v. Google Inc. Represented Google against buySAFE’s claims of patent infringement. The technology includes online transaction performance guarantees. Successfully argued the claims covered unpatentable subject matter under 35 USC § 101 and won judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c). Loyalty Conversion Systems Corporation v. American Airlines, Inc. et al. (Eastern District of Texas). Counsel for American Airlines, United Airlines, US Airways, Frontier Airlines and other major international airlines against Loyalty Conversion Systems Corporation in a patent infringement case filed in the Eastern District of Texas. The technology included converting loyalty points into other forms of credits and/or currency for purchase of good and/or services. Successfully argued that the claims covered unpatentable subject matter under 35 USC 101 and won judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c). In addition, filed two Covered Business Method Patent Review Petitions that were instituted on 101 grounds. Gemalto, Inc. v. Merchant Customer Exchange. Commercial arbitration in which our client claimed improper termination of a service contract for the provision of a mobile payment platform. After a week-long arbitration before a three-judge panel, won $45.8 million (including attorney fees) for improper termination in a complete victory for our client. Brilliant Optical Solutions v. Google. Represented Google Fiber, Inc. in a patent infringement case filed in the Western District of Missouri where the Google Fiber System has been accused of infringement. Brilliant Optical Solutions, LLC v. Google Inc., No. 4:13-cv-00356 (W.D. Minn., filed April 10, 2013). Aeritas LLC v. US Airways. Defended multiple major airlines in actions brought in the District of Delaware alleging infringement of the use of an electronic mobile boarding pass to gain entry on a flight. Aeritas, LLC v. US Airways Group, Inc. et al., No. 1:11-cv-01267 (D. Del., filed December 21, 2011). Createads v. Web.com, Network Solutions and Register.com. Represented Web.com et. al in a patent infringement case in the D. of Delaware involving web development technology. CreateAds LLC v. Web.com Group Inc., et al., No. 1:12-cv-01612 (D. Del., filed November 29, 2012). Createads v. Media Temple. Defended Media Temple in a patent infringement case in the D. of Delaware involving web development technology. CreateAds LLC v. Media Temple, Inc., No. 1:13-cv-00115 (D. Del., filed January 18, 2013). Successfully obtained a judgment of priority on behalf of client in a patent interference related to computers that use point-to-point links to transfer data between a memory controller and buffered memory. (B.P.A.I. Decision 2010).","searchable_name":"Dara M. Kurlancheek","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":444653,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":5142,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eRyan Kearney is a seasoned litigator and trial lawyer with extensive experience in environmental and regulatory compliance, climate change and adaptation, product liability,\u0026nbsp;personal injury and commercial litigation, including mass tort and class action defense in the oil \u0026amp; gas, tobacco, consumer product, medical device, construction, private equity, real estate and transportation industries.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRyan is a dedicated advocate for his clients, investing in creative strategies with a results-driven approach that has achieved nine complete defense verdicts for his trial teams in the last seven\u0026nbsp;years, in addition to dozens of favorable resolutions and outright dismissals pre-trial.\u0026nbsp; He prides himself on obtaining optimal client outcomes, working to defy odds in some of the most plaintiff-friendly jurisdictions across the country.\u0026nbsp; Ryan's recent work includes defending clients in environmental and regulatory citizen suits, dozens of product liability and wrongful death actions, medical device cases related to surgical mesh products, commercial litigation in the private equity and real estate industries, and construction, transportation and other products litigation\u0026nbsp;cases involving catastrophic injuries suffered in workplace and automotive settings.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRyan has considerable experience in all stages of litigation, having taken or defended hundreds of depositions and managed countless cases through difficult discovery tracks, motion practice, mediation, trial and appeals.\u0026nbsp; He is routinely called upon to help defend clients in some of their most high-stakes litigation involving sensitive client information and sympathetic plaintiffs in environmental and regulatory compliance, wrongful death, traumatic brain injury and disfigurement cases.\u0026nbsp; Ryan regularly works with in-house counsel to develop strategy, discovery and case management plans from the early stages of litigation through trial.\u0026nbsp; Ryan is particularly skilled in\u0026nbsp;the development, presentation and defense of company witnesses in deposition and trial testimony.\u0026nbsp; He\u0026nbsp;is also a skilled writer and oral advocate, with a wide range of success in new and developing areas of the law.\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"ryan-kearney","email":"rkearney@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":null,"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[]},"expertise":[{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":764,"guid":"764.smart_tags","index":1,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":16,"guid":"16.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":17,"guid":"17.