Currently defending a leading pasta maker in multiple nationwide class actions against allegations related to mislabeling and violations of slack fill requirements.
Represented Cook County in claims against its former insurance broker for breach of contract and breach of fiduciary duty. A jury verdict in excess of $9 million has been obtained following an eight-figure settlement with the insurer. Affirmed on appeal.
Successfully defended the majority shareholders in connection with a corporate merger valued at $800 million in which the shareholders exercised drag-along rights in the corporate charter to effect the transaction. Case was dismissed and merger closed.
Successfully represented the minority shareholder of a business in seeking to enforce the buy-sell provision in a shareholder agreement that allows the purchase of shares at book value, and in pursuing claims against the other shareholder for misappropriating corporate assets. After a victory at trial, the matter settled on favorable terms.
Represented the plaintiffs in a RICO claim alleging that State Farm and others secretly financed and orchestrated a judge’s successful 2004 campaign for the Illinois Supreme Court, without disclosing that information. The judge then participated in a judicial decision reversing a $1 billion judgment against State Farm. Issues included the due process right of a litigant to an impartial hearing before an impartial court, and whether there are consequences for a wealthy and influential corporation that uses dark money to recruit and elect a sympathetic judge without disclosing that information to the court and the other litigants. After a jury was impaneled, the matter settled for $250 million.
Defended a pharmaceutical manufacturer in a nationwide consumer fraud class action by purchasers of prescription drugs. The trial court entered final judgment for the defendants on grounds of statute of limitations, federal preemption, and failure to prove elements of consumer fraud. The trial court’s decision was affirmed on appeal.
Successfully defended former directors and officers in a shareholder class action, breach of fiduciary duty suits in bankruptcy, and an SEC investigation arising from alleged financial and business misrepresentations. The clients paid nothing.
Represented a minority owner of one of the country’s largest privately held companies in an arbitration regarding the value of company stock. The arbitration panel awarded more than $20 million, which was later affirmed by the federal district court and the Eighth Circuit.
Defended the exclusive licensee of one of the world’s most popular card games against allegations by the inventor that the licensee breached the terms of the license agreement.
Represented parties (on a pro bono basis) in pursuing claims that Uber Technologies Inc. is subject to federal anti-discrimination statutes. The matter presented issues of first impression related to whether an e-commerce business such as Uber, which claims to be merely an electronic marketplace or an app, is subject to the same standards as corporations providing services. Obtained a first-impression ruling that a ride share company cannot discriminate because it is covered as a public accommodation and a travel service under the ADA.
Successfully defended former directors and officers of a public company against claims brought by former shareholders arising out of a going-private transaction. During trial, the court entered a directed finding in favor of four directors and exonerated the other two in a verdict. The trial court verdict was affirmed on appeal.
Successfully represented a 13-year-old girl in alleging that the Girl Scouts violated the federal Rehabilitation Act in not providing sign language interpreters to a deaf girl who sought to participate in scouting. In a case of first impression, the Seventh Circuit reversed a trial court ruling dismissing the matter, holding that the Girl Scouts are an organization covered by the federal statute. The court’s ruling established that private membership organizations that receive federal funds are covered by federal disability discrimination law.
Represented condominium owners alleging that the homeowners’ association violated their rights under the Fair Housing Act by removing their mezuzah from the doorpost of their unit. The dispute was resolved successfully in the client’s favor on the eve of a jury trial. Add a new entry
This is a test of the divider