Cases
Cases Tried or Otherwise taken to Judgment: Massachusetts Mutual Life Ins. Co. Residential Mortgage-Backed Securities Litigation: (D. Mass.) Represented MassMutual in its actions under the Massachusetts Uniform Securities Act, against underwriters Credit Suisse
Goldman Sachs, arising from their sales of residential mortgage-backed securities to MassMutual in 2005-2007. Credit Suisse settled after four weeks of trial, taking an additional $79.5 million charge to earnings because of the settlement payment. Goldman Sachs settled shortly thereafter.
Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation v. United States: (Court of Federal Claims)
Represented Sikorsky against Department of Justice in bench trial of government contract suit. Government sought $80 million plus interest on its claim that Sikorsky had overcharged for aircraft
parts by allocating material overhead costs in violation of cost accounting st
ards during 1999-2005.
Judgment for Sikorsky
trial court rejected government's claim in its entirety.
Argued for Sikorsky on government's appeal to Federal Circuit. Judgment for Sikorsky affirmed on appeal.
United States v. United Technologies Corp.: (S.D. Ohio)
Represented UTC at trial
on appeal in the Department of Justice's $600 million False Claims Act lawsuit. The government claimed that UTC division Pratt & Whitney inflated prices of F-15
F-16 jet engines in the Great Engine War with GE, a multi-billion dollar competitive Air Force procurement in the 1980s.
After a 10-week bench trial, the trial court held that Pratt had made three false statements in a 1983 offer
imposed a $7.1 million statutory penalty, but the court rejected the government's $600 million damages theory,
held that actual damages were zero. After two rounds of appeals, the Sixth Circuit held that the trial record established that the government failed to prove any damages
rem
ed the case.
On rem
, the government ab
oned its damages claims,
in June 2016 the trial court entered final judgment awarding a total of $11.1 million ($1.2 million in disgorgement, $2.8 million in interest,
the $7.1 million penalty). The government declined to appeal, ending the case.
Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation v. United States: (Court of Federal Claims)
Represented Sikorsky against Department of Justice in government contract action seeking $34 million on challenge to Sikorsky's overhead accounting practices. Trial court granted Sikorsky's motion for judgment on the pleadings,
rejected the government's claim in its entirety. Federal Circuit dismissed government's appeal.
Administradora, et al. v. DuPont: (Florida)
Represented DuPont in three-week Miami jury trial of product liability claims involving the Benlate fungicide. Plaintiff, the largest of 23 Costa Rican citrus producers who brought the action, sought $42 million damages
$20 million in prejudgment interest, costs
fees. The jury found plaintiff 60% contributorily negligent
awarded substantially reduced damages, resulting in an award of a small fraction of plaintiff's claim. The trial outcome resulted in a settlement of all 23 actions on terms favorable to DuPont.
Rago, et al. v. Federal Signal Corporation: (Illinois)
Represented Federal Signal in two Cook County jury trials of product liability claims by Chicago firefighters alleging sirens caused permanent hearing loss.
2008 Trial (27 plaintiffs): Jury verdict for Federal Signal on all claims.
2009 Trial (9 plaintiffs): Jury verdict for plaintiffs, but for reduced damages (totaling $445,000).
Super Helechos, et al. v. DuPont: (Florida)
Represented DuPont in 10-week mass jury trial in Miami state court of product liability claims involving Benlate fungicide. Plaintiffs, 27 Costa Rican farms, claimed $396 million damages. Trial court entered directed verdicts for DuPont on all claims of most of the largest plaintiffs (constituting 60% of plaintiffs' total claimed damages)
jury awarded other plaintiffs a small fraction of amounts sought.
On appeal, the Florida court of appeals (1) affirmed directed verdicts for DuPont on claims of the largest plaintiffs,
(2) reversed all jury verdicts for other plaintiffs due to numerous trial court errors. DuPont Wins Benlate Appeal . DuPont subsequently resolved the entire action for a nominal amount.
Naftali, et al. v. DuPont: (New Jersey)
Represented DuPont in New Jersey's largest environmental tort trial, a ten-week jury trial of personal injury, medical monitoring,
punitive damages claims of residents near a DuPont munitions plant. Trial was part of a mass tort lawsuit brought by 1,600 plaintiffs alleging toxic contamination caused by 90 years of plant operations.
Court dismissed punitive damages claims at close of evidence. Jury awarded no damages to seven of ten trial plaintiffs. Jury awarded three plaintiffs damages totaling less than $500,000.
Entire mass lawsuit
related federal lawsuit settled favorably after verdict.
Residential Funding Corp.: (GMAC)
v. DeGeorge Financial Corp.: (D. Conn.)
Represented Residential Funding in jury trial of lender-liability case. DeGeorge sought $390 million damages plus punitive damages. Residential Funding counterclaimed for $96 million.
Jury verdict for Residential Funding on all issues, including $96 million damages award.
The National Law Journal listed verdict as a Top Plaintiffs' Verdict for 2001.
