Litigation

Describe your practice area and what it entails.

Brad: I defend clients in “bet the company” litigations, regulatory/enforcement matters, and internal investigations. My practice essentially involves helping my clients avoid, manage, and mitigate existential risk across industries and subject matters. I work with CEOs, boards, and general counsel to address multifaceted crises involving potentially ruinous liability, an adverse court decision, an explosive news story, a crippling enforcement action, or a dangerous congressional investigation. My major focus is helping my clients manage the risk of existential litigation or enforcement actions and serving as a consiglieri to executive management. I also am very active in the community and, as chair of the firm, I help guide the firm’s strategy and lead the firm’s response to the mounting number of social justice and racial justice crises.

Karen: My practice focuses on two primary things: trials and crisis management. I have represented some of the world’s largest and most impactful companies in business-critical cases. Sometimes we build the trial strategy from the first day of the case, and sometimes we are brought in just for trial. I also advise executives and boards when their companies are truly in crisis, either because of government investigations, congressional oversight, litigation, media scrutiny, or all of the above. I also maintain a very active pro bono practice, which has included representing plaintiffs injured by the white supremacists who terrorized Charlottesville in 2017 and winning a two-year battle for budget autonomy on behalf of the District of Columbia. I have experience in government and politics, so I often work on cases where politics, social impact, and law intersect. 

What types of clients do you represent? 

Brad: I represent global banks like Citigroup, JPMorgan, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Credit Suisse, and others; sports leagues like the National Football League, Major League Baseball, Major League Soccer, and others; leading alternative asset managers like Apollo, Blackstone, KKR, and others; and numerous Fortune 50 companies.

Karen: I represent some of the largest, most innovative companies in the world, including Amazon, Uber, Airbnb, Oracle, and General Electric, but I also represent smaller companies like The RealReal, as well as universities, nonprofits, and individuals. 

What types of cases/deals do you work on? 

Karen: I just wrapped up a significant copyright infringement trial on behalf of Oracle related to support for enterprise software. In 2021, I was proud to try two of the highest-profile civil cases in the country: Epic v. Apple, an antitrust challenge to the App Store by the maker of Fortnite, and Sines v. Kessler, the case against the white supremacists responsible for the violence in Charlottesville in 2017. I’m defending Amazon in a series of unprecedented litigations challenging its low-price guarantee, a core of its business model. I’m representing Uber in an antitrust suit, Qualcomm in a major commercial dispute, and The RealReal in a suit brought by Chanel in an effort to shut down the resale market. In between, I am handling several congressional investigations. And I go to trial this March where I represent a group of children and their parents in a case against a preschool where the children were sexually abused. 

Brad: I handle all of the NFL’s most threatening, high-profile matters, including the massive, multidistrict concussion litigation against the NFL brought on behalf of more than 5,000 retired players alleging they suffered cognitive impairment due to their participation in professional football. I recently successfully represented General Electric in a multibillion-dollar trade secrets case against Siemens; Morgan Stanley in the dismissal of a massive class action alleging manipulation in the multitrillion-dollar Treasury securities markets; the independent directors of CBS in a lawsuit related to its merger with Viacom; Credit Suisse in an independent review of its relationship with the Archegos Capital, which collapsed, resulting in the bank losing billions of dollars; Citigroup in more than a dozen class action litigations and regulatory investigations; Blackstone in a multibillion-dollar claim that it misled state pension investors; and other clients in “bet the company” matters. I am also very active on pro bono matters involving reproductive choice, gun control, protecting voter integrity, and immigrant rights.

How did you choose this practice area?

Karen: I had no intention of being a lawyer for most of my early life and career. Following college, I worked in television news, then on Capitol Hill, then on a political campaign, and back to the Hill. I specialized in communications. One day it hit me that I could put my communications skills to work as a federal prosecutor, where I could try cases on behalf of the government. My current practice unites my love of trial work and my experience in government and communications.

Brad: My parents were both lawyers, and I knew early on that I wanted to be a litigator. I joined Paul, Weiss as a summer associate because the litigation department was renowned as a place where you could work with the world’s greatest lawyers on the biggest, most important cases, while also engaging in important, high-impact pro bono litigation. Early on, I had the privilege to learn from two giants in the litigation bar, Judge Simon Rifkind and Arthur Liman, both consummate trial lawyers.

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

Karen: One of the things I love most about my practice is that every day is different. On any given day, I am focused on trial prep, editing briefs or motions, learning the facts of a case, or, if trial is approaching, writing a cross-examination or an opening statement, or preparing a witness to testify. I do a lot of Zoom calls with clients and colleagues to discuss case strategies. And always, I work in close collaboration with a core team of brilliant colleagues. 

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

Brad: People join our litigation practice from all academic backgrounds, but a track record of academic excellence is a baseline for future success. So much of what you learn in litigation is “on the job” training, so I tell law students to seek out a firm like Paul, Weiss that offers the best training, professional skills development, and the chance to work with the world’s best, most talented trial lawyers. 

Karen: The most important thing to bring to the job is a great attitude. I tell people starting out that when someone presents you with a new opportunity, no matter how intimidating, you should try to start from a place of “yes.” Put the fear aside and believe you can do whatever comes at you, including and especially things you haven’t done before. 

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

Karen: Challenges of legal practice were redefined in many ways by the pandemic. It used to be that constant travel was a challenge; now, ironically, we all miss traveling and look for opportunities to meet our clients and colleagues. We were fortunate to have a few (masked) in-person trials during the pandemic, and they felt like a bit of normalcy during a crazy time.  

Brad: The exponential growth in digital data and communications produced in the average business litigation can be challenging. Our litigators need to keep abreast of the onslaught because the tiniest detail could prove outcome determinative. We have invested heavily in legal technology that can both improve outcomes for our clients and help them retrieve the knowledge they need faster and more efficiently, earning a recognition in December from the Financial Times for our innovations. Relatedly, our tech clients face unprecedented legal threats in areas where commercial, antitrust, and class action law are all implicated; that work has accelerated since we expanded into Northern California in 2021.

What do you like best about your practice area?

Karen: I love the intensity of working together with my colleagues and clients to solve hard problems, which often break new ground in law or business. I started my career working on political campaigns; I know the value of being in the trenches with your teammates, day in and day out. We are a team, and it makes the work all the more meaningful.

Brad: I treat my clients’ problems as my own, and so nothing is more gratifying than developing creative solutions to seemingly intractable problems, resolving existential threats facing my clients, and enabling them to focus on their business and strategic goals. As a result, so many of my clients have become close friends over the years.

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

Brad: Associates, even in their first year, play an important role in and make major contributions to litigation matters. There are myriad opportunities to get involved in important aspects of cases, from taking and defending depositions, to helping prepare pleadings and motions, to organizing documents for trial. We give our junior lawyers courtroom experience early on and encourage them to take on pro bono cases, where they can get real-world experience leading matters, while making a tangible difference in their clients’ lives and helping to improve society.

What makes practicing as a litigator at your firm uniquely enjoyable?

Karen: Trial work is a team sport. I regularly try cases with a small group of hyper-talented, wonderful people with whom I have worked over many years; I call us a “trial SWAT team.” We have a lot of fun together, even when the cases are high stress, and we are good at what we do because we love doing it.

