|
Experience
Political Law
Virginia House of Delegates v. Bethune-Hill
U.S. Supreme Court
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia
Secured a significant 5-4 U.S. Supreme Court decision on behalf of 12 Virginia voters in a constitutional challenge to the Virginia House of Delegates’ redistricting plan arising under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. We challenged the redistricting map as an unconstitutional racial gerrymanders. This decision is the culmination of several years of litigation, which included a prior Supreme Court ruling in our client’s favor. Following a bench trial in July 2015, a divided three-judge panel of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia voted 2-1 to uphold the map. Perkins Coie sought review by the Supreme Court, and in its opinion, issued on March 1, 2017, the Supreme Court reversed the lower court, finding that the majority had applied an incorrect legal standard and remanded the case for additional proceedings, applying the correct standard. A new trial was held on remand before a three-judge panel in October 2017, and in July 2018 the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia held that 11 of the House of Delegates districts were unconstitutional racial gerrymanders in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. The House of Delegates appealed this decision, which the U.S. Supreme Court dismissed on June 17, 2019 for lack of standing.
Larson, et al. v. State of Montana and The Montana Green Party
Represented Montana Democratic Party and several voters in a successful challenge to the Montana Green Party ballot qualification petition on the grounds that it did not gather enough valid signatures to get its candidates on the ballot for the 2018 election year. After the trial court ruling in plaintiffs’ favor, Montana Supreme Court summarily affirmed.
Cooper v. Harris
U.S. Supreme Court
U.S. District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina
Secured a victory in the U.S. Supreme Court on May 22, 2017 on behalf of two North Carolina residents seeking invalidation of North Carolina’s 1st and 12th Congressional Districts as racial gerrymanders in violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment. Following trial in October 2015, on February 6, 2016, a three-judge panel of the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina found in our team’s favor, striking down the congressional plan originally drawn in 2011, enjoining further elections under it, and directing the North Carolina General Assembly to adopt a new map. The three-judge panel then denied the defendants’ motion to stay, as did the U.S. Supreme Court. The Supreme Court Opinion, authored by Justice Kagan, upheld the district court’s judgment that the North Carolina General Assembly had unlawfully used race to draw congressional districts.
Florida Democratic Party v. Scott
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida
Represented Florida Democratic Party in a lawsuit alleging claims under the Equal Protection Clause and Voting Rights Act based on Florida’s refusal to extend voter-registration deadlines for the 2016 general election in light of Hurricane Matthew. Obtained injunction requiring Florida to extend registration deadlines, allowing more than 100,000 voters to register for the election.
Page, et al. v. Virginia State Board of Elections
Secured a unanimous victory in the U.S. Supreme Court, cementing a win for several Virginia voters previously obtained from a three-judge panel of the U.S. District Court of Virginia, which found Virginia’s 3rd Congressional District to be an unconstitutional racial gerrymander. In a vote of 8-0, the Court dismissed the appeal, brought by Virginia’s Republican Congressional delegation, who had intervened as defendants in the action, based on argument that the delegation lacked standing to maintain the appeal.
Harris v. McCrory
U.S. District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina
Represented several North Carolina voters in challenge to North Carolina redistricting scheme as violative of the Fourteenth Amendment Equal Protection Clause.
Warinner v. Detzner
U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida
Represented several Florida voters in challenge to a Florida congressional redistricting as racial gerrymander in violation of Fourteenth Amendment.
State of Texas v. United States
U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia
Represented several voters in federal Voting Rights Act preclearance action under Section 5 to Texas federal congressional redistricting.
Perez, et al. v. Perry, et al.
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas
Represented several voters in Voting Rights Act, Section 2, challenge to Texas federal congressional redistricting.
