Firm Recognized Among “Best Places to Work” for LGBT Equality

Microsoft has discontinued support for Internet Explorer. To access the Patterson Belknap website, please install a modern browser like Microsoft Edge or Google Chrome.

Firm News

Back to Firm News

November 19, 2015

Firm Recognized Among “Best Places to Work” for LGBT Equality

Again this year, Patterson Belknap has been recognized by the Human Rights Campaign Foundation as a “Best Place to Work” for LGBT workplace equality. The Firm scored a 100% rating in HRC’s newly released 2016 Corporate Equality Index (CEI) report. The CEI report, released each fall, provides an in-depth analysis and rating of large U.S. employers and their policies and practices related to lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender employees.

Firm Highlights

Firm Amicus Brief Plays Key Role in U.S. Supreme Court Dissent

Patterson Belknap submitted an amicus brief that played a significant role in Justice Sonia Sotomayor's June 29, 2026 dissent in Trump v. Slaughter. The brief was filed on behalf of legal historians Noah A. Rosenblum and Nathaniel Donahue, arguing that the concepts "quasi-legislative" and "quasi-judicial" as used in Humphrey's Executor had long histories in American law and provide workable definitions to guide the Court's review of congressional limitations. In the dissent, Justice Sotomayor, joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown-Jackson, cited the brief extensively. Justice Sotomayor relied on the brief to explain that the concepts were well-established well before the Humphrey's decision, and were used by many political figures and by courts developing a “quasi-judicial” category for officers whose duties resembled a judge’s. To read the amicus brief, please...

Not Over Yet?: Drug Manufacturers Eye Potential Circuit Split on Federal Drug Pricing Program

The Inflation Reduction Act’s Drug Price Negotiation Program has been the subject of litigation since Congress passed it in 2022 in an effort to curb the cost to Medicare of brand-name pharmaceutical drugs. These challenges—initiated in federal court by major pharmaceutical manufacturers—have largely been unsuccessful, rejected in both federal district and appeals courts in the Second and Third Circuits, with writs of certiorari uniformly denied by the U.S. Supreme Court. But all hope is not yet lost for pharmaceutical manufacturers’ opposition to the DPNP. A few challenges remain pending in the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the District of Columbia and Fifth Circuits, with the latter signaling potential receptiveness to the manufacturers’ positions at oral argument. To continue reading Amy Vegari and...

Supreme Court Reaffirms Disgorgement in Sripetch, But Jury Question Looms

In our January 2026 post, Supreme Court to Clarify the SEC’s Disgorgement Powers, we previewed the Supreme Court’s decision to take up Sripetch v. Securities & Exchange Commission,[1] a case in which defendants sought to pare back the SEC’s authority to seek disgorgement. The case resolves a circuit split that arose in the wake of Liu v. SEC.[2] In Liu, the Court sought to clarify the SEC’s ability to impose the penalty of disgorgement, ruling that disgorgement was available as equitable relief, but to avoid transforming an equitable remedy into a punitive one, “the remedy [is restricted] to an individual wrongdoer’s net profits to be awarded for victims.” In response to Liu’s requirement that disgorgement be “awarded for victims,” the Second Circuit...

The Growing Antitrust Risks Of AI Pricing For Health Insurers

As algorithmic pricing models continue to gain traction throughout industries, they increasingly face scrutiny from legislators, enforcers and private plaintiffs who fear their anticompetitive potential. The health insurance industry is no exception: Courts are seriously considering challenges to algorithmic models for health insurance pricing, and legislators are also stepping in. This article focuses on recent legislative and enforcement trends to regulate this developing technology, as well as two ongoing cases involving algorithmic pricing in the health insurance industry, In re: MultiPlan Health Insurance Provider Litigation in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois and In re: Zelis Repricing Antitrust Litigation in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts. Both cases are now in discovery as the plaintiffs continue to pursue...

Bankruptcy Court Decides Issue of First Impression Concerning Code Section 365(h)

When a debtor that is a landlord rejects a real property lease in bankruptcy, the tenant has a choice. Either the tenant can treat the lease as terminated or retain its rights under the lease. These rights include the use, possession, quiet enjoyment, subletting, and hypothecation of the property. In a recent case, the parties and the court grappled with this question: when does the tenant need to make that decision? When the lease is rejected, or by some other date? Interestingly, neither the court nor the parties found case law on this issue. It was one of first impression. In re All Star Props., LLC, No. 25-41314, 2026 Bankr. LEXIS 1461 (Bankr. N.D. Ga. June 15, 2026). The debtor owns...

