Setting - and achieving - objectives is important to our clients and second nature to us. Before we were lawyers, we were investment advisors, CPAs, and consultants with international public accounting firms. We draw on our real-world experience to give our clients focused guidance.

Firm News

October 20, 2016 ǀ Firm files First Amended Class Action Complaint against Schnuck Markets, Inc. on behalf of financial institutions that reimbursed their customers for fraudulent charges and incurred expenses to replace credit cards and debit cards compromised in the Schnucks data breach.

October 7, 2016 ǀ NFL Players Concussion Injury Litigation New York Times interviews co-counsel, Deepak Gupta, about the Firm’s appeal of the NFL concussion settlement to the United States Supreme Court.

September 29, 2016 ǀ Packaged Seafood Antitrust Litigation - Firm files eighth complaint on behalf of direct purchaser grocery retailers against, among others, Tri-Union Seafoods, LLC, Bumble Bee Foods, LLC, and the Starkist Company for artificially raising and fixing the prices of packaged seafood sold in the United States since at least 2003.

September 29, 2016  ǀ Texas Surcharge Litigation - The United States Supreme Court accepted the Firm’s Petition for Writ of Certiorari filed on behalf of Texas merchants. The High Court will end a split between the Eleventh Circuit, which held that the Florida credit card surcharge statute violates the First Amendment and is unconstitutional, and the Second and Fifth Circuits, which held that the virtually identical New York and Texas credit card surcharge statutes do not. The credit card surcharge statutes at issue prohibit merchants from assessing consumers a surcharge for paying with credit cards, while allowing consumer discounts for payments by cash, check, or debit card.

September 26, 2016 ǀ NFL Players Concussion Injury Litigation - Firm files Petition for Writ of Certiorari with the United States Supreme Court on behalf of 31 former NFL players and family members appealing the class action settlement.

September 26, 2016 ǀ Syngenta MIR 162 GMO Corn Litigation Kansas City federal court certifies a national class action on a single federal claim, and eight state sub-classes on various state law claims—Arkansas, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, Ohio, and South Dakota. State law sub-classes, however, were not certified for the remaining forty-two states. Corn producers now have an important decision to make. They may proceed as unnamed, anonymous class members and be bound by whatever happens in the class action—good or bad. Or, they may opt-out of the class action, file their own individual case—including the state law claims not included in the class action—and control their own destiny. We favor the second option. Corn farmers who proceed as individual plaintiffs—not the class action lawyers—will control the resolution of their claims. Class action settlements require court approval, are subject to delay caused by class administration, and are subject to being reversed on appeal. Individual plaintiff settlements, on the other hand, are not subject to any of these limitations or bad outcomes. And now is the time to take action and file an individual case because depending on where you farm, the applicable statutes of limitation are running that may forever bar your claims.