|
Experience
Antitrust & Unfair Competition Litigation
Maxwell v. American Honda Motor Company Inc., et al.
Superior Court of Arizona, Maricopa County
Counsel for American Honda Motor Company Inc. and related Honda entities in a putative class action asserting antitrust violations and consumer fraud pertaining to importation of new vehicles from Canada to the United States. Settled on terms favorable to the client.
State of Arizona ex rel. Woods v. American Tobacco Company, et al.
Superior Court of Arizona, Maricopa County
Trial counsel for Brown & Williamson in Attorney General action brought against major tobacco companies alleging damages in excess of $550 million for alleged Arizona antitrust violations and other claims. Settled as part of a nationwide settlement.
Gray v. Philip Morris Companies, et al.
Superior Court of Arizona, Maricopa County
Trial counsel for Brown & Williamson in putative consumer class action alleging price fixing and price discrimination under Arizona’s antitrust laws pertaining to the sale of cigarettes. Dismissed.
Richardson v. F. Hoffman-Laroche, et al.
Superior Court of Arizona, Maricopa County
Trial counsel for Chinook Group Inc. and Chinook Group, Ltd. in putative consumer class action against major vitamin manufacturers alleging price fixing and price discrimination under Arizona’s antitrust laws. Settled on terms favorable to the client.
PFFJ Inc. v. F. Hoffman-Laroche, et al.
U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona
Trial counsel in putative consumer class action against major vitamin manufacturers alleging price fixing and price discrimination under Arizona’s antitrust laws. Settled on terms favorable to the client.
Harsco Corporation v. GAF Material Corporation
Indiana
Trial counsel for GAF in Indiana action brought by Harsco alleging antitrust violations and other claims relating to the production of artificially colored slag-based roofing granules. Settled on terms favorable to GAF.
Ward v. Rohm & Haas Company, Atofina Chemicals Inc., et al.
U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona
Trial counsel in indirect purchaser class action for conspiracy and combination to restrain trade where the defendants conspired to illegally set the value and price of plastics. Settled on favorable terms.
Microtherm Inc. v. Rheem and Marathon Water Heaters
U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona
Counsel for Rheem and WHI in an action alleging, among other claims, tortious interference and violations of the Lanham Act. Pending.
Associated Distributors v. Arista Records, et al.
U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona
Trial counsel for Arista Records in action alleging unlawful restraint of trade under Arizona antitrust laws. Settled on terms favorable to Arista.
Securities & Corporate Governance Litigation
In re Computer Memories Securities Litigation
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
Trial counsel for Intel Corporation in securities class action arising out of $50 million public offering of shares in Computer Memories Inc., a California disk drive manufacturer. Settled on eve of trial on terms favorable to Intel, the largest shareholder in Computer Memories.
In re Residential Resources Securities Litigation
U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona
Trial counsel in class action securities case arising out of initial public offering of shares to investor in collateralized mortgage obligations. Settled on favorable terms.
In re Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc., Research Reports Securities Litigation
U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona
Class action for alleged violation of federal securities laws. Settled on terms favorable to Merrill Lynch.
Corporativo Valenzuela Hermano, S.A. de C.V. v. Merrill Lynch, et al.
Superior Court of Arizona, Pima County
Counsel for Merrill Lynch in an action alleging various Arizona securities law violations relating to a corporate takeover dispute between two foreign corporations pending in Mexico. Pending.
Woods v. Citigroup, et al.
U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona
Trial counsel for Citigroup in putative class action involving Citicorp’s Capital Accumulation Plan where plaintiffs allege certain manipulative practices and misrepresentations in connection with their purchase of CAP stock within the meaning of the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act of 1998. Pending.
In re AIG’s Application to Acquire American Bankers
Co-counsel for Cendant in hostile takeover litigation against AIG relating to the purchase of American Bankers for an ultimate price of $67 per share or $3.1 billion. Litigation involved lawsuits in Florida and New Jersey as well as contested regulatory proceedings in Arizona, Texas, Florida, Kentucky and New York. The case settled on terms favorable to Cendant after commencement of Florida regulatory hearing, with AIG withdrawing its competing bid for the company.
Intellectual Property Litigation
S.C. Johnson & Son Inc. v. The Dial Corporation
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin
Trial counsel for Dial in a trade dress infringement action relating to air freshener products brought by S.C. Johnson in Milwaukee, WI. After a two-day hearing, Judge denied request for a preliminary injunction. Settled on terms favorable to Dial.
