Our lawyers and staff are focused on seeking exceptional results for our clients. We deliver value by creating solutions to legal problems through high quality work and innovative strategy designed to meet client objectives.
Select a practice area from the list below to view the results from that area.
Financial Litigation Selected Results
|
Represented individual and related trusts and corporation in an action for recovery of the reduction in value of their investment units due to a restatement of Mills Corporation's financial statement.
|
|
|
As class counsel, we represented 250 injured plaintiffs pursuing claims against major banks, financial institutions and brokerage houses for the loss of U.S. Treasury Bonds which were intended to fund structured settlements to be paid over a twenty-year span.
|
|
|
Acted as lead counsel for casualty insurers who filed suit in federal court against the State of Minnesota to contest the legislative taking of excess workers compensation reinsurance premium payments. We obtained a summary judgment ruling on the basis that the action of the Minnesota Legislature violated the contract impairment clause of the Constitution of the United States. 842 F.Supp. 1211 (D.Minn. 1994). We then obtained an affirmance in the Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. 46 F.3d 813 (8th Cir. 1995). The prosecution of this case resulted in the refund of $700 million in excess premiums to the insurers.
|
|
|
Represented AMEX Mutual Funds in a few matters to recover assets when properties were improperly appraised and when the bond issuers defaulted on projects. We recovered assets from the companies, bond underwriters, trustee banks, and lawyers involved in the projects.
|
|
|
Represented several institutional investors, including 5 mutual funds, which invested millions of dollars in high yield bonds issued by a Thai Steel Mill. The bonds were underwritten by U.S. investment banks and sold to the institutional investors under Rule 144A. Our clients sued two of the underwriters and another defendant for fraud and ultimately recovered by settlement just before trial about 80% of their out of pocket damages. The case required discovery from parties in and outside of the United States and involved complex financial and accounting issues. In the course of the litigation, we established, in two separate published opinions, that a sophisticated investor is not required to conduct an independent investigation as to the accuracy of statements made in an offering memorandum when there is nothing obviously suspicious about those statements.
|
|