Romo v. Detzner
Second Judicial Circuit of Florida, Leon County
Litigation on behalf of Florida voters challenging the lawfulness of Florida’s congressional voting map under Florida Constitution which prohibits the legislature from drawing voting maps that favor one political party over another or that protect incumbent members of the United States Congress. After more than two years of intensive discovery battles that included a landmark interlocutory ruling from the Supreme Court of Florida allowing the deposing of sitting members of the Florida Legislature, the case went to trial in May 2014. Court found violation and invalidated map. No. 2012 - CA -00412 (Fla. Cir. Ct. Leon County)
Barber for Congress v. Arizona
U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona
Represented Ron Barber for Congress Campaign in preliminary injunction hearing over failure of Arizona counties to include wrongfully-rejected absentee and provisional ballots in recount of closely-watched congressional election.
Page v. Virginia State Board of Elections
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia
Represented several individual voters in challenge to Virginia’s congressional redistricting arising under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment for unconstitutional use of race in redistricting. Following a bench trial, court entered judgment finding a violation. Decision was subsequently vacated by the U.S. Supreme Court and remanded for further consideration in light of Alabama Legislative Black Caucus v. State of Alabama (No. 13-895) (Mar. 25, 2015). On June 5, 2015, the three-judge panel reaffirmed its prior decision and ordered the Virginia General Assembly to redraft the Congressional districting plan by September 1, 2015. No. 3:13 cv 678 (E.D. Va. Jun. 5, 2015)
Obenshain v. Virginia Attorney General Mark Herring
Circuit Court Virginia, Henrico County
Represented Virginia Attorney General Mark Herring in statewide recount and related Virginia State court proceedings governing recount procedure and certification. Court confirmed the results of the recount, holding that Mark Herring had received the highest number of lawfully cast ballots and was entitled to receive the certificate of election.
Charles Wilson, et al. v. Governor John Kasich, et al.
Supreme Court of Ohio
Represented several individual voters in redistricting challenge to Ohio reapportionment under Ohio State Constitution in action filed under original jurisdiction of Ohio Supreme Court.
Washington State Democratic Central Committee v. Washington State Secretary of State
Superior Court of Washington, Thurston County
Represented Washington State Democrats in preliminary injunction action challenging use of “GOP” description on gubernatorial ballot by Republican gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi.
Guy v. Miller
U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada
Appearance in advocacy during Nevada congressional redistricting proceedings in Las Vegas and Carson City.
In Re Petition Regarding 2010 Gubernatorial Election (Minnesota Gov. Mark Dayton)
Minnesota State Canvassing Board (St. Paul)
Represented Minnesota's now-Governor-Elect Mark Dayton in this action filed in the Minnesota Supreme Court under that Court's original jurisdiction. The action sought an injunction relating to the recount of the 2010 gubernatorial election and was handled on a highly accelerated basis, resulting in a unanimous decision in favor of Governor-Elect Dayton. Also represented Governor-Elect Dayton before the Minnesota State Canvassing Board in connection with the recount, which culminated in the certification of Mr. Dayton's election on Wednesday, December 8, 2010.
In Re Contest of General Election held on Nov. 4, 2008 (U.S. Senator Al Franken)
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Represented U.S. Senator Al Franken in six-week recount involving nearly three million ballots—the largest in American history—and subsequent election contest and related seven-week trial before three-judge panel. Represented Senator Franken in several related proceedings before the Minnesota lower courts and Supreme Court. 767 N.W.2d 453 (Minn. 2009). Three-judge trial court ultimately concluded, unanimously, that Al Franken had received the highest number of votes legally cast in the 2008 general election for United States Senator and therefore was entitled to receive the certificate of election. Final margin was 312 votes (out of 2.9 million ballots cast).
Borders, et al. v. King County, et al. and Washington State Democratic Central Committee (Washington Gov. Christine Gregoire)
Superior Court of Washington, Chelan County
Represented Washington State Democratic Central Committee during the course of the recount and subsequent election contest of Washington’s 2004 gubernatorial election, the closest gubernatorial election in United States history. After two-week election contest trial, the court concluded that Governor Gregoire had received the highest number of lawfully cast ballots in the 2004 General Election and rejected the contest brought by Republican candidate Dino Rossi. Final margin was 132 votes (out of 2.8 million ballots cast).
Cantwell 2000 Recount
Represented U.S. Senator Maria Cantwell in closely watched recount of her election to the United States Senate.