Resin Technology
U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona
Defended Canadian manufacturing company in an action for fraud and breach of contract arising out of company’s licensing of technology for blending pigmented crosslinkable polyethylene resin used in the manufacture of large plastic refuse containers, which allegedly had failed throughout the United States. Settled on favorable terms.
Cravens L. Wanlass, et al. v. Carrier Corporation and United Technologies Corporation
U.S. District Court for the District of Utah
Counsel for Carrier Corporation and United Technologies in federal court in Utah. Plaintiffs sought in excess of $200 million in damages for alleged infringement of a patent relating to single-phase electric motors that utilize capacitors in the run mode. The case settled on terms favorable to Carrier.
Mobility Electronics Inc. v. Comarco Inc.
U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona
Successfully opposed a preliminary injunction in a case alleging that Mobility's universal power adapters infringed patent claims. Case settled after preliminary injunction was denied.
Product Liability
Southwest Gas Corporation v. Tucson Electric Power Company
Superior Court of Arizona, Pima County
Trial counsel for E.I. du Pont de Nemours in claims that its polyethylene-resin pipe was defectively designed and manufactured, allegedly resulting in massive failures throughout the Tucson metropolitan area natural gas distribution system. Case resulted in a summary judgment for du Pont.
E.I. du Pont de Nemours
Multiple venues nationwide
Trial counsel for E.I. du Pont de Nemours in over 600 cases throughout the country regarding the incorporation of DuPont’s Teflon® product into a medical implant device. The plaintiffs sued DuPont for, among other things, strict liability and negligence on the ground that DuPont had a duty to warn them about the dangers associated with the jaw implant.
In re May 4, 1988 Fire Litigation (Pepcon)
Superior Court of Nevada, Clark County
Counsel for United Technologies Corporation's Chemical Systems Division, a rocket motor maker, in litigation arising out of the May 4, 1988 explosion of 10 million pounds of ammonium percolate at the Pepcon plant in Henderson, NV, involving over 150 parties, with property damage claims exceeding $170 million. The case settled on terms favorable to the client.
Marcum v. The Purdue Pharma Company, et al.
U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona
Trial counsel for Abbott Laboratories against allegations that the drug OxyContin is defectively designed and manufactured, resulting in plaintiff’s addiction and related injuries.
Foreman, et al. v. Wyeth Pharmaceuticals, et al.
U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona
Trial counsel for Abbott Laboratories in various Arizona court actions against allegations that its hormone replacement therapy drug is defectively designed and manufactured, resulting in an assortment of personal injuries to plaintiffs.
Pfizer Inc.
Venues in Arizona
Trial counsel for Pfizer in consumer fraud actions relating to the use of Celebrex by numerous Arizona plaintiffs.
Botanical Laboratories Inc.
Venues in Arizona
Trial counsel for Botanical in actions alleging that its design and manufacture of certain ingredients used in the cold remedy Zicam was defective, resulting in an assortment of personal injuries to plaintiffs.
County of Maui v. United Technologies
Trial counsel for United Technologies in a six-month jury trial arising out of a $47 million claim by the County of Maui against UTC for breach of warranty and fraud. The trial result was a verdict for the defense.
GAF Corporation
Venues in Arizona and California
Trial counsel for GAF Corporation in cases involving allegations that GAF manufactured and sold defective roofing and other building material products.
Cox v. Ford Motor Company, et al.
Superior Court of Arizona, Maricopa County
Trial counsel for Key Safety Systems Inc. action against allegations that its airbag sensors were allegedly defectively designed and manufactured, resulting in the wrongful death of an automobile passenger. Dismissed.
Cemex USA
Venues in Arizona
Trial counsel for Cemex USA in personal injury actions involving claims relating to the alleged faulty operation of its batch-mixers, concrete mixing trucks, automated concrete chutes and other heavy equipment.
Litigation
Lloyd’s of London v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company
U.S. District Court for the Central District of California
Trial counsel for United Technologies in a $20 million insurance coverage action involving United Technologies primary and excess insurers. The case was tried before a jury for four weeks in which the jury returned a special verdict relating to trigger of coverage.
Performance Bond Surety
California Superior Court, County of Los Angeles; California Court of Appeals
Represented performance bond surety in trial and appellate proceedings in a malicious prosecution action arising out of the lower court and the California Supreme Court's decision in Cates Construction v. Talbot Partners Inc.
