Giant Slayer: Marc Seltzer, Susman Godfrey
Marc Seltzer, the head of the Los Angeles office of Susman Godfrey, took on the world's largest animation companies, including Disney, Pixar, Lucasfilm…
November 14, 2017 at 12:55 PM
7 minute read
Marc Seltzer, the head of the Los Angeles office of Susman Godfrey, took on the world's largest animation companies, including Disney, Pixar, Lucasfilm Ltd., DreamWorks and Sony, and recovered nearly $170 million on his animation employee clients.
The settlement meant an average recovery of more than $16,800 per class member before fees and costs, with a class of about 10,000. Seltzer recently told The Recorder the basic elements of Susman's approach to litigation: Work as efficiently as possible and gear toward trial.
What were the key incremental wins that led to that result? The critical wins in the litigation included defeating defendants' motions to dismiss the amended complaint filed after the court dismissed the original consolidated complaint as being time-barred. The court granted leave to amend, and we were able to successfully address the court's concerns in the amended complaint. Also of critical significance to our success in the case was winning our motion for class certification over the vigorous opposition of the defendants.
How, if at all, does your approach change when you're representing the little guy going up against a larger competitor—or in this case competitors—in litigation? Our approach to all litigation, big and small, and whether for a plaintiff on a contingency fee basis or a defendant who is paying us by the hour, is the same. We litigate as efficiently as possible, avoiding unnecessary work and keeping our eyes focused with great intensity on getting the evidence we need to win at trial and then trying the case to a verdict when a fair settlement can't be reached.
Does your firm's noted reputation for betting on clients make it easier for Susman to take these types of cases on? We are known for taking on cases on a wide range of alternative billing arrangements. That means we can and do take on cases other firms can't or won't take.
A prospective client with a crisis calls and asks why you and your team at Susman should be retained. What is your answer? We are trial lawyers who can take on any kind of case with the skill, resources and determination needed to handle the most difficult, complex and demanding cases ever litigated. Our experience in successfully litigating challenging cases is second to none.
Who is a litigator outside your own firm that you admire and why? There are many, and it would be a long list. Among California lawyers, I have the greatest regard for the lawyers at the Cotchett, Pitre & McCarthy firm, including Joe Cotchett, Frank Pitre and Steve Williams. They are truly superb lawyers. I also have the highest regard for Patty Glaser, Mark Robinson, Dean Ziehl and Marshall Grossman. I could name many others, but I would be remiss if I didn't mention my former partner, Jack Corinblit, with whom I practiced law for 20 years. He was an incredible lawyer, close friend and mentor and an extraordinary role model for what a great lawyer should be.
Marc Seltzer, the head of the Los Angeles office of
The settlement meant an average recovery of more than $16,800 per class member before fees and costs, with a class of about 10,000. Seltzer recently told The Recorder the basic elements of Susman's approach to litigation: Work as efficiently as possible and gear toward trial.
What were the key incremental wins that led to that result? The critical wins in the litigation included defeating defendants' motions to dismiss the amended complaint filed after the court dismissed the original consolidated complaint as being time-barred. The court granted leave to amend, and we were able to successfully address the court's concerns in the amended complaint. Also of critical significance to our success in the case was winning our motion for class certification over the vigorous opposition of the defendants.
How, if at all, does your approach change when you're representing the little guy going up against a larger competitor—or in this case competitors—in litigation? Our approach to all litigation, big and small, and whether for a plaintiff on a contingency fee basis or a defendant who is paying us by the hour, is the same. We litigate as efficiently as possible, avoiding unnecessary work and keeping our eyes focused with great intensity on getting the evidence we need to win at trial and then trying the case to a verdict when a fair settlement can't be reached.
Does your firm's noted reputation for betting on clients make it easier for Susman to take these types of cases on? We are known for taking on cases on a wide range of alternative billing arrangements. That means we can and do take on cases other firms can't or won't take.
A prospective client with a crisis calls and asks why you and your team at Susman should be retained. What is your answer? We are trial lawyers who can take on any kind of case with the skill, resources and determination needed to handle the most difficult, complex and demanding cases ever litigated. Our experience in successfully litigating challenging cases is second to none.
Who is a litigator outside your own firm that you admire and why? There are many, and it would be a long list. Among California lawyers, I have the greatest regard for the lawyers at the
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'Water Cooler Discussions': US Judge Questions DOJ Request in Google Search Case
3 minute readJudge to Hear Arguments on Whether Google's Advertising Tech Constitutes a Monopoly
3 minute readRead the Document: 'Google Must Divest Chrome,' DOJ Says, Proposing Remedies in Search Monopoly Case
3 minute readTrending Stories
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