The following is an excerpt from Practice Perspectives: Vault's Guide to Legal Practice Areas.

Charlotte Baigent, a Holwell Shuster & Goldberg associate, represents both plaintiffs and defendants in high-stakes commercial litigation, appeals, and arbitrations. She has litigated across the country, examining witnesses in a multiweek federal jury trial, arguing before the Second Circuit, and co-authoring briefs in the U.S. Supreme Court. Charlotte co-chairs the firm’s Associates Committee and maintains a substantial pro bono practice. Charlotte clerked in the Supreme Court of Canada and the British Columbia Court of Appeal. Born and raised in Canada, Charlotte earned her J.D. from the University of British Columbia and her B.A. from Concordia University.

Scott Danner is a Holwell Shuster & Goldberg partner whose practice focuses on trials and arbitration hearings on both the plaintiff and defense sides. On the plaintiff side, he has secured multiple eight-figure verdicts in bench and jury trials. Over the past year, Scott has spent more days in hearings across the country—precisely where he thrives and wants to be—than in the office. Scott leads Holwell Shuster & Goldberg’s relationship with the Office of Appellate Defenders and regularly mentors associates on pro bono appeals. Scott clerked on the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York and the New York State Court of Appeals. He received his J.D. from the Cardozo School of Law and his B.A. from Cornell University.

Describe your practice area and what it entails.

Scott: I am first and foremost a trial lawyer. I have first-chaired trials in federal and state court, and I have defended dozens of mass arbitration claims at full merits hearings. Although the legal subject matter of my caseload varies from year to year, I have litigated multiple cases involving trade secrets and anti-trust law, as well as contract disputes involving private equity and hedge funds. My practice varies between the plaintiff and defense sides.

Charlotte: I litigate trials, appeals, and arbitrations, with roughly an even split between plaintiff- and defense-side work. Over the past year, I represented clients in a federal jury trial, a high-stakes commercial arbitration, and multiple appeals. Looking forward to 2026, I am currently preparing for two multiple-month antitrust federal jury trials and trademark litigation before the United States Patent and Trademark Office.

What types of clients do you represent?

Scott: Holwell Shuster & Goldberg counts many of the most successful and innovative companies in the country among its clients, as well as smaller ones in bet-the-company litigation. For example, I recently led the firm’s team that won an $81 million trade secrets jury verdict for aerospace startup Zunum Aero against Boeing in federal court in Seattle. I also helped secure a $70 million win in New York state court for investment fund Melody Business Finance against former hedge fund billionaire Philip Falcone, and I led the team defending Valve Corporation (which owns the Steam gaming platform) in mass arbitrations brought under antitrust laws. I am currently representing private equity firm H.I.G. Capital in its case against another private equity firm alleging fraud in an M&A transaction.

Charlotte: To Scott’s point on the diversity of our clients, in the past year alone, I have represented multiple Fortune 500 companies, a startup, a medical technology company, and an investment company. With Scott and others, I represented Zunum from early discovery through an $81 million jury verdict and successful appeal. Previously, I represented Chubb as a codefendant in a case arising from the Jay Peak Ponzi scheme, an online media company in a privacy-related putative class action, and a social media company in high-stakes arbitration. At the time of this interview, I am preparing to defend Visa in two major antitrust federal jury trials in 2026.

What types of cases/deals do you work on?

Charlotte: My caseload ranges widely, which I love. Last year, I examined witnesses at a federal jury trial concerning trade secrets in May and then tried a complex $5 billion contract dispute in private arbitration in December. This year, I argued a novel question of private international law before the Second Circuit and initiated administrative tribunal proceedings. In my pro bono practice, I have represented Medical Students for Choice—a nonprofit with over 300 chapters—in litigation concerning access to reproductive healthcare across the country, including before the U.S. Supreme Court. In partnership with the ACLU, I have also represented individuals in Title VII discrimination and §1983 excessive-force-in-arrest lawsuits.

Scott: In one sense, my cases have a more defined profile: I primarily work on business disputes with a strong likelihood of going to trial. I am a generalist, but my recent cases have included antitrust, trade secrets, financial services, contract disputes, restructuring-related litigation, and international arbitration.

How did you choose this practice area?