Chairman of Paul, Weiss since 2008, Brad S. Karp is one of the country’s leading litigators and corporate advisers. Brad has successfully guided numerous Fortune 100 companies, financial institutions, sports leagues, and others through “bet the company” litigations, regulatory matters, internal investigations, and crises. He has received dozens of industry recognitions for his legal achievements and for his leadership within the legal profession. Brad is active in the community, serving on numerous public interest, educational, cultural, and charitable boards. He is a graduate of Harvard Law School and has spent his entire professional career at Paul, Weiss.

Karen L. Dunn is one of the nation’s top trial lawyers. In recent years, Karen has successfully tried some of the largest, highest-profile cases, including Epic v. Apple, Waymo v. Uber, Malden v. Uber and Oracle v. Rimini Street. In 2021, she won a historic civil rights victory, Sines v. Kessler, a landmark trial against the neo-Nazis and white supremacists responsible for the violence in Charlottesville, Virginia, in 2017. A veteran of all three branches of government and former debate adviser to President Barack Obama, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and Vice President Kamala Harris, Karen is also a skilled crisis manager.

Describe your practice area and what it entails.

I have been a litigation partner at Cleary Gottlieb since 2003. My practice focuses on complex commercial litigation and arbitration, usually involving cross-border disputes. I represent corporations of all kinds, including numerous financial institutions and manufacturers. I am also thrilled to be a part of our firm’s sovereign practice, meaning I represent and advise foreign states as well as a range of state-owned entities. My practice entails both prelitigation advice as well as litigating disputes in federal and state courts throughout the country, including before domestic and international arbitral tribunals.

What types of clients do you represent?

I represent financial institutions, including Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, and BNP Paribas. I also represent manufacturers such as Bosch and Whirlpool. I represent foreign states that include the Republic of Argentina. I also am involved in pro bono with a particular focus on LGBTQ+ clients.

What types of cases/deals do you work on?

My cases cover a range of matters involving complex financial products and transactions, cross-border disputes, and class actions. For many years, I defended the Republic of Argentina in connection with litigation arising out of its 2001 sovereign debt default. That work has involved litigation in courts at the district level, the appellate level, and the United States Supreme Court. I also represent Bosch in class actions across the country in connection with claims arising out of diesel vehicles.

How did you choose this practice area?

I always knew I wanted to be a litigator because I love legal writing, public speaking, and debate. Cleary’s practice drew me because of its historically generalist approach where commercial litigators develop subject matter expertise while litigating a range of different types of matters. Moreover, our international footprint means we are often involved in matters involving U.S. law, but also the laws of other countries. When I joined Cleary, our litigation group was quite small, which was very appealing because it meant getting more interesting experience sooner. While the success of our practice has brought considerable growth, we still remember the value of the “small firm” approach—both in how we interact with each other and the attention we give to our clients.

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

In a typical day, I perform a range of tasks, which can include preparing for and appearing in court either in person or by Zoom, working closely with associates on revising legal briefs or other court submissions, having team meetings to go over strategy, and negotiating and dealing with opposing counsel. Interacting with my clients is often the most rewarding part of my day. I help them work through problems by learning about their business to craft practical solutions to any challenges they face. Of course, the day often involves firm management-type tasks too. For three years, I served as chair of our Talent Committee, which highlighted the importance of training and nurturing our associates, who remain essential to our efforts and represent the future leaders of our firm.

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

I recommend engaging in all classes no matter what the subject matter is and training yourself to always think deeply and carefully about whatever topic you may face. It is helpful to take classes that require a lot of writing and clinics or other programs offered at the school that allow you to develop on-your-feet experience and gain confidence.
What do you like best about your practice area?

I like that there is always something new. There are always new laws to figure out and understand or analyze. Even where the law is “settled,” there is always some new factual situation that needs to be analyzed in that context. You are always meeting new people, and it is exciting to get exposed to new judges with different styles. In this practice, you learn how to make arguments to whatever audience you are before and protect the interest of your client.

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

I always say that I want to give a junior lawyer as much experience as they are comfortable taking. The junior lawyer jumps right into developing legal theories and learning and investigating the facts of the case. I think it is critical that from day one a junior lawyer considers themself a full part of the team. The law has always been driven forward by its youngest members. I do not think there are any black-and-white limits on what a junior lawyer can do based on seniority. A junior lawyer can take depositions and interact directly with the client among other interesting tasks.

What kinds of experience can summer associates gain at this practice area at your firm?

At Cleary, we see summer associates as full members of the team. We include them in important meetings and hearings. I want summer associates to dive right in and write not just memos, but briefs that will be filed with the court. We want them to be the front-line person presenting at meetings and generating ideas. There are also always the fun experiences that come with our social events, which play a key role in exposing the summer associates to their future colleagues. We want the summer associates to get to know as many Cleary lawyers as possible and for Cleary lawyers to get to know the summer associates.

What are some typical career paths for lawyers in this practice area?

One career path would be becoming a senior member of the litigation group—we have partner, counsel, and senior attorney positions. But most of our associates go on to great futures outside of Cleary—Cleary offers such good training, experience, and exposure that our associates are well equipped for a range of exciting positions, and employers of all stripes recognize that. Future employers know that someone who has litigated at Cleary is well suited to litigate or advise clients anywhere. Cleary’s litigation group alumni include general counsel, other in-house lawyers, law professors, government lawyers, and lawyers at non-governmental organizations and other public interest organizations. We are also proud of our former partners who are federal judges, prosecutors, and in government.

Carmine Boccuzzi, Partner—Litigation (2023)

Carmine D. Boccuzzi is a partner based in Cleary Gottlieb’s New York office. His litigation and arbitration practice covers a broad range of complex civil litigation matters. He focuses on international disputes, including those involving foreign states and state-owned entities, as well as disputes involving the capital markets and antitrust issues.

Carmine has been recognized as a leading litigator and arbitrator by Chambers Global, Chambers USA, The Legal 500 U.S., The Legal 500 Latin America, Benchmark Litigation, Latin Lawyer, and Who’s Who Legal. He has also been honored by the Irish Repertory Theater for 25 years of pro bono service. 

Carmine joined the firm in 1994 and became partner in 2003.

He received a J.D. from Yale Law School and a B.A., magna cum laude, from Yale University.

Describe your practice area and what it entails.

The Business & Tort Litigation practice at Jones Day is a general litigation practice, where our trial lawyers serve clients from counseling through trial and appeal in business and government disputes, torts, and civil litigation. My practice also includes Investigations & White Collar Defense. In this practice area, Jones Day helps clients with U.S. and cross-border investigations and defends clients in white collar criminal defense matters.  

My practice focuses on preparing cases for trial; finding ways to strategically resolve cases, whether by motion or trying the case; and addressing any post-trial issues. We often work with our other litigation or disputes-based practice groups, who bring various other experience to the case—whether it’s cross-border or a specific area of law (securities, intellectual property, labor and employment, etc.). Our practice is truly national and international, and gives us the opportunity to work with our colleagues around the globe.

What types of clients do you represent? 

In civil cases, I defend companies against actions brought by other corporations or by individuals. In investigations and civil cases, I advise U.S. and foreign companies from a broad array of industries, including education, energy, financial, manufacturing, retail, and technology industries.

In criminal cases, I generally represent business executives accused of wrongdoing. My pro bono work involves representing persons wrongfully convicted of crimes and survivors of domestic abuse.

What types of cases/deals do you work on? 

I work on all types of business dispute cases. Some cases are business-to-business disputes, while others are individuals-to-business disputes. The disputes range from allegations involving breach of contract, trade secret theft, alleged public nuisance, personal injuries that occurred in the U.S. and abroad, and measures taken by businesses during the COVID pandemic.

