Runners up for Litigator of the Week include Winston & Strawn's Tom Melsheimer, who after a seven-week trial in federal court in Dallas, won acquittal for a prominent surgeon, Dr. William Daniel ("Nick") Nicholson. What made the win so impressive is that of the nine defendants on trial for conspiring to pay and receive over $40 million in health care bribes and kickbacks, Melsheimer's client was the only one found not guilty.

Jenner & Block's Todd Toral and Matt Hellman obtained a significant win for two civilian lawyers who had been ordered to continue representing the alleged mastermind of the USS Cole attack. The lawyers sought to withdraw, citing improper government monitoring of their client conversations. The D.C. Circuit found there was "an intolerable cloud of partiality" over the judicial conduct of a military official overseeing the case.

Michael Kelly of McCarter & English had a banner week. Along with co-counsel from Morgan Lewis, he prevailed before the Delaware Supreme Court in Verition v Aruba Networks, a closely watched case that concerns appraisal actions where stockholders of companies targeted in mergers object to the acquisition price. Kelly also won three summary judgment/dismissals on one day in federal court in Delaware in cases related to the drug Risperdal.

Baker McKenzie partner C. Thomas Kruse led a trial team scoring $72 million in damages, disgorgement, and prejudgment interest to Superior Energy Inc.'s subsidiary Stabil Drill Specialties. The Harris County, Texas jury found two former Stabil Drill executives breached their fiduciary duties, committed fraud, and misappropriated Stabil Drill's trade secrets.

And Sam Lieberman of Sadis & Goldberg convinced the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit to reverse and remand a case for which we previously awarded his adversary, O'Melveny & Myers partner Abby Rudzin, Litigator of the Week. Lieberman represents investors suing Chinese online retailer Dangdang Inc. over a "going private" merger. Last year, the district court dismissed the case on forum non conveniens grounds, but the Second Circuit concluded the court abused its discretion by failing to consider the forum selection clause.