Charlotte: I was drawn to trial work early because it is intellectually challenging, demanding, and exciting all at once. It requires meeting with people, asking questions, discovering what happened, assembling the facts into a compelling story that fits the relevant legal framework, and then presenting the story in a way that is both true and persuasive.

Scott: I began my career at a larger firm working mainly on the defense side, where I learned a ton from a lot of great lawyers. I found myself drawn to Holwell Shuster & Goldberg, which has a more generalist practice and provides greater opportunities to work on both sides of the “v.” Like Charlotte, I found that I really love trial work, especially the art of crafting a narrative to fit the evidence and presenting it to a decision-maker in the most persuasive way possible.

What is a “typical” day like and/or what are some common tasks you perform?

Scott: This certainly hasn’t been true of my whole career, but for the past year, my typical day has been going to court or to an arbitration hearing. I haven’t done the math, but I bet I’ve been in court or an arbitration more weekdays than not! When I’m not doing that, I’m advising clients, working on briefs, and doing my best to help our associates become bet-ter lawyers. A lot of the really fun strategizing and mentoring happens sitting together in our (single) office.

Charlotte: The rhythm of my work changes from one month to the next. One month, I could be flying around the country taking and defending depositions. The next month, I could be drafting motions and appellate briefs. I enjoy this diversity of experiences; I make an effort to have both a pre-trial case and an appeal on my docket each year, along with meaningful pro bono work.

What training, classes, experience, or skills development would you recommend to someone who wishes to enter your practice area?

Scott: These may sound mundane, but if you want to be a litigator, I recommend Evidence and advanced Legal Research courses. If you come in with a solid grasp of the rules of evidence and the latest research tools, you will be a step ahead. This is only going to become more important as new AI tools transform litigation. I would also advise seeking out opportunities to be trained. Do not wait for an invitation. Volunteer to attend a hearing, sit in on a client call, or write the first draft of a brief.

Charlotte: You want to be ready to draft that brief that Scott mentions. As litigators, all of our advocacy starts with writing. Take courses with professors who will edit your writing, and ask for feedback. I also recommend moot court. All of the time spent preparing, practicing, and receiving feedback on your oral advocacy skills will make it much easier to argue a motion on short notice down the line.

What is the most challenging aspect of practicing in this area?

Scott: Our clients trust us with exceptionally high-stakes matters, and this means we routinely face the best lawyers in the country. Going against really good adversaries is hard, but that’s a good thing! It’s how we get better; I learn a lot watching how our opposing counsel work, and it makes our wins even more satisfying.

What misconceptions exist about your practice area?

Charlotte: I think there can be an incorrect perception (fueled by TV) that litigators are mean, overbearing, and borderline unethical. In reality, credibility with the court is everything for a litigator, and much of our advocacy happens outside the courtroom in negotiations with opposing counsel. An effective litigator can assess where the parties align, where they diverge but may reach a compromise, and where they have a genuine legal dispute that needs to be resolved in court.

What are some typical tasks that a junior lawyer would perform in this practice area?

Charlotte: Since our case teams often have only a few lawyers, even the most junior associate helps develop case strategy. By mastering the evidence and the law, a junior lawyer can quickly add value and become best-positioned to take on more opportunities. Depositions are good examples: As a junior lawyer, if you know every document, come up with the strategy, advocate for your ideas, and help a deposition run smoothly, you will have built trust and confidence in your ability to take a future deposition. You will also learn more. You’ll be able to pick up on nuances in a witness’ answers, brainstorm questions you would want to ask to tease out the best admissions for your case, observe the questioner ask even better questions, and start to develop your own skills, style, and approach.

How is practicing litigation in a boutique different from practicing in a large law firm?

Scott: The biggest difference is that litigation is the sole focus in our boutique, not simply one practice area among many. This means conflicts are much less of an issue: We can represent almost anyone against almost anyone. Boutiques also typically have lower associate-to-partner ratios. Since our teams are leanly staffed, I am able to spend time investing in the development of each associate on each of my cases. The smaller size of a boutique also reduces the potential for the development of silos and fiefdoms. It is possible to have great culture at a large firm, but boutiques have a structural advantage in fostering true collegiality. At Holwell Shuster & Goldberg, we hire each associate with the goal of helping them develop, succeed, and hopefully have a long career at the firm.