As to criminal matters, my cases mostly involve allegations of fraud, or other crimes of deceit or concealment, and bribery. On the investigations front, I have worked on government investigations involving Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), Office of Foreign Asset Control (OFAC) regulations, U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) regulations, the Department of Justice, and internal investigations involving possible employee or company misconduct.

My pro bono cases have been similarly varied. I’ve worked on asylum, prisoner civil rights, student rights, wrongful conviction, landlord-tenant, and domestic violence restraining order cases at both trial and appellate courts.

How did you choose this practice area?

In many ways, I feel that I did not choose this practice area, it chose me—or more accurately, it was a natural fit and next step. In law school, when I learned about what judicial law clerks do, I knew that I wanted to clerk. After clerking, I had gained so many skills that would make me a great litigator, it was natural for me to become a litigator. It wasn’t even a choice.

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

There is no typical day in my world. Each day brings new challenges. As I have gained seniority, I spend far more time advising clients on a range of legal issues and discussing litigation strategy. I also am spending significant time taking and defending depositions, which involves taking a deep dive into documents and brainstorming on themes, what my witness will be asked, or the admissions I want to get from the deponent. Most importantly, when I defend a witness, I work with the witness to make sure they know what to expect and feel prepared to sit for the deposition. Lastly, I have been working with experts, helping them gain the case knowledge necessary to draft their expert reports. I like to dig into the facts and legal standards in my cases, so you can also still find me conducting research from time to time.  

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

I would recommend that you do whatever interests you in terms of training, classes, and experience. There is no right way to prepare to be a litigator. A broad range of experience will help you quickly learn new facts and adapt to the ever-changing space. Your life experience in general is also helpful, no matter what experiences you have had. Of course, interning or clerking for a judge is helpful. (And I highly recommend it.) Trial and appellate advocacy courses are also helpful. But in the end, a good litigator can think through legal issues; see potential issues before they occur; and understand, empathize, and connect with people. Those skills are not taught by a specific class or experience. In conclusion, do what you like. I assure you. It will be helpful to your career.

What do you like best about your practice area?

I absolutely love the variety of cases that I have as a litigator. I enjoy learning about new companies and new technology, and meeting people working in various business industries. I am a lifelong learner at heart, and this practice area allows me to learn something new every day.  

What misconceptions exist about your practice area?

My favorite misconception about my practice area is that litigators love to argue. It is simply not true for all of us. As a litigator, the majority of my time is spent thinking about arguments in advance of having to write them out in a motion or present them to a court. Most arguments I (and others) make are well-orchestrated performances that we spend hours preparing for. Arguing with friends and family in a traditional sense is much different than the arguments litigators make to the court. (Although those types of “arguments” are great for figuring out how to think on your feet.)

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

There are a variety of tasks a junior lawyer would perform in this practice area. The availability of work is only limited by the lawyer’s desires. As long as you show a willingness and preparedness to handle a task, there is a good chance the work will be assigned to you. We have first-year associates who write the initial drafts of written discovery, sections of motions, and letters to opposing counsel about settlement or discovery disputes. They also research issues to support the development of case and trial strategy. Junior associates conduct fact interviews of employees and help prepare witnesses for depositions. Many junior lawyers also have opportunities to take depositions and take active roles in trials by examining witnesses or helping with other trial tasks.  

What kinds of experience can summer associates gain at this practice area at your firm?

One of the best parts of the summer associate experience at Jones Day is the variety of experiences available. As a summer associate, you can work on varied projects from all practice groups. If a law student is not sure whether they want to do transactional work or litigation, or if they know they want to do litigation but are unsure about which practice area they want to work in, the summer associate experience at Jones Day is perfect for that law student because a summer associate at Jones Day can explore all areas.

Kapri Saunders is a litigator who represents private and public companies, as well as business professionals, in complex civil litigation, government investigations, and white collar criminal matters. Kapri has advised clients on disputes arising out of business contracts, consumer fraud and protection, mortgage lending and real estate transactions, public corruption, and violation of federal criminal statutes, as well as governmental and internal investigations. She has experience at every stage of litigation. She has managed and conducted factual investigations and discovery, drafted successful dispositive motions and appellate briefs, argued motions, developed trial strategies, and negotiated settlements. She also has civil and criminal trial experience. Prior to practicing law, Kapri worked in higher education administration at a small private college, developing the residence life department, creating campus programming, and advising students. Kapri maintains an active pro bono practice with a particular focus on advocating on behalf of wrongfully convicted persons and helping domestic abuse survivors obtain restraining orders against their abusers.

Describe your practice area and what it entails.

The breadth of cases at MoloLamken and the depth of expertise across trial-level and appellate practice mean that the docket here is ever varied and exciting. Our firm regularly takes high-stakes cases to trial—and wins—in federal and state courts around the country. Our attorneys also frequently appear before the U.S. Supreme Court, which recently granted two of our cert petitions on the same day. In addition, we have robust white collar, intellectual property, and bankruptcy practices. And associates are expected to practice across all of those areas, regardless of their experience prior to MoloLamken.

What types of clients do you represent?

MoloLamken represents companies, boards, funds, individuals, investors, and inventors in a diverse range of legal matters. We represent plaintiffs and defendants. For example, we might represent corporations defending against breach of contract or patent infringement claims. At the same time, we might be representing plaintiffs in a securities class action or institutional investors challenging the payout on a structured investment product. We also regularly undertake individual representations in white collar cases, where we represent both private citizens and government officials.

What types of cases/deals do you work on?

My personal docket is as diverse as the firm’s. In the past year, I’ve worked on matters including a jury trial in a plaintiff-side securities fraud class action in the Southern District of New York, a Ninth Circuit First Amendment appeal, post-trial motions in a patent case in a Texas federal court, a cross-border judgment enforcement matter against a foreign sovereign, and a business dispute in the New York Supreme Court’s Commercial Division.

How did you choose this practice area?

My district court clerkship confirmed for me that I wanted to be a litigator. For me, that meant seeking a firm where I would be part of the action in my cases right away, rather than waiting years on the sidelines for substantive experience. I also loved working across a breadth of subject matter areas when I clerked, and I was unwilling to be siloed into a specialty just when I was beginning my career. MoloLamken offered the right mix of work and a culture that prioritizes mentoring associates and getting them real experience as early and as often as possible. That’s a rare combination, and it’s why I chose this firm.

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

Because of my varied caseload, my days also vary widely. This past summer, I spent two weeks at a jury trial where I examined a witness, second-chaired and prepped others, and briefed and argued evidentiary objections. This fall, I spent two weeks drafting and revising an appellate brief on First Amendment and standing issues. A typical day also involves meeting with my colleagues to discuss strategy, responding to emails, and ensuring that a given case’s upcoming filings or discovery requests are in order. MoloLamken staffs across its three offices and operates on a hybrid in-person and remote model. When I work from home, I communicate frequently with my teammates by phone, chat, and videoconference. During our two weekly in-office days, we typically eat lunch as an office, and I regularly stop by partners’ offices for advice on subjects ranging from business development to how to train for a marathon.