Fees Recoverable by Oversecured Creditors in Bankruptcy: The Application of Code Sections 506(b) and 502(b)

Bankruptcy Code section 506(b) entitles an oversecured creditor to post-petition interest and reasonable fees and other charges. Are a creditor’s pre-petition charges also subject to a court’s view of what is reasonable? Courts are split on this issue. A judge in New York recently explained why, in his view, reasonableness is not the right standard for the pre-petition portion of a claim. Pre-petition charges should be determined by applicable state law and not a judge’s analysis of what is reasonable. In re 1300 Desert Willow Road, LLC, No. 25-11375, 2026 WL 2088511 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. Jul. 20, 2026). The debtor is a single-asset real estate company. The creditor had loaned the debtor $20 million secured by a mortgage on real property. The debtor...

Firm Tops The American Lawyer's 2026 Pro Bono Scorecard with Number 1 Ranking

Patterson Belknap has been recognized with a number 1 ranking in The American Lawyer's 2026 Pro Bono Scorecard. These rankings assess pro bono efforts among Am Law 200 firms and are based on the average number of pro bono hours per lawyer and the percentage of lawyers performing 20 or more pro bono hours in 2025. The Scorecard highlights the firm's “intense focus” on pro bono work, with an average of 185.7 hours per lawyer and 85.1% of firm lawyers doing more than 20 hours of pro bono. The article includes commentary from Pro Bono Chair, Michael F. Buchanan, on the firm’s commitment to both impact litigation and pro bono work that has an impact on people's lives, such as access to health care,...

SEC Proposes Regulation E-Delivery: Default Electronic Delivery for Federal Securities Law Communications

On July 16, 2026, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC” or “Commission”) proposed Regulation E-Delivery[i], a new regulatory framework that would permit covered entities to deliver required information to investors and other recipients electronically as the default method, without first obtaining affirmative consent. In an accompanying statement, SEC Chairman Paul S. Atkins characterized the proposal as “an important step toward allowing the financial services industry to harness technology for the benefit of everyday American investors” and “another stride toward a regulatory framework suitable for the modern era.”[ii] Proposed Regulation E-Delivery would establish uniform conditions under which the federal securities laws’ information delivery requirements are satisfied by electronic delivery. The proposal would generally supersede the Commission’s 1995[iii] and 1996[iv] e-delivery...

Regulation E-Delivery: SEC Proposes to Make Electronic Communication the Default

On July 16, 2026, the Securities and Exchange Commission announced a proposed rule to broaden many financial market participants’ use of electronic communications with investors and others who receive information pursuant to federal securities laws.[1] Referred to as “Reg E-Delivery,” the new rule aims to help issuers and others who disseminate SEC-required information transition away from delivering paper documents, a communication method the Agency pointed out imposes “unnecessary costs and expenses” while “no longer reflect[ing] the preference of most investors.”[2] Commenting on the proposed rule, Chair Atkins stated: The world has changed dramatically since many of our rules were first adopted. But, all too often, our regulatory framework has remained static. … In an age of artificial intelligence and blockchain technology, a...

Patterson Belknap Recognized by Chambers in its 2026 High Net Worth Guide

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler is pleased to announce that the firm has been recognized by Chambers High Net Worth 2026 in the following practice areas: Art and Cultural Property Law – USA-Nationwide Private Wealth Law – New York Chambers is a leading independent professional legal research company, delivering detailed rankings and insights into the world’s top lawyers and law firms. Its research methodology includes detailed interviews with clients and peers and analysis of capabilities, achievement, and sector presence. The firm also received individual recognitions by Chambers in both practice areas: Anne-Laure Alléhaut is ranked in the Art and Cultural Property Law practice area in the USA. Michael Arlein is ranked in the Private Wealth Law practice area in New York. Comments regarding the firm in the Chambers High Net Worth...