Labor & Employment
Bailey v. Alpha Technologies Incorporated, et al.
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington
Represented Alpha Technologies and Altair Advanced Industries and their respective CEOs in a hotly contested public policy wrongful termination, defamation, and wage-and-hour case brought by a former senior international buyer. All claims except the wrongful termination claim were dismissed on motions to dismiss or on summary judgment. After a six-day trial, the court granted defendants’ motion for a directed verdict and dismissed the sole remaining claim against all four defendants. The court also entered judgment against the plaintiff on the defendants’ counterclaim on several outstanding promissory notes, with attorneys’ fees and interest.
Airlines for America v. Port of Seattle, et al.
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington
Represented trade group for major American air carriers in challenge to wage ordinance adopted by the Port of Seattle, imposing minimum wage, training, and other requirements. Case involves challenge based on labor preemption, Airline Deregulation Act (ADA), and state statutory authority issues.
State of Washington v. Grocery Manufacturers Association
Superior Court of Washington, Thurston County
Represented Biotechnology Industry Association, a third party in the underlying litigation, objecting to the State’s subpoena for documents in connection with underlying litigation over campaign finance disclosure allegations.
iSoftStone v. Launch Consulting, Inc.
iSoftStone v. Launch Consulting and Wanis Nadir
iSoftStone v. Launch Consulting and Jeffrey Higgins
Superior Court of Washington, King County
Represented iSoftStone in several coordinated lawsuits against employees and new employers in lawsuits to enforce non-competition and confidentiality agreements.
Cedar Grove Composting, Inc. v. City of Marysville
Davis v. Cedar Grove Composting, Inc.
Superior Court of Washington, Snohomish County
Represented Strategies 360, a political consulting firm and a third party in the litigation, objecting to serial subpoenas for documents. Obtained order quashing overbroad subpoena.
Kathy Leodler v. Vulcan Inc., et al.
Jeff Benoit v. Vulcan Inc., et al.
Thomas RoseHaley v. Vulcan Inc., et al.
Traci Turner v. Vulcan Inc., et al.
Ramon Sandoval v. Vulcan Inc., et al.
Superior Court of Washington, King County
Represented Vulcan and principals in litigation and arbitration arising over workplace disputes.
MMMT Holdings Corporation v. NSGI
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington
Represented MMMT Holdings in litigation arising over valuation of flour mills in international sale transaction.
Wiley v. Microsoft
Superior Court of Washington, King County
Represented Microsoft in defense of gender discrimination, retaliation, and employment "handbook" claim. After extensive discovery, summary judgment granted dismissing all claims on eve of trial.
Microsoft v. Miszewski
Superior Court of Washington, King County
Represented Microsoft in successful enforcement of non-competition agreement against departing employee and his new employer. Court entered preliminary injunction enforcing noncompetition agreement.
Lesann McEnroe v. Microsoft Corporation
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Washington
Represented Microsoft in Americans with Disabilities Act discrimination lawsuit by difficult pro se plaintiff. The Court ultimately dismissed every claim brought by the plaintiff, ruling on two separate motions to dismiss and, ultimately, a final summary judgment dismissing the remaining claims and entering judgment for the defendant, Microsoft.
Karl Leaverton v. RBC Capital Markets Corporation, et al.
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington
Represented RBC Capital Markets in age discrimination and ERISA lawsuit involving ERISA and age discrimination claims asserted by former co-President of RBC Wealth Management. Court dismissed ERISA claims on summary judgment, after which the parties resolved the remaining claims amicably.
Fluke Corporation and Danaher Corporation v. Milwaukee Electric Tool Company, et al.
Superior Court of Washington, King County
Represented Fluke Corporation and Danaher Corporation in noncompetition and misappropriation of trade secrets case against several former employees and their new employer, Milwaukee Tool. Secured temporary restraining order and, after expedited discovery and a one-week evidentiary hearing, a preliminary injunction.
UTILX v. Bertini, et al.