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

Because MoloLamken expects associates to jump in right away, we only hire associates who have clerked. Beyond that, the firm values excellent academic credentials, strong writing skills, and stand-up experience in law school or practice. Most importantly, the firm is looking for attorneys who fit MoloLamken’s culture: people with diverse backgrounds and experiences who are excellent teammates and collaborators and who have the common sense and self-confidence to learn new skills and manage challenging cases.
What is the most challenging aspect of practicing in this area?

Our diverse practice is a double-edged sword; it means that I’m always a beginner in something on my docket. I often need to get up to speed on a subject area or a litigation skill quickly, which is occasionally stressful. For example, in a given week I might have to figure out both how to hire a private investigator to locate an unwilling subpoena target and what the scienter standard for a securities fraud claim is in the Second Circuit. That variety means that, while I sometimes wish I was an expert in something, I’m never bored.

What misconceptions exist about your practice area?

Personally, I wasn’t convinced that MoloLamken really expected associates to have a true generalist practice, even though my now-colleagues told me so during my interviews. But I underestimated the degree to which the firm believes in the generalist model and backs it up by ensuring that associates have the mentorship they need to master particular skills and subject-matter areas. For example, when I started at the firm I was surprised that the firm’s appellate and Supreme Court practitioners wanted me on their cases even though I didn’t clerk on an appellate court—which is typically a prerequisite to joining an appellate practice. But they did. As a result of the mentorship I’ve received working on appeals, I’m not only developing an appellate practice, but am also improving my writing in general as well as my instincts about what issues to preserve at trial.

What is unique about your practice area at your firm?

MoloLamken is unusual in its lack of hierarchy and also in its relatively few conflicts, which allows the firm to take on such a broad array of cases. The result is that working at MoloLamken is a kind of “choose your own adventure” experience, with opportunities across all of the areas in which the firm practices—business disputes, IP disputes, and white collar defense and investigations. For example, I’m especially interested in trial work. Within eight months of starting at MoloLamken, I went to trial and took a witness. And I have upcoming trial opportunities where I expect to get similarly substantive experience. I’ve had the same experience seeking out particular subject-matter areas of interest. I know I would not be experiencing that breadth of opportunity and support at many—if any—other firms.

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

Because MoloLamken doesn’t operate according to a traditional hierarchy, both associates and partners frequently work “up” or “down” from their class year. There isn’t a hard distinction between junior and senior associates. Typical tasks for associates include drafting motions or briefs, mooting colleagues for upcoming arguments, working with expert witnesses, taking or defending depositions, drafting complaints, negotiating with opposing counsel, interviewing witnesses, or issuing and responding to requests for discovery. Unlike at some other firms, MoloLamken associates are also substantially involved in two other key aspects of running a firm: business development and recruiting.

Alex Eynon represents plaintiffs and defendants in a broad range of trial and appellate matters. Before joining MoloLamken, Ms. Eynon served as a law clerk to the Honorable Lee H. Rosenthal of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas. She also previously worked as a litigation associate at Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison. Ms. Eynon received her B.A. in Art History from Columbia University and her J.D. from Yale Law School. During law school, she worked as a teaching assistant for Professor Judith Resnik’s Federal Courts course and participated in Yale’s Samuel Jacobs Criminal Justice clinic.

Describe your practice area and what it entails.

We are a trial litigation boutique and pride ourselves on being able to take any case to trial. The firm’s attorneys have now tried more than 200 cases in a wide variety of areas, including over 20 trials since the firm opened in 2016.

While we take cases at every stage, we are often hired to represent clients at or near the end of discovery. This means our cases are normally ramping up for trial, and our job is to focus on taking what is often a very broad record and simplify it into a compelling narrative that will be persuasive to a jury. We also focus very strongly on diversity in the firm, as it is our goal that our attorneys be reflective of the juries to which we are presenting.

What types of clients do you represent?

The firm represents a wide variety of clients including large companies (Altria, Bayer, Microsoft, Glenmark, 3M, Cargill, Medtronic, Plaid, Allergan, and Georgia Pacific), sports associations (the NFL and NCAA), criminal defendants, and pro bono clients. The pro bono cases are some of the most rewarding, and Chambers & Partners has recognized the firm as having one of the two best pro bono programs of all law firms in the country, large or small.

What types of cases/deals do you work on?

Like all attorneys at our firm, we are focused on cases headed toward trial. In terms of subject matter, there is no single type of case on which we work. As a firm, we are willing to take any case to trial, but over the past several years we have had antitrust, class action, criminal, products liability, and sports-related trials. Everybody at the firm floats between these areas and is exposed to all aspects of trial litigation.

How did you choose this practice area?

Moira: I always had an inkling I wanted to be a trial lawyer, but it really was having the opportunity to work with Beth Wilkinson (now my partner) early in my career that solidified the desire. Watching her connect with juries and create a compelling narrative, I wanted to have that experience myself. My passion for trial lawyering was furthered when I served as a federal prosecutor and was able to experience having my own trials where I was leading case strategy. After serving as first chair for the government and obtaining a conviction in a major racketeering trial against the leader of a cult-like organization called NXIVM (which was the subject of HBO’s documentary The Vow), I decided to join Wilkinson Stekloff so I could continue trying complex, sophisticated cases.

Anastasia: After law school, where there is such a strong focus on legal research and writing, I expected that I would pursue an appellate practice. During my first clerkship, which was for a federal district court judge, I realized that I enjoyed the pace and strategy of litigation. Getting to observe trials clinched it for me: I was drawn to how the parties gathered facts and used them to tell stories about the claims at issue in their cases. I looked for firms where, even early in my career, I would have the opportunity to work closely with great trial lawyers on challenging, fascinating cases. As it turns out, that’s a great description of Wilkinson Stekloff.

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

Anastasia: After over five years here, I can honestly say that there is no such thing as a “typical day.” Although we are always focused on trial—whether a complaint has just been filed or we are preparing for a pretrial conference—tasks can vary a lot depending on the stage of the case. For example, early on we might be meeting with clients or vetting potential experts. As a case proceeds, we might be preparing witnesses for depositions, helping to develop expert reports, or participating in strategy meetings to ensure we’re developing a record that aligns with our trial narratives. Closer to trial, we typically shift our attention to preparing opening statements, developing direct and cross examinations, and preparing trial-related briefs.

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

Moira: Watch as many trials and as many different trial lawyers as you can. I still love observing trials and other trial lawyers, and it is such an incredible right that we have as citizens that our trials are public and we can just go watch. More people—especially people who say they want to be trial lawyers—should be taking those opportunities when they can.

Anastasia: Practical experience is best! Although much of our legal system is built around resolving disputes through trial, trials are relatively rare. But it is hard to know whether you will love the intensely focused—and highly thrilling—experience of trying a case without actually doing it. Law school clinics can be a great way to get these experiences, as can summer positions at firms or in government. Even if you’re not a member of the trial team, observing in court and doing anything else you can to get exposure to trials is a good idea.

What misconceptions exist about your practice area?

Anastasia: One cliché about litigation generally, and trial specifically, is that it is always adversarial. While there is plenty of conflict, much of litigation practice involves negotiation and compromise. While some of our matters go to trial very quickly, others go on for a year or more, which means we spend plenty of time interacting with opposing counsel. Trying to understand their point of view and thinking critically about when to push is an important part of helping a case progress smoothly. Having a strong track record of interacting fairly with the other party can also pay dividends in front of judges.

What is unique about your practice area at your firm?