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":3,"guid":"3.capabilities","index":4,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":21,"guid":"21.capabilities","index":5,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":5,"guid":"5.capabilities","index":6,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":761,"guid":"761.smart_tags","index":7,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":71,"guid":"71.capabilities","index":8,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":984,"guid":"984.smart_tags","index":9,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1114,"guid":"1114.smart_tags","index":10,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1205,"guid":"1205.smart_tags","index":11,"source":"smartTags"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Kearney","nick_name":"Ryan","clerkships":[],"first_name":"Ryan","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":202,"law_schools":[{"id":722,"meta":{"degree":"J.D.","honors":"","is_law_school":"1","graduation_date":"2012-01-01 00:00:00"},"order":1,"pin_order":null,"pin_expiration":null}],"middle_name":"T.","name_suffix":"","recognitions":null,"linked_in_url":null,"seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":14,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eRyan Kearney is a seasoned litigator and trial lawyer with extensive experience in environmental and regulatory compliance, climate change and adaptation, product liability,\u0026nbsp;personal injury and commercial litigation, including mass tort and class action defense in the oil \u0026amp; gas, tobacco, consumer product, medical device, construction, private equity, real estate and transportation industries.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRyan is a dedicated advocate for his clients, investing in creative strategies with a results-driven approach that has achieved nine complete defense verdicts for his trial teams in the last seven\u0026nbsp;years, in addition to dozens of favorable resolutions and outright dismissals pre-trial.\u0026nbsp; He prides himself on obtaining optimal client outcomes, working to defy odds in some of the most plaintiff-friendly jurisdictions across the country.\u0026nbsp; Ryan's recent work includes defending clients in environmental and regulatory citizen suits, dozens of product liability and wrongful death actions, medical device cases related to surgical mesh products, commercial litigation in the private equity and real estate industries, and construction, transportation and other products litigation\u0026nbsp;cases involving catastrophic injuries suffered in workplace and automotive settings.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRyan has considerable experience in all stages of litigation, having taken or defended hundreds of depositions and managed countless cases through difficult discovery tracks, motion practice, mediation, trial and appeals.\u0026nbsp; He is routinely called upon to help defend clients in some of their most high-stakes litigation involving sensitive client information and sympathetic plaintiffs in environmental and regulatory compliance, wrongful death, traumatic brain injury and disfigurement cases.\u0026nbsp; Ryan regularly works with in-house counsel to develop strategy, discovery and case management plans from the early stages of litigation through trial.\u0026nbsp; Ryan is particularly skilled in\u0026nbsp;the development, presentation and defense of company witnesses in deposition and trial testimony.\u0026nbsp; He\u0026nbsp;is also a skilled writer and oral advocate, with a wide range of success in new and developing areas of the law.\u003c/p\u003e"},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":5838}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2026-01-02T15:57:05.000Z","updated_at":"2026-01-02T15:57:05.000Z","searchable_text":"Kearney{{ FIELD }}Ryan Kearney is a seasoned litigator and trial lawyer with extensive experience in environmental and regulatory compliance, climate change and adaptation, product liability, personal injury and commercial litigation, including mass tort and class action defense in the oil \u0026amp; gas, tobacco, consumer product, medical device, construction, private equity, real estate and transportation industries.\nRyan is a dedicated advocate for his clients, investing in creative strategies with a results-driven approach that has achieved nine complete defense verdicts for his trial teams in the last seven years, in addition to dozens of favorable resolutions and outright dismissals pre-trial.  He prides himself on obtaining optimal client outcomes, working to defy odds in some of the most plaintiff-friendly jurisdictions across the country.  Ryan's recent work includes defending clients in environmental and regulatory citizen suits, dozens of product liability and wrongful death actions, medical device cases related to surgical mesh products, commercial litigation in the private equity and real estate industries, and construction, transportation and other products litigation cases involving catastrophic injuries suffered in workplace and automotive settings.\nRyan has considerable experience in all stages of litigation, having taken or defended hundreds of depositions and managed countless cases through difficult discovery tracks, motion practice, mediation, trial and appeals.  He is routinely called upon to help defend clients in some of their most high-stakes litigation involving sensitive client information and sympathetic plaintiffs in environmental and regulatory compliance, wrongful death, traumatic brain injury and disfigurement cases.  Ryan regularly works with in-house counsel to develop strategy, discovery and case management plans from the early stages of litigation through trial.  Ryan is particularly skilled in the development, presentation and defense of company witnesses in deposition and trial testimony.  He is also a skilled writer and oral advocate, with a wide range of success in new and developing areas of the law. Counsel Lehigh University  Fordham University Fordham University School of Law U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado Florida Georgia New Jersey Nevada New York","searchable_name":"Ryan T. Kearney","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":444883,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":5116,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eBryan King is Counsel\u0026nbsp;in King \u0026amp; Spalding\u0026rsquo;s Product Liability \u0026amp; Mass Tort\u0026nbsp;practice group.\u0026nbsp;Bryan defends Fortune 100 and other large companies in a wide range of complex litigation matters, including product liability, toxic tort and commercial cases. Bryan has significant deposition, motion, case management, and trial experience.