Marts v. Republican Party of Virginia, Inc., U.S. District Court, Western District of Virginia and U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit: Represented both a statewide political party and a local party that were named as defendants in a lawsuit affecting the constitutional right of political parties to freedom of association. The federal district court granted the defendants’ early motion to dismiss, finding that the political parties’ actions that gave rise to the case were constitutionally protected. The plaintiffs appealed, and the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court’s ruling. Virginia Lawyers Weekly recognized the district court’s decision as one of the most important constitutional law opinions in Virginia for the year 2018 based on that opinion’s likelihood to have a significant impact on the practice of constitutional law.
SwimWays Corp. v. ZURU, Inc., U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Virginia: Successfully defended an international toy company based in Asia that was named as a defendant in a multimillion-dollar patent infringement lawsuit. Drafted and filed a motion for summary judgment.
SwimWays Corp. v. ZURU, Inc., U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Virginia: Successfully defended an international toy company based in Asia that was named as a defendant in a multimillion-dollar patent infringement lawsuit. Drafted and filed a motion for summary judgment. Following a lengthy oral argument, the court entered summary judgment in the client’s favor, declared the plaintiff’s patent invalid in a 71-page opinion, and dismissed the case with prejudice. The judge also denied the plaintiff’s motion for partial summary judgment. The plaintiff never appealed the district court’s decision dismissing the lawsuit.
Income Tax School, Inc. v. Lopez, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Virginia: Represented defendants in a copyright infringement case and successfully secured an early dismissal of the lawsuit upon jurisdictional grounds.
Ferguson v. Republican Party of Virginia, Inc., Campbell County Circuit Court, Virginia: Represented a major statewide political party that was named as a defendant in a lawsuit involving complex constitutional law issues. The action arose out of an internal party dispute. Moved to dismiss the case on behalf of the defendant, and after a lengthy hearing, the court agreed with the statewide political party and entered a rare dismissal with prejudice of the entire lawsuit. In so doing, the judge noted that courts should not wade into internal political party disputes, particularly where, as here, the dispute centered on the party’s fundamental First Amendment association right. The action was never appealed.
In the Matter of Rave Cinemas, LLC, Virginia Alcoholic Beverage Control Board: Successfully defended the nation’s fifth largest cinema circuit against charges brought by the enforcement division of the Virginia Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC). The ABC alleged the client violated certain state alcoholic beverage control laws. Tried and won the case before an ABC administrative law judge. After the judge dismissed all charges against the client, the ABC Board upheld the judge’s decision.
Hinkle v. ABB Process Analytics, Inc., U.S. District Court, Southern District of West Virginia: Represented a corporate defendant in an ERISA class action lawsuit. Moved to dismiss the case on the grounds that plaintiffs had failed to exhaust their administrative remedies. The court granted the motion and dismissed the case.
Maricco v. Meco Corp., U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Michigan: Served as national counsel for a prominent step stool and grill manufacturer. Handled this manufacturer’s defense in a complex products liability action pending in a Michigan federal district court. Conducted significant fact and expert discovery. Argued a motion for summary judgment and an accompanying motion in limine to exclude plaintiff’s expert’s testimony. The court granted the summary judgment motion and dismissed the case with prejudice. The court also granted in part the manufacturer’s motion to exclude plaintiff’s expert.
Fluor Corporation v. American International Specialty Lines Insurance Co., U.S. District Court, Central District of California: Successfully represented an international insurance company named as a defendant in a complex coverage action filed by an insured. The case arose out of the alleged failure of a gold mine processing facility constructed by the insured in the Andes Mountains of Chile. After the mine processing facility prevailed in an arbitration against the insured, the insured, which was represented by one of the largest law firms in the world, filed suit against the carrier, seeking coverage and claiming tens of millions of dollars in damages. The insured also alleged claims for bad faith and punitive damages in the coverage action. Handled significant international discovery matters in defending the client, retained and worked with foreign counsel in multiple countries, engaged in extensive motion practice, and successfully compelled the insured and the mine owner to produce hundreds of thousands of relevant documents located in Chile and Canada. After drafting and filing multiple summary judgment motions based on the insurer’s coverage defenses, the case settled favorably for the client.
State of West Virginia ex rel. One-Gateway Assocs., LLC v. Hon. Gary L. Johnson, Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia: Represented a company that sought a writ of prohibition in the West Virginia supreme court to prohibit the enforcement of a state court’s order granting injunctive relief to a landowner. The supreme court granted the writ of prohibition, finding the state court erred as a matter of law in granting injunctive relief.