Wilkinson Stekloff’s relentless focus on trial is part of what makes working here so rewarding. While many firms and lawyers view trial as a last resort, we are thinking about our presentation to the jury from the moment a complaint is filed or whenever a case first comes to the firm. We develop our trial themes early and use them to guide our decision making at every stage. That means we do everything, from depositions to document discovery to the briefing of dispositive motions, with an eye toward our ultimate trial strategy. Being able to make good arguments is critical but it will only get you so far—we want to make our case come alive for the jury. This approach is more difficult but also a lot more interesting and a lot more fun.

What kinds of experience can summer associates gain at this practice area at your firm?

Anastasia: Because of our size, our summer class is small and we try to give summer associates as wide a variety of experiences as possible. If the stars align and there is a trial during their time here, we make every effort to include them in the trial team. Going to trial is high paced and challenging, but also incredibly rewarding—and having a chance to participate in a trial is an important part of deciding whether this is the right type of practice for you. Even absent a trial, summer associates can expect to be integrated into all aspects of associate work, from joining witness preps to observing jury exercises to helping draft briefs.

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

Moira: Practicing in a boutique—at least at Wilkinson Stekloff—is markedly different from practicing in BigLaw, which is where I started my career. We can be more discerning in who we hire and what cases we take on. Our model puts teamwork and camaraderie front and center, and the cases we take in are ones that are aligned with our model, which focuses on trial law. For our associates, a major difference is the amount of early ownership they get in matters as well as client contact, which is made possible due to our flat fee structure.

Since joining the firm as partner in 2019, Moira has represented clients in product liability, antitrust, sports, and general commercial litigation. Moira recently served as trial counsel for Altria in an administrative trial related to the FTC’s challenge of Altria’s $12.8 billion minority investment in JUUL for which she helped obtain a full dismissal of claims against Altria. Before joining the firm, Moira served as Assistant United States Attorney for the Eastern District of New York, where she led criminal investigations and prosecutions involving both white collar and violent crime, including her groundbreaking prosecution and trial conviction of Keith Raniere—the leader of purported self-help group NXIVM.

Anastasia Pastan was promoted to counsel on January 1, 2023. Since joining in 2017, Anastasia has represented clients in antitrust, product liability, environmental, and contract matters. She has extensive experience in trial strategy and preparation and was part of the trial team for Bayer that won a complete defense verdict in the third state-court bellwether trial involving Xarelto. Recently, Anastasia managed the trial team that defeated the FTC's efforts to enjoin Microsoft's $69 billion acquisition of Activision Blizzard. Anastasia also maintains an active pro bono practice, representing clients in trial and post-conviction matters. 

Describe your practice area and what it entails.

Geng: Commercial litigation, including intellectual property, False Claims Act, and class actions.

Andres: Commercial litigation with a focus on patent infringement litigation. 

What types of clients do you represent?

Geng: My clients include institutions both large and small as well as individuals. For example, I represented General Electric in a major business dispute arising out of an M&A transaction, as well as a small pharmaceutical manufacturer, Genus Lifesciences, in a false advertising case against a larger competitor. I am also proud to represent clients like Yale University and the City of Baltimore in a major class action suits seeking to hold banks accountable for manipulating a benchmark interest rate around the time of the 2008 financial crisis.

Andres: I represent a broad variety of clients, including multibillion-dollar companies like Koninklijke KPN, institutional clients like the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and smaller companies like Ancora Technologies and Arigna Technology.

What types of cases/deals do you work on?

Geng: I work on all types of cases within the general commercial litigation sphere. Some of my current cases include a patent infringement action in the medical device industry, a multibillion-dollar False Claims Act case against a major insurance company, and a dispute between an individual client and a former employer, among others.

Andres: I am working on a number of patent infringement actions in various jurisdictions around the country, including on behalf of Koninklijke KPN, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Ancora Technologies, and Arigna Technology. For example, I recently tried a case on behalf of Koninklijke KPN against Ericsson in the Eastern District of Texas where the jury found in our favor on all issues and awarded KPN $31.5 million in damages.

How did you choose this practice area?

Geng: One reason why I was initially attracted to Susman Godfrey was the breadth of the firm’s practice. I knew I wanted to litigate but was not ready to pick a specific practice area coming out of law school. I’ve been grateful to the firm for giving me the opportunity to work in a variety of different areas of law and hone my skills as a litigator over a range of interesting and exciting cases.

Andres: I think it’s more accurate to say that it found me. I was assigned to a Koninklijke KPN patent infringement case as an associate and really enjoyed the work, including learning such a great deal about the telecom technologies that KPN had developed that were at issue. I decided I wanted to do more cases like that and have not looked back. 

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

Geng: My work can vary greatly from day to day. Some days I am highly focused on one case or one task—drafting a major brief, for instance, or taking or defending a deposition. Other days I might be splitting my time between several different cases, which can often involve jumping from call to call to go over strategy with a client, negotiate with opposing counsel, discuss an issue with an expert, or just check in with other team members. That’s one aspect of my practice that I really enjoy—there is always something different and interesting to be working on.

Andres: I am lead or co-lead on a number of patent infringement cases, so my day to day involves managing various teams in various stages of litigation. In some cases, that can mean simply checking in with various team members and providing direction on next steps—both at a macro and micro level. In other cases, that can mean writing or editing briefs, taking depositions, and attending hearings. In short, my day to day can vary greatly, but everything I do is focused on making sure my cases are progressing toward a successful outcome for my clients. 

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

Geng: One experience that the firm requires all new associates to have is a federal clerkship, and I highly encourage anyone interested in the type of work we do to pursue that opportunity. As a new attorney, clerking provides a tremendously informative window into how judges approach cases, and it also allows a new attorney to see how the court system works from the inside. 

Andres: I practice almost exclusively in federal court, where good writing is paramount—developing writing skills is critical to success as a lawyer. I also think that getting as much deposition and stand-up experience as possible is incredibly important for a young lawyer. I’m very grateful that Susman Godfrey not only provided that to me, but continues to prioritize providing that same opportunity to the next generation of brilliant Susman Godfrey associates. 

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

Geng: The types of cases that I work on can be complex and take years to resolve, and I even have cases that for various reasons, such as appeals, have been ongoing for a decade or more. One challenge associated with that kind of timescale and complexity can be maintaining the momentum to drive toward a resolution. From my very first day, the firm has emphasized the importance of identifying specifically what is needed to move a case forward and focusing on those high-value tasks to really advocate for what matters most to our clients, which is achieving a successful outcome.

Andres: Two challenges come to mind. Number one, there’s the challenge of diving in and learning the ins and outs of different technologies. But that’s a good challenge. It’s one of the reasons I really enjoy this practice area. A not-so-good challenge is the degree to which the law itself has kept changing in recent years. From TC Heartland to the standards for convenience transfer to the abandonment of Fintiv, it has become much more difficult for a patent holder to get their day in court. 

What do you like best about your practice area?

Geng: One underrated aspect of general commercial litigation is the opportunity to dig deep into industries that might never otherwise come across your radar. I really enjoy this learning process and now understand more than I ever expected about a wide array of topics, ranging from medical devices to cryptocurrency to utility regulation. Also, while I enjoy representing both plaintiffs and defendants, there is something special about representing an individual plaintiff and helping them navigate our civil justice system to right the wrongs that they have suffered.

Andres: One of the things that I like best about this practice area is learning such a great deal about a number of different technologies. I also really enjoy helping clients protect their valuable technology—on both sides of the “v.” 

What misconceptions exist about your practice area?

