U.S. Chamber of Commerce lawyers expand their reach
Lately, this small group of litigation attorneys has been expanding their reach beyond just the the interest of business at the Supreme Court level.
September 24, 2013 at 06:37 AM
2 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
Traditionally, the lawyers who work for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce have focused their attention on cases in the interest of business at the Supreme Court level. But lately, this small group of litigation attorneys has been expanding their reach.
The legal department's litigation group has now begun taking on cases beyond those headed to the high court—adding to their docket those that simply may have an impact on business interests. This year, the group has been involved in 84 cases, oftentimes filing friend-of-the-court briefs and sometimes challenging specific government regulations. In 2012 and 2011, it worked on 63 and 58 cases, respectively.
“Most cases in this country are not resolved by the U.S. Supreme Court,” Rachel Brand, a senior lawyer with the chamber's litigation group, the National Chamber Litigation Center, told Reuters. “If you really want to expand your influence you have to be in other courts. A lot of law is made by state courts in particular.”
The chamber's court filings point to the increase resulting from expanded actions in state courts and federal appeals courts.
While the chamber has seen some successes in its increased involvement outside of the Supreme Court, critics are keeping an eye on the activity.
“You can't help but notice how successful the National Chamber Litigation Center has been before the Supreme Court,” Doug Kendall, president of the Constitutional Accountability Center, which opposes the Chamber on some issues, told Reuters. “It certainly requires organizations that support appropriate regulations of businesses and the free market system to take notice and respond appropriately.”
In addition to its Supreme Court work in 2013, the chamber has also filed briefs in cases before the high courts in three states (Texas, Minnesota and Tennessee), has filed six friend-of-the-court briefs in the California Supreme Court this year, and three in New York's highest court, the Court of Appeals.
Read more about this story on Reuters.
See more recent InsideCounsel stories about litigation trends:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All
Coinbase Hit With Antitrust Suit That Seeks to Change How Crypto Exchanges Operate
3 minute read
Baker Botts' Biopharma Client Sues Former In-House Attorney, Others Alleging Extortion Scheme
Trending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250