Firm Amicus Brief Plays Key Role in U.S. Supreme Court Dissent

Patterson Belknap submitted an amicus brief that played a significant role in Justice Sonia Sotomayor's June 29, 2026 dissent in Trump v. Slaughter. The brief was filed on behalf of legal historians Noah A. Rosenblum and Nathaniel Donahue, arguing that the concepts "quasi-legislative" and "quasi-judicial" as used in Humphrey's Executor had long histories in American law and provide workable definitions to guide the Court's review of congressional limitations. In the dissent, Justice Sotomayor, joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown-Jackson, cited the brief extensively. Justice Sotomayor relied on the brief to explain that the concepts were well-established well before the Humphrey's decision, and were used by many political figures and by courts developing a “quasi-judicial” category for officers whose duties resembled a judge’s. To read the amicus brief, please...

Not Over Yet?: Drug Manufacturers Eye Potential Circuit Split on Federal Drug Pricing Program

The Inflation Reduction Act’s Drug Price Negotiation Program has been the subject of litigation since Congress passed it in 2022 in an effort to curb the cost to Medicare of brand-name pharmaceutical drugs. These challenges—initiated in federal court by major pharmaceutical manufacturers—have largely been unsuccessful, rejected in both federal district and appeals courts in the Second and Third Circuits, with writs of certiorari uniformly denied by the U.S. Supreme Court. But all hope is not yet lost for pharmaceutical manufacturers’ opposition to the DPNP. A few challenges remain pending in the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the District of Columbia and Fifth Circuits, with the latter signaling potential receptiveness to the manufacturers’ positions at oral argument. To continue reading Amy Vegari and...

Supreme Court Reaffirms Disgorgement in Sripetch, But Jury Question Looms

In our January 2026 post, Supreme Court to Clarify the SEC’s Disgorgement Powers, we previewed the Supreme Court’s decision to take up Sripetch v. Securities & Exchange Commission,[1] a case in which defendants sought to pare back the SEC’s authority to seek disgorgement. The case resolves a circuit split that arose in the wake of Liu v. SEC.[2] In Liu, the Court sought to clarify the SEC’s ability to impose the penalty of disgorgement, ruling that disgorgement was available as equitable relief, but to avoid transforming an equitable remedy into a punitive one, “the remedy [is restricted] to an individual wrongdoer’s net profits to be awarded for victims.” In response to Liu’s requirement that disgorgement be “awarded for victims,” the Second Circuit...

The Growing Antitrust Risks Of AI Pricing For Health Insurers

As algorithmic pricing models continue to gain traction throughout industries, they increasingly face scrutiny from legislators, enforcers and private plaintiffs who fear their anticompetitive potential. The health insurance industry is no exception: Courts are seriously considering challenges to algorithmic models for health insurance pricing, and legislators are also stepping in. This article focuses on recent legislative and enforcement trends to regulate this developing technology, as well as two ongoing cases involving algorithmic pricing in the health insurance industry, In re: MultiPlan Health Insurance Provider Litigation in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois and In re: Zelis Repricing Antitrust Litigation in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts. Both cases are now in discovery as the plaintiffs continue to pursue...

Bankruptcy Court Decides Issue of First Impression Concerning Code Section 365(h)

When a debtor that is a landlord rejects a real property lease in bankruptcy, the tenant has a choice. Either the tenant can treat the lease as terminated or retain its rights under the lease. These rights include the use, possession, quiet enjoyment, subletting, and hypothecation of the property. In a recent case, the parties and the court grappled with this question: when does the tenant need to make that decision? When the lease is rejected, or by some other date? Interestingly, neither the court nor the parties found case law on this issue. It was one of first impression. In re All Star Props., LLC, No. 25-41314, 2026 Bankr. LEXIS 1461 (Bankr. N.D. Ga. June 15, 2026). The debtor owns...

Fees Recoverable by Oversecured Creditors in Bankruptcy: The Application of Code Sections 506(b) and 502(b)

Bankruptcy Code section 506(b) entitles an oversecured creditor to post-petition interest and reasonable fees and other charges. Are a creditor’s pre-petition charges also subject to a court’s view of what is reasonable? Courts are split on this issue. A judge in New York recently explained why, in his view, reasonableness is not the right standard for the pre-petition portion of a claim. Pre-petition charges should be determined by applicable state law and not a judge’s analysis of what is reasonable. In re 1300 Desert Willow Road, LLC, No. 25-11375, 2026 WL 2088511 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. Jul. 20, 2026). The debtor is a single-asset real estate company. The creditor had loaned the debtor $20 million secured by a mortgage on real property. The debtor...