Geng: One misconception that I personally had is that you must have a certain personality or style to succeed as a trial litigator. Growing up, no one in my family was a lawyer, and I’ll admit that most of what I thought I knew about the law came from TV and movies. One thing that I’ve appreciated in the years that I’ve been practicing is working with (and against!) a diverse group of successful lawyers who each have their own unique approach. My advice to anyone who wants to be a trial lawyer is to focus on your own strengths and what value you bring rather than worry about how you might compare to what you think a successful lawyer looks or sounds like.

Andres: I think the main misconception is that one needs to have a science or engineering background to work in patent litigation. At the end of the day, you need to be able to explain the technology to the judge and his clerks and—after that—to a jury. Rarely is anyone in those groups going to have science or engineering backgrounds. So, the key is to dive in and learn the technology to the point that you understand it and can explain it to other people who lack that technical background. 

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

Andres: The amount of opportunity. Certainly, there is more opportunity to do real case tasks earlier. Here, it’s rare for associates to not take solo depositions or argue in court in their first year. And on the financial side, there’s also more opportunity to forge your own path and be successful. Because we do not have the hierarchy of practice groups or many mandatory “anythings,” partners can focus on what we do best: winning cases and getting fantastic results for our clients.

Geng: Working at a smaller firm gives you the opportunity to really get to know all of your colleagues, and at a place like SG, that means spending every day with some of the most brilliant, fun, and generous people in our profession.

Geng Chen represents clients in complex commercial litigation in all areas, ranging from general business disputes to intellectual property to the False Claims Act and more. Geng has amassed an impressive collection of litigation victories and favorable settlements for diverse clients, including Fortune 500 industry leaders and classes of unfairly treated plaintiffs—for example in In re LIBOR Financial Products Antitrust Litigation, Geng secured settlements totaling over $500 million; and Melissa Ferrick v Spotify, she secured a settlement valued at over $100 million for songwriters and composers. Geng previously clerked for Judge Jacques Wiener, Jr., of the Fifth Circuit and, while at Harvard Law, served as an executive editor of the Harvard Law Review.

Lauded by one client as “one of the best patent lawyers in America,” Andres Healy litigates IP and complex commercial disputes and represents clients ranging from multibillion-dollar industry leaders to individual inventors. He has secured a significant number of wins on behalf of major players in the technology and telecommunications fields, including a $31.5 million patent infringement jury verdict on behalf of Dutch telecom company Koninklijke KPN against telecom giant Ericsson in 2022. Andres graduated first in his class from the University of Florida College of Law and completed two federal clerkships before joining Susman Godfrey. He was appointed to SG’s Executive Committee in 2022.  

Describe your practice area and what it entails.

We are a trial litigation boutique and pride ourselves on being able to take any case to trial. The firm’s attorneys have now tried more than 130 cases in a wide variety of areas, including over 20 trials since the firm opened its doors in 2016.

While we take cases at every stage, we are often hired to represent clients at or near the end of discovery. This means our cases are normally ramping up for trial, and our job is to focus on taking what is often a very broad record and simplify it into a compelling narrative that will be persuasive to a jury. We also focus very strongly on diversity in the firm, as it is our goal that our attorneys be reflective of the juries to whom we are presenting.

What types of clients do you represent?

The firm represents a wide variety of clients—including large companies (Bayer, Allergan, Georgia Pacific), sports associations (NFL, NCAA), criminal defendants, and pro bono clients. The pro bono cases are some of the most rewarding, and Chambers & Partners has recognized the firm as having one of the two best pro bono programs of all law firms in the country, large or small.

What types of cases/deals do you work on?

Like all attorneys at our firm, we are focused on cases headed toward trial. In terms of subject matter, there is no single type of case on which we work. As a firm, we are willing to take any case to trial, but over the past several years we have had antitrust, class action, criminal, products liability, and sports-related trials. Everybody at the firm floats between these areas and is exposed to all aspects of trial litigation.

How did you choose this practice area?

Kieran: I was working at the DOJ, and my practice mostly focused on briefing and arguing dispositive motions involving constitutional law and statutory interpretation. I joined Wilkinson Stekloff because I wanted a new challenge and to learn from some of the best trial lawyers in the country on how they approach cases. I am glad I did, because it has changed the way I practice as a lawyer. Going to trial regularly gives you a totally different perspective on every other part of a case—including how to take depositions, how to deal with opposing counsel, and even how you argue in front of judges.

Cali: It's probably cliché to say this, but I have been drawn to the trial side of practicing law since I did mock trial in college. I particularly loved the problem solving and strategy aspects of trying a case, not to mention the energy of working with a team to figure out how to quickly and effectively reach an audience with our key themes and facts in a complex case. When Beth and Brian started the firm, I jumped at the chance to turn what was once just an extracurricular into my daily job. And as much as I have loved recapturing that strategizing and problem-solving energy, what has been even more fun has been to recapture it while watching and working with some of the best trial lawyers in America to understand every decision that goes into trying a case to a successful verdict.

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

No two days are the same, and a lot of what we do depends on the stage of the case. As a general matter, we focus a lot of our time on preparing our cases for trial and then going to trial.

Preparing for trial covers a lot of ground, but on any given day, we might be meeting with clients, participating in internal strategy meetings, prepping witnesses for cross, developing direct and cross examinations, preparing opening statements, or drafting dispositive or trial-related briefs.

The best part of our job is actually going to trial. The hours can be long, but every day brings a lot of excitement. Regardless of which lawyer is standing up in the courtroom, the entire team has to work together to analyze the evidence as it comes in, react, and provide our best response. It is a very collaborative process that is really quite unlike anything else we do as lawyers.

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

There is no substitute for getting trial experience. We would recommend doing anything you can to get that experience, whether it be working at a trial firm over the summer, doing a law school clinic or government internship that gives you exposure to trials, or even doing moot court or mock trial in law school. The most important indicator of whether somebody will be a successful trial lawyer is whether he or she has a passion for the work. The best advice we can give to an attorney who is thinking about becoming a trial lawyer is to get out there and see what it is actually like.

What misconceptions exist about your practice area?

One of the biggest misconceptions from candidates applying to our firm is that writing is not an important skill for trial lawyers. We both spend a lot of time writing, and it is still the chief way that we communicate with the court. Sometimes we are writing a lot because our firm is taking the lead on dispositive briefing, but there is also an incredible amount of other briefing that occurs before and during trial. That briefing can have a significant effect on the course of trial—from influencing the evidence that is admitted by the court to shaping the instructions that are read to the jury. But it also has a more intangible effect, as each piece of work product submitted to the court is an opportunity to educate the judge on the merits of your case and hopefully win her or him over to your side.

What is unique about your practice area at your firm?

Wilkinson Stekloff’s relentless focus on trial is part of what makes working here so rewarding. While many firms and lawyers view trial as a last resort, we are thinking about our presentation to the jury from the moment a complaint is filed, or whenever a case first comes to the firm. We develop our trial themes early and use them to guide our decision making at every stage.

That means we do everything, from depositions to document discovery to the briefing of dispositive motions, with an eye towards our ultimate trial strategy. To take just one example, we don’t just look for experts who agree with our position—we want someone with a compelling story, who will be able to connect with jurors and explain difficult concepts in a way regular people can understand.

Being able to make good arguments is critical but it will only get you so far—we want to make our case come alive for the jury. This approach is more difficult but also a lot more interesting and a lot more fun.