Superior Court of Washington, King County
Represented UTILX in aggressive litigation enforcing noncompetition agreement and trade secrets misappropriation claims involving silicone injection technology for buried power cable life extension. Six-week jury trial resulted in verdict for UTILX and entry of injunction extending and enforcing noncompetition against defendant Bertini.
Jones, et al. v. The Boeing Company
Superior Court of Washington, King County
Represented Boeing in defense of race discrimination and retaliation claims brought by twelve current and former Boeing employees, who opted out of class action settlement, and pursued aggressive litigation over 5-year period. All claims either dismissed or dropped.
Hom-Eng, et al. v. Starbucks Corporation, et al.
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington
Represented Starbucks and several senior executives in connection with multi-plaintiff sex harassment, discrimination, and retaliation claims.
Malden Mills v. Dyersburg Fabrics
Superior Court of Washington, King County
Represented Dyersburg Fabrics and individual employee defending against enforcement of noncompetition agreement. One-day injunction hearing resulted in denial of motion for preliminary injunction.
Martin Williams v. The Boeing Company
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington
Represented Boeing in federal and state race retaliation claims brought by former Boeing machinist. Defense verdict obtained on all counts following two-week jury trial. Trial court was affirmed on appeal, Williams v. Boeing, 166 F.3d 1219 (9th Cir. 1999).
Bynum, et al. v. The Boeing Company
Superior Court of Washington, King County
State Court of Appeals of Washington
Represented Boeing in defense of 18-plaintiff breach of contract and fraud in employment claims. Seven-week jury trial resulted in unanimous defense verdicts for Boeing across the board for all plaintiffs on all claims. Verdicts were affirmed on appeal. Bynum, et al. v. The Boeing Co., 85 Wn. App. 1065 (1997).
Seattle Municipal Court
Represented the Seattle Municipal Court and all of its judges in dispute with the City of Seattle over the elimination of a judicial position. The dispute was resolved amicably after an exchange of correspondence.
Pro Bono
State of Arizona v. William Lyle Woratzek
Pro bono representation of William Lyle Woratzek, a convicted inmate on Arizona's death row for 10 years (1987 - 1997), in original federal habeas corpus proceedings from the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona, through the United States Court of Appeals to the Ninth Circuit, and to the United States Supreme Court; in a second federal habeas proceeding through the federal system; in Section 1983 emergency stay litigation up to and through the U.S. Supreme Court; and in clemency proceedings before the Arizona Board of Pardons and Parole.
Rogelio Montes, et al. v. City of Yakima, et al.
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Washington
Represented several Yakima voters in Voting Rights Act, Section 2, challenge to at-large election system for electing city council members. After more than a year of extensive discovery and litigation, court granted summary judgment in favor of plaintiffs, finding electoral system in violation of the Voting Rights Act and implementing remedial electoral districts for future elections. 40 F. Supp. 3d 1377 (2014).
In Re Initiative 1105 Ballot Title Challenge
Superior Court of Washington, Thurston County
Represented coalition supporting Initiative 1105 in statutory action challenging ballot title to 2010 Washington Initiative 1105 (which would have authorized the private sale of hard liquor in Washington State). Defended the ballot title and description drafted by Washington's Attorney General for the Voter's Pamphlet and the ballot itself in the 2010 General Election in Washington and appeared during the course of the hearing on the action.
Doe, et al. v. Reed, et al.
U.S. Supreme Court
Represented respondent Washington Families Standing Together in opposing First Amendment challenge to disclosure, under state's Public Records Act, of petitions for initiatives and referenda filed with the state as part of direct democratic processes. In an 8-1 decision, the Justices agreed with respondent Washington Families Standing Together that the disclosure of referendum petitions does not facially violate the First Amendment. Doe v. Reed, 130 U.S. 2811 (2010). Also represented Washington Families Standing Together in its effort to support Washington's domestic partnership law in earlier stages of the litigation and related lawsuits.
Peace Action v. City of Medina
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington
Represented advocacy group and individual citizens in First Amendment challenge to local restrictions on political and religious speech in public parks, sidewalks and neighborhoods. Court granted preliminary injunction enjoining enforcement of the statute, declaring it unconstitutional, and awarding attorneys’ fees.