\u0026nbsp;[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBryan\u0026nbsp;serves on the national counsel team\u0026nbsp;for a safety\u0026nbsp;equipment manufacturer. He\u0026nbsp;collaborates with partners from King \u0026amp; Spalding's New York office to oversee\u0026nbsp;local counsel throughout the country and oversee\u0026nbsp;strategic decisions in motion practice, fact and expert discovery, mediations, and trials. Bryan supervises\u0026nbsp;cases in jurisdictions that are\u0026nbsp;known for disproportionate volumes of litigation and large verdicts, including NYCAL,\u0026nbsp;Madison and Cook counties in Illinois, Alameda and Los Angeles counties in California, and Philadelphia County in Pennsylvania.\u0026nbsp; His\u0026nbsp;subject matter expertise and knowledge of evolving case law on a national level equip him\u0026nbsp;with a unique ability to assess risks of liability and lay the groundwork for critical defenses nationwide.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBryan earned his Bachelor of Arts from the University of California, Los Angeles and his Juris Doctor from Pepperdine University School of Law where he was the business editor of the National Association of Administrative Law Judges Journal, a member of Pepperdine Law\u0026rsquo;s Honor Board, \u0026nbsp;and a teaching fellow for Dean Carol Chase.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"bryan-king","email":"bking@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":null,"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[]},"expertise":[{"id":6,"guid":"6.aofs","index":0,"source":"aofs"},{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":103,"guid":"103.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":17,"guid":"17.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":16,"guid":"16.capabilities","index":4,"source":"capabilities"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"King","nick_name":"Bryan","clerkships":[{"name":"Intern, Hon. James Di Cesare (Orange County Superior Court), California","years_held":"2009"}],"first_name":"Bryan","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":202,"law_schools":[{"id":1570,"meta":{"degree":"J.D.","honors":"","is_law_school":"1","graduation_date":"2011-01-01 00:00:00"},"order":1,"pin_order":null,"pin_expiration":null}],"middle_name":"L.","name_suffix":"","recognitions":null,"linked_in_url":null,"seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":14,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eBryan King is Counsel\u0026nbsp;in King \u0026amp; Spalding\u0026rsquo;s Product Liability \u0026amp; Mass Tort\u0026nbsp;practice group.\u0026nbsp;Bryan defends Fortune 100 and other large companies in a wide range of complex litigation matters, including product liability, toxic tort and commercial cases. Bryan has significant deposition, motion, case management, and trial experience.\u0026nbsp;[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBryan\u0026nbsp;serves on the national counsel team\u0026nbsp;for a safety\u0026nbsp;equipment manufacturer. He\u0026nbsp;collaborates with partners from King \u0026amp; Spalding's New York office to oversee\u0026nbsp;local counsel throughout the country and oversee\u0026nbsp;strategic decisions in motion practice, fact and expert discovery, mediations, and trials. Bryan supervises\u0026nbsp;cases in jurisdictions that are\u0026nbsp;known for disproportionate volumes of litigation and large verdicts, including NYCAL,\u0026nbsp;Madison and Cook counties in Illinois, Alameda and Los Angeles counties in California, and Philadelphia County in Pennsylvania.\u0026nbsp; His\u0026nbsp;subject matter expertise and knowledge of evolving case law on a national level equip him\u0026nbsp;with a unique ability to assess risks of liability and lay the groundwork for critical defenses nationwide.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBryan earned his Bachelor of Arts from the University of California, Los Angeles and his Juris Doctor from Pepperdine University School of Law where he was the business editor of the National Association of Administrative Law Judges Journal, a member of Pepperdine Law\u0026rsquo;s Honor Board, \u0026nbsp;and a teaching fellow for Dean Carol Chase.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e"},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":5792}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2026-01-08T21:54:24.000Z","updated_at":"2026-01-08T21:54:24.000Z","searchable_text":"King{{ FIELD }}Bryan King is Counsel in King \u0026amp; Spalding’s Product Liability \u0026amp; Mass Tort practice group. Bryan defends Fortune 100 and other large companies in a wide range of complex litigation matters, including product liability, toxic tort and commercial cases. Bryan has significant deposition, motion, case management, and trial experience. \nBryan serves on the national counsel team for a safety equipment manufacturer. He collaborates with partners from King \u0026amp; Spalding's New York office to oversee local counsel throughout the country and oversee strategic decisions in motion practice, fact and expert discovery, mediations, and trials. Bryan supervises cases in jurisdictions that are known for disproportionate volumes of litigation and large verdicts, including NYCAL, Madison and Cook counties in Illinois, Alameda and Los Angeles counties in California, and Philadelphia County in Pennsylvania.  His subject matter expertise and knowledge of evolving case law on a national level equip him with a unique ability to assess risks of liability and lay the groundwork for critical defenses nationwide.\nBryan earned his Bachelor of Arts from the University of California, Los Angeles and his Juris Doctor from Pepperdine University School of Law where he was the business editor of the National Association of Administrative Law Judges Journal, a member of Pepperdine Law’s Honor Board,  and a teaching fellow for Dean Carol Chase.\n  Counsel University of California-Los Angeles UCLA School of Law Pepperdine University Pepperdine University School of Law 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 Los Angeles County Bar Association Intern, Hon. James Di Cesare (Orange County Superior Court), California","searchable_name":"Bryan L. King","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}]}}