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

Beth (Wilkinson) and Brian (Stekloff) always say they founded this firm to train the next generation of trial lawyers. And they mean it. Our business model, which consists exclusively of flat fees, means associates get a lot of exposure to clients, witnesses, and opposing counsel. Even junior associates have a seat at the table for strategy and witness meetings, and associate input is always taken seriously. Associates work closely with witnesses in a variety of contexts. This includes preparing for and attending in-person meetings, helping vet expert reports and other materials, drafting outlines for depositions and trial, working with witnesses to prepare PowerPoint presentations for trial, and writing strategy memos. Associates also help with opening statements and closing arguments at trial, conduct research (legal and otherwise—ask us about how associates’ factual research has helped solidify multiple trial victories!), and drafting briefs. The bottom line is we aren’t wasting time billing hours or generating busy work—everyone is focused on the case we collectively will present to the jury.

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

Most of the differences are driven by the practical implications of having fewer attorneys—we have around 35 lawyers; whereas, large law firms can have hundreds if not thousands of lawyers. That means all of our attorneys have to be willing to dig in and participate not just in all aspects of our cases but also in the management of the firm—whether by serving on the technology committee or helping to analyze potential business opportunities. But it also means you have a bigger voice right from the start: Many of the actions we have taken as a firm (both at trial and otherwise) were first suggested by some of our most junior associates.

The other big difference is a personal one. At a smaller firm, particularly when you are going to trial together on a regular basis, you end up knowing everyone else really well. That creates a different type of environment and encourages the feeling that you and your colleagues are teammates.

Kieran Gostin is a partner at Wilkinson Stekloff, promoted on July 1, 2019. Since joining the firm in 2016, Kieran has represented clients in significant matters across a variety of subject matters—including antitrust, consumer class actions, and products liability. Six of those matters have gone to verdict at trial, with each case resulting in a defense judgment. Before joining Wilkinson Stekloff, Kieran was a trial attorney in the Federal Programs Branch of the U.S. Department of Justice, where he defended the legality of federal statutes and executive agency action. Kieran has received “rising star” awards from the National Law Journal, Benchmark Litigation, and Law360.

Cali Cope-Kasten is a partner at Wilkinson Stekloff, promoted on January 1, 2022. After graduating from Michigan Law, Cali clerked on the District of Minnesota. Since joining the firm at its founding, Cali has worked on numerous paying and pro bono matters at various stages, including discovery, dispositive motions, trial, and appeal. Her experience includes six jury trials, three of which were federal multi-district litigation bellwether cases, and two bench trials. Most recently, Cali was trial counsel in Clark v. Monsanto Co., helping to secure a groundbreaking verdict for Monsanto in the Roundup litigation.

Describe your practice area and what it entails.

Amanda: My practice is commercial litigation. I represent both plaintiffs and defendants in a wide array of practice areas including antitrust, appellate, class action, employment, intellectual property, privacy, qui tam, and securities litigation. I practice in federal and state courts, as well as in arbitrations.

Elisha: My practice is commercial litigation. I represent individuals, companies, and classes, on the plaintiff and defense side, in anything that could be characterized as a business dispute (we do the occasional personal dispute as well). I practice in state and federal court across the country and in arbitration.

What types of clients do you represent?

Amanda: I represent a diverse client base of businesses, government entities, and individuals. My corporate clients include media and entertainment company, NBCUniversal; online real-estate marketplace, Zillow; and commodities trading firm, Vitol. I have also represented dozens of government entities in California, including the County of Los Angeles and numerous other counties and cities throughout the state. In addition, I have served as legal counsel to individual whistleblowers and employees challenging powerful corporations.

Elisha: I represent companies of all sizes, from innovative start-ups like the real estate analytics company, HouseCanary, and the driverless car company, Aurora, to large companies like Walmart and Nasdaq. I’ve represented a class of animators, an individual partner at a private equity firm, and a whistleblower from the pharmaceutical industry.

What types of cases/deals do you work on?

Amanda: I enjoy the challenge of taking on formidable opponents in cases that are shaping the future of business and industry. For example, I serve as co-lead counsel in two groundbreaking putative class actions challenging Google’s unlawful collection of consumers’ Internet browsing and app activity. The first case—which challenges Google’s collection of private internet browsing data even when users are in “Incognito” mode—received nationwide press in connection with our successful efforts to defeat Google’s motion to dismiss. The second case challenges Google’s collection of users’ “Web & App Activity” even after users expressly denied Google permission to do so. We successfully argued against Google’s motion to dismiss the case—resulting in a court order keeping the plaintiffs’ claims alive.

I also enjoy defending parties on the other side of the “v.” Before the same court in which I represent plaintiffs with privacy claims, I also lead the defense of the world’s leading commodity trading firm, Vitol Inc., in an antitrust case alleging a conspiracy to inflate California gasoline prices over a two-year period. In another newsworthy matter, I defended Flutter Entertainment in a multi-billion-dollar dispute with Fox Sports concerning an option to purchase a stake in the leading U.S. sports betting firm FanDuel Group.

Elisha: My cases range from trade secret disputes between companies big and small, to qui tam False Claims Act cases, defamation suits, antitrust class actions, and a gender discrimination lawsuit.

My biggest win is a $706.2M jury verdict for real estate analytics company, HouseCanary, after a six-plus week jury trial in state court in San Antonio, Texas. The case involved claims against Title Source, an affiliate of Quicken Loans, for misappropriation of trade secrets, fraud, and breach of contract.

I also previously secured a $450M settlement—one of the largest ever in the United States by a single whistleblower—in a landmark False Claims Act lawsuit against the Swiss drug manufacturer Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation. I represented the whistleblower in this groundbreaking case.

How did you choose this practice area?

Amanda: I was drawn to the idea of being a trial lawyer as a college student. I joined UCLA’s mock trial team on a lark, after the team captain (who, not coincidentally, is now my husband) gave a very convincing presentation to incoming freshmen. Four years of mock trial competitions and two national championships later, I had caught the trial “bug.” Susman Godfrey was a natural fit because it’s a firm that focuses on winning at trial, giving early stand-up experience to young associates, and trying interesting cases in a wide variety of practice areas. After my 4-week summer at Susman Godfrey as a 2L, I knew this was where I wanted to practice.

Elisha: I’ve always wanted to be a litigator. I love thinking of creative ways to persuade people—judges, juries, opposing counsel—that our position is the right one and the one that will win the day. At Susman Godfrey, I get to practice that art across a range of subject matters and on both sides of the “v.”

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

Amanda: My favorite part of any case—and what I most enjoy doing—is digging into the facts to figure out the true story of what happened. Good trial lawyers are storytellers, and to tell a convincing story, you have to master the facts. On any given day, I might be arguing a motion in court, prepping a witness for her deposition, writing a brief, or preparing for trial.

Elisha: It varies depending on the stages my cases are in. I usually have a brief in the works, and there is often a meet and confer with opposing counsel. If I’m prepping for depositions or trial, you will find me reviewing key documents and putting together the story we want to tell.

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

Amanda: I strongly recommend any training that allows you craft an argument and then stand up and engage in public speaking. If you’re still a student, participating in mock trial/trial advocacy or moot court competitions is a great way to gain experience. If you’re out of law school, I recommend signing up for a NITA (National Institute for Trial Advocacy) training.

