Complex Commercial Litigation
COMPLEX COMMERCIAL LITIGATION
Protecting your business by resolving disputes predictably and efficiently giving you a competitive edge in the marketplace.
Complex litigation can be a costly and disruptive assault on your company.
By knowing your business, its strategic objects and your industry, we provide custom solutions that minimize risk, limit costs and protect your human capital. Collaboration with a firm that knows your business, your goals and your objectives helps to secure success on your terms.
Our deep bench of seasoned trial lawyers protects clients in high exposure “bet-the-company” disputes, class action and aggregate litigation and international arbitration.
We provide efficient, predictable and transparent services customized for your needs through state-of-the-art technology and project management.
We pioneer alternative service models and fee structures to ensure alignment with your needs. We are constantly innovating new ways to deliver client value. We aspire to be your strategic partner in solving your most vexing disputes.
Who we work with
- Public and private companies
- Corporate officers, directors and shareholders
- Skilstaf, Inc. v. CVS Caremark Corp., et al., U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, No. 10-15338, February 9, 2012
Secured unanimous published decision affirming the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California’s dismissal of a putative class action filed against national pharmacy chains Supervalu Inc., New Albertson’s Inc., Walgreens Co., Longs Drugs Stores Corp., The Kroger Co., Safeway Inc., Wal-Mart Stores Inc., CVS Caremark Corp. and Rite Aid Corp., which alleged the pharmacies’ participated in an unlawful scheme to artificially inflate drug prices.
- Georgia Tuttle, M.D., et al. v. The State of New Hampshire, Belknap County Superior Court, NH, Docket No. 09-E-148(2009); NH Supreme Court Docket No. 2009-0555 (2010) and related judicial, administrative and legislative proceedings.
Acted as lead counsel for a consortium of over 300 health care providers, on behalf of themselves and a class of more than 6,000 current or past policyholders in the New Hampshire Medical Malpractice Joint Underwriting Association (JUA), in an action that successfully challenged state legislation that required the JUA to transfer a total of $110 million in alleged excess surplus funds to the state’s general fund in fiscal years 2009, 2010, and 2011. Both the trial court and the New Hampshire Supreme Court ruled in our clients’ favor, holding that the legislation constituted an impermissible impairment of clients’ contract rights in violation of the New Hampshire Constitution. In 2011–2012, we successfully defended clients’ adjudicated rights in a sequence of judicial, administrative, and legislative proceedings culminating in the prosecution of a precedent setting litigation class action. Class certification was granted, summary judgment was obtained and, after a fairness hearing, the Plan of Allocation to return the $110 million in funds to policyholders was approved.
- Signature Flight Support Corporation v. Landow Aviation Limited Partnership, Case No. 1:08cv955, (U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Virginia, 2010); U.S. Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit, No. 10-1440, 10-1968, August 9, 2011.
Represented Signature Flight Support Corporation in a multimillion dollar contract dispute involving a Signature sublessee, Landow Aviation, at the Washington Dulles International Airport. Signature claimed Landow Aviation went beyond what the sublease permitted. After a three-week trial, the court ruled in favor of Signature on all contract issues and entered a permanent injunction forcing Landow to comply with the sublease. The Fourth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decision affirms our 2010 trial victory and protects our client’s business interests against improper competition at Washington Dulles Airport for the next 25 years.
Wardman Investor LLC v. Marriott International, Inc. and Washington Convention and Sports Authority, Case No. CA 006427 B, (Superior Court, District of Columbia, 2010).
Represented the Washington Convention and Sports Authority in a case involving a constitutional challenge to the public/private financing of a commercial real estate deal. In a case of first impression in the District of Columbia, the D.C. Superior court ruled that the Washington Convention Center Headquarters Hotel, a $550 million Marriott Marquis Convention Center hotel to be built adjacent to the new convention center in Washington, could go forward as planned.
Representation of a large pharmaceutical manufacturer in an action commenced by the Massachusetts Attorney General's Office
Representation of a large pharmaceutical manufacturer in an action commenced by the Massachusetts Attorney General’s Office alleging that the company violated the Massachusetts Consumer Protection Statute as a result of off-label promotion and the failure to disclose certain product risk information.
- Don't Miss It: Hot Deals & Firms We're Following This Week
Law360 | July 10, 2014
Gannett Co., Inc.’s acquisition of seven Texas television stations from London Broadcasting Company for $215 million is highlighted among the top deals this week. Nixon Peabody represented Gannett. The deal team noted in the coverage includes Public Company Transactions practice group leader John Partigan, Labor & Employment partners Brian Kopp and Michael Hausknecht, Tax partner Christian McBurney, Antitrust partner Gordon Lang and counsel Alycia Ziarno, and associates Tiana Butcher and Pierce Han.
- Rule Limiting Privilege Log Practice to Take Effect
Commercial Litigation Insider | July 9, 2014
This coverage highlights new Rule 11-b, signed by New York Chief Administrative Judge Gail Prudenti, which will instruct parties to meet at the outset of the case and afterward to discuss the scope and parameters of privilege review. Rochester Commercial Litigation partner David Tennant, co-author of the rule, is quoted.
- Medicaid Act May Offer Cause of Action against Rate Cuts
Law360 | July 9, 2014
Manchester Commercial Litigation associate Anthony Galdieri authored this column discussing whether Section 13(A) of the Medicaid Act is enforceable in court by private litigants.