Perrine v. DuPont: (West Virginia)
Retained shortly before trial to represent DuPont in class-action jury trial of toxic-tort claims. Class of 8,500 alleged community contamination by zinc smelter emissions over a century. Jury verdict for plaintiffs.
Represented company on appeal to West Virginia Supreme Court, which ordered re-trial on statute of limitations defense
substantially reduced potential damages. Case settled favorably.
Wagner v. NL Industries: (Pennsylvania)
Represented NL Industries in ten-week class-action jury trial of claims of 7,500 residents seeking several hundred million dollars in personal injury
property damages due to lead emissions from factory over 35 years.
Jury verdict for NL on all issues. The National Law Journal listed case as a Top 15 Defense Verdict.
Argued summary judgment
jurisdictional issues on appeal to Pennsylvania Superior Court. Affirmed on appeal.
In re Harold C. Simmons Family Trusts: (Texas)
Represented Mr. Simmons in eight-week jury trial of breach of trust action brought by daughters seeking control of billion-dollar trusts.
Case settled favorably after hung jury
Mr. Simmons retained control.
Hoover v. BISSELL: (N.D. Ohio)
Represented BISSELL in Markman hearing
in jury trial of patent infringement action by Hoover. Hoover claimed $120 million damages.
Case settled favorably at close of evidence.
Supracor v. Reebok: (N.D. Cal.)
Represented Reebok in damages trial of licensing dispute. Supracor, represented by Wilson Sonsini, sought $100 million.
Case settled favorably after trial.
Patton v. Ohr Properties Management: (N.D. Ill.)
Represented plaintiffs in housing race-discrimination action. Jury verdict for clients, including punitive damages.
Lake County Forest Preserve District v. Carrolls: (Illinois)
Represented family in two state court trials in eminent domain dispute over $30 million estate.
Verdicts for clients on all issues.
In re Asbestos IV: (West Virginia)
Represented NL Industries in mass jury trial
case settled favorably during trial.
In re Petrova: (I.N.S.)
Represented family of asylum applicants in bench trial. Judgment for clients.
Porter v. Saddlebrook Resort: (Florida)
Represented Saddlebrook Resort in administrative trial of property nuisance action. Judgment for Saddlebrook on all issues.
Other Representative Cases: Appeal of Pratt & Whitney (Armed Services Board of Contract Appeal): Representing Pratt in challenge to government's $210 million claim that Pratt violated Cost Accounting St
ards.
Countrywide Home Loans, Inc. v. Mortgage Guaranty Insurance Corporation: (N.D. Cal.)
Representing MGIC in a $100 million mortgage insurance dispute with Countrywide.
Dyson, Inc. v. BISSELL Homecare, Inc.: (N.D. Ill.)
Represented BISSELL in Lanham Act action brought by Dyson concerning vacuum cleaner advertisements. Case settled.
BISSELL Homecare, Inc. v. Dyson, Inc.: (W.D. Mich.)
Represented BISSELL in patent infringement action concerning vacuum cleaner technology. Case settled.
Swift Transportation Co. v. Ernst & Young: Represented Ernst & Young in accounting malpractice action arising from merger between Swift Transportation Company
a competitor. Case settled.
Lead Paint Litigation: Represented NL Industries in state
federal actions alleging personal injury
property damage arising from lead pigment
lead paint. Various cases won on summary judgment or motions to dismiss.
AIMCO v. National Union: (D. Colo.)
Represented AIMCO in insurance dispute. Case settled favorably.
Agnes, et al. v. DuPont: (D. New Jersey)
Represented DuPont in toxic tort action brought by 500 plaintiffs. Case settled favorably.
CRLI v. Ferguson: Represented plaintiff CRLI in breach of contract action. Case settled favorably.
EchoStar v. News Corp.: Represented EchoStar in satellite television contract case seeking several billion dollars in damages from the News Corporation (Rupert Murdoch). Case settled favorably.
Biotech v. Bayer Corp.: Represented Bayer in antitrust action involving blood derivative product. Case settled favorably.
General Motors Pickup Truck Litigation: Represented General Motors in 35 state
federal consumer class actions alleging defects in more than 5 million vehicles. Presented oral argument before federal judicial panel on multi-district litigation. Cases settled.
Carlson v. General Motors: Represented General Motors in nationwide consumer class action alleging defects in more than 500,000 diesel vehicles. (District of South Carolina) Case settled.
General Motors/Allison Engine: Represented GM
former division Allison Engine in wrongful death actions alleging defect in gas turbine helicopter engine. (Various) Cases dismissed with no payment by GM.
Young v. Connecticut Mutual: Represented Corporate Compensation Plans, Inc. in trial court (Northern District of Illinois)
on appeal (Seventh Circuit) in business interference
contract case. Case won
affirmed on appeal.
Roots Partnership v. L
s' End: Represented L
s' End in trial court (Western District of Wisconsin)
on appeal (Seventh Circuit) in securities class actions. Cases won
affirmed on appeal.
