More than half of Patterson Belknap’s attorneys are devoted to litigation. The litigating partners at Patterson Belknap have tried hundreds of cases, including many of the most complex in their fields. One client has described us as "courtroom artisans." We are not afraid to go to trial, and our clients—and our adversaries—know it. We are accustomed not only to trying cases, but to delivering the results our clients want and that cases merit. In many situations of course, settlement may be the best option. In those instances, our reputation and track record should enhance our clients' chances for a favorable settlement.
Our leadership in litigation is consistently recognized in Chambers USA. The guide notes that "This team 'consistently delivers high-caliber work' which attracts long-standing clients. The team consists of 'smart and aggressive litigators who deliver excellent results time and time again'."
The Patterson Belknap litigation team has also earned the top New York ranking of “Highly Recommended” in Euromoney / Institutional Investor's Benchmark: America's Leading Litigation Firms and Attorneys. Benchmark regards Patterson Belknap as home to “serious litigation talent” and quotes a client as saying we are “one of the best litigating firms in the United States.” In addition, our practice is recognized nationally in the U.S. News / Best Lawyers survey of "Best Law Firms," and also ranked in the top tier in New York.
More than half of Patterson Belknap's litigators have held judicial clerkships, including at the federal District Court, Court of Appeals and Supreme Court levels as well as various state levels. Many have gained invaluable experience through the public roles they played prior to joining the firm, such as Attorney General of the State of New Jersey and acting head of the Southern District’s Major Crimes Unit. In addition, a number of our attorneys have served as federal prosecutors in the Southern District of New York and the District of New Jersey.
Patterson Belknap litigators handle matters in all dispute resolution fora. Together they have tried cases in federal court in every judicial Circuit. They are equally skilled in trying cases in New York state courts. At the same time, our lawyers have represented clients in matters before The American Arbitration Association, The Center for Public Resources, The Conflict Prevention & Resolution International Center for Dispute Resolution, The Hague, International Centre for Dispute Resolution, International Center for Settlement of Investment Disputes, The International Court of Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce, Jams, The London Court of International Arbitration and UNCITRAL. Many of our attorneys are themselves practicing arbitrators and mediators who know the value of resolving a dispute through alternative dispute resolution proceedings.
Our clients include Fortune 500 corporations, such as multinational pharmaceutical manufacturers, media conglomerates, and financial services institutions. In addition, we represent foreign governments, state-owned enterprises, major banks, brokerage firms, pension funds, insurance companies, individual officers and directors of large companies, major investors, entrepreneurs, and closely held corporations. We have in-depth experience in a number of industries, including pharmaceuticals; medical devices; consumer products; media and entertainment; finance, securities and derivatives; manufacturing; technology and communications; commercial real estate; and others.
Patterson Belknap believes that technology is integral to providing efficient, effective and successful legal services. The firm continually evaluates new technologies and adopts those which it believes are most useful to delivering better client service. The firm's technological support for case work comes from the Practice Support Department. This group of dedicated professionals provide the database, trial support and technical skills needed to facilitate best the work of our lawyers and legal assistants. Analysts are responsible for front-line support, management of the case data and the management of any outside vendors.
- We are the leading law firm representing the financial guaranty (or "monoline") insurance industry in its efforts to recover against financial institutions and other sponsors of RMBS for breaches of representations and warranties and other claims relating to the quality of the mortgage loans included in these transactions. We represent four monoline insurers in their remediation efforts relating to dozens of separate RMBS transactions, including investigation and prosecution of billions of dollars in claims for breaches of representations and warranties and other wrongdoing against some of the world's largest financial institutions, as well as advising on restructuring and other loss-mitigation options.
- For over a decade we have represented our client, a medical device manufacturer, in a series of “bet-the-company” patent litigations relating to coronary stents. We conducted 14 trials, preliminary injunction hearings and arbitrations involving infringement, enforceability and/or validity issues. The last of the disputes settled with our client receiving $1.725 billion. In total, this client collected more than $3.6 billion. In addition, we recently obtained a reversal in the Federal Circuit of a $593 million jury verdict related to coronary stents.
- Obtained preliminary injunction enjoining satellite providers from airing nationally broadcast television commercials. Successfully argued appeal; which led to the Second Circuit redefining several key doctrines in the law of false advertising.
- We successfully represented a major pharmaceutical company in connection with a False Claims Act matter filed by a qui tam plaintiff. The plaintiff alleged that our client has been pursuing an off-label marketing strategy by marketing one of its drugs to physicians who do not treat patients for which the drug has an indicated use, and by sampling the drug in a dose that is not indicated for its primary use. A federal court in Virginia dismissed the complaint with prejudice.
- We represented one of the world’s largest providers of travel and real estate services in its highly complex fraud litigation with its former auditor. Our lawyers successfully defended against the accounting firm's motion to dismiss our client's claims. The case was among the largest client lawsuits against a Big Four accounting firm for audit malpractice and settled for $298 million.
- We secured a significant victory for our client, a Fortune 100 pharmaceutical company, in an ongoing litigation relating to Average Wholesale Price (AWP), a drug pricing benchmark used in pharmaceutical reimbursement by both government and private payors. The litigation lasted over five years and included numerous class actions that were consolidated in a multi-district litigation. The judge found each of the other defendants, all major pharmaceutical manufacturers, to have violated the consumer protection laws of Massachusetts, but found that our client's conduct was lawful. Accordingly, the claims against our client were dismissed.
- We recently won a major victory in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in an important case of first impression involving the intersection between FDA labeling rules and advertising law. The court ruled that our client, the world’s leading beverage company, cannot be sued under the Lanham Act over the name and labeling of a juice product that is authorized by FDA regulations.
- We represented a major financial institution in an antitrust lawsuit brought by another financial services company. In this follow-on suit to a Department of Justice case, the plaintiff sought damages for injuries allegedly suffered as a result of certain credit card rules. The plaintiff also joined numerous banks, including our client, alleging that they conspired to exclude the plaintiff from the bank-issuing card market. The case subsequently settled.
- We have represented a leading biotechnology company in a number of high-stakes commercial arbitrations over patent and other IP rights to best-selling monoclonal antibody and recombinant protein therapies.
- We secured the dismissal of a defamation suit against our client, a prominent law firm. The plaintiff, a former business partner of the law firm's client, alleged that a partner at the firm had made defamatory statements about him in a letter to a vendor. Relying on recent United States Supreme Court cases on federal pleading standards, we successfully moved to dismiss the complaint with prejudice on the grounds that the allegedly defamatory statements were privileged and the plaintiff had failed to plead facts to overcome the privilege.