Elisha: Watching someone good prepare a witness for a deposition or trial examination is invaluable. This behind-the-scenes work is vital, and you can’t learn it from a book or from watching the deposition or examination itself. I also recommend clerking in a trial-level court. Observing how different attorneys and firms present their cases (in writing and oral advocacy) helped me understand the kind of firm I wanted to practice at and the kind of litigator I wanted to be. Seeing how different styles are received by the court is also highly valuable.

What do you like best about your practice area?

Amanda: I enjoy the variety of our firm’s practice. We are true trial lawyers and generalists at that. We represent plaintiffs and defendants, roughly equally as often. And we try cases in an array of practice areas. We pride ourselves on mastering complex technologies and fact patterns, and standing toe to toe with firms that “specialize” in the practice areas in which we litigate. Our specialty is figuring out the most persuasive way to try a case, no matter what practice area, venue, or side of the “v.”

What is unique about your practice area at your firm?

Elisha: Three things:

• 1)    Our practice is extraordinarily varied. We don’t just try securities cases or patent cases. We specialize in getting cases trial-ready and trying those cases, whether we represent the plaintiff or defendant. This makes us better lawyers in every case.
• 2)    We treat every case like it will go to trial, not like it will eventually settle or otherwise go away. Figuring out the case you will present at trial from the outset puts you in the best position no matter what happens in the case.
• 3)    We have a ton of fun. You don’t apply to work at Susman Godfrey if you don’t like the practice of law. While the lawyers have varied styles and approaches, they uniformly think practicing law is fun, and it shows.

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

Elisha: Susman Godfrey is unique in that junior lawyers do many of the same tasks as senior lawyers. They take depositions, they argue hearings, they are in charge of full briefs. At trial, they may not do opening statements (though it happens) but they will put on witnesses. One task that typically falls to more junior lawyers is managing a case’s task list. This critical job requires young lawyers to understand the big picture, not just what they are working on, which ultimately helps prepare them to manage cases as a partner.

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

Amanda: One of the biggest differences is that we are lean and mean. We face off against large law firms routinely and we will never beat them by out-staffing them. Instead, we staff most of our cases with a couple of partners and one or two associates. And we trust those associates to handle significant tasks on their own from Day One—from writing dispositive motions, to taking and defending depositions, to arguing motions in Court, to examining witnesses at trial.

Amanda Bonn handles some of the most groundbreaking litigation in California and across the country. In 2021 she secured settlements valued at $175M against AT&T, Verizon, and Sprint on behalf of hundreds of California and Nevada government entities in whistleblower case, California et al. v. Cellco Partnership. Bonn is now serving as co-lead counsel in two groundbreaking putative class actions challenging Google’s unlawful collection of consumers’ Internet browsing and app activity. Bonn has been recognized as one of 100 Top Women Lawyers in California by The Daily Journal, an “Up and Coming” Commercial Litigator by Chambers USA, a Litigation Trailblazer by National Law Journal, and one of 500 Leading Plaintiff Financial Lawyers nationwide by Lawdragon.

Elisha Barron has secured over $1B in jury verdicts and settlements for her clients in the past five years alone. Landmark victories include winning a $706.2M jury verdict for HouseCanary after a six-plus week jury trial against Title Source over trade secret misappropriation, fraud, and breach of contract; securing a confidential settlement for Joel and Mary Rich in their high-profile defamation lawsuit against Fox News; and securing a $450M settlement in a landmark FCA lawsuit against Novartis Pharmaceuticals. Barron has been named a Plaintiffs Lawyer Trailblazer by National Law Journal, One to Watch by Best Lawyers, and a Rising Star by NY Law Journal. Elisha previously clerked for Judge Shira Scheindlin in the Southern District of New York and Judge José Cabranes on the Second Circuit.

Describe your practice area and what it entails.

MoloLamken represents clients exclusively in complex disputes and investigations. We handle the most challenging and interesting cases in the country—from high-stakes civil and criminal trials to matters of national importance before the U.S. Supreme Court. In our civil litigation, we represent both plaintiffs and defendants in a broad variety of cases, including business litigation, class actions, antitrust, intellectual property, judgment enforcement, and bankruptcy. On the criminal side, we represent companies and individuals both during the investigation stage and after indictment. We have no practice groups, so I often find myself drafting a Supreme Court brief in the morning and arguing a pretrial motion in a criminal case in the afternoon. We believe that our appellate work makes us better trial lawyers and our trial work makes us better appellate advocates, and that has been true in my experience.

What types of clients do you represent? 

Our clients are as diverse as the matters we handle on their behalf. Unlike firms with hundreds or thousands of lawyers, we have the flexibility to represent individuals, plaintiffs in class actions, criminal defendants, foreign sovereigns, startups, Fortune 100 companies, hedge funds, private equity firms, and government officials. We even represent a Native American tribe. Because our case teams are so small, associates regularly brief clients on case developments and often manage the day-to-day client relationship. One of the great privileges of practicing at MoloLamken is getting to know my clients and helping them achieve their goals.  

What types of cases/deals do you work on? 

My practice is as varied as the firm’s. I currently represent an investment management firm in litigation against a global bank, a criminal defendant facing campaign finance charges, plaintiffs in a trade secrets case, patent owners in suits against the world’s largest technology companies, plaintiffs in an antitrust suit against a giant medical device manufacturer and equally large distributors, and a bank seeking to enforce a judgment against a foreign sovereign. These matters are pending before federal and state trial courts, two different federal courts of appeals, and the U.S. Supreme Court.

How did you choose this practice area?

Coming off my clerkships, I wanted to practice law—not watch others practice a narrow slice of the law. To me, that meant being able to run cases from complaint through appeal. Few firms let associates try plaintiff-side class actions, defend individuals at a criminal trial, and argue appeals raising novel legal questions. Even fewer firms also let associates run cases, take depositions, cross-examine witnesses at trial, argue in court, and draft Supreme Court briefs. But MoloLamken does. That is why I am here. 

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

There are no “typical” days for a MoloLamken associate. On any given day, I might be drafting a Supreme Court brief, arguing a motion in court, taking or defending a deposition, negotiating with the government or opposing counsel, brainstorming trial strategy, or meeting with prospective clients. Most days involve some combination of those things. The one constant, however, is that I am always working with a small team of fantastic lawyers and even better people. A strong sense of camaraderie pervades every team I work on and makes even the less glamorous aspects of life as a lawyer enjoyable.

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

To practice at a firm like MoloLamken, you must be a great teammate and an excellent writer; have a curious mind and an entrepreneurial spirit; and be ready to manage entire cases from start to finish and help bring in new cases. No law school class teaches all that. But law students or lawyers hoping to transition to a boutique can still prepare. In my view, that preparation starts with reading: reading great writing (both fiction and legal writing); reading transcripts of cross-examinations by legendary trial lawyers; reading the news for ideas of potential suits or clients; reading books on trial practice and legal writing. Aspiring boutique lawyers can then pair that reading with experience that mimics practice. Law students, for example, can join clinics, mock trial, or moot court; work as a research assistant for a professor; or get an externship with a judge. Practicing lawyers can join professional associations, attend trial advocacy workshops, or take a pro bono case to get experience running an entire case. More importantly, though, prospective applicants should be constantly looking for ways that they can be better today than yesterday and better tomorrow than today. That commitment to self-improvement is more valuable than any class or experience.

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

The hardest part of my job is also the best part—I am constantly doing something new. I am often the only associate on a case, so it is up to me to learn how to do everything from effecting service on a foreign sovereign during a pandemic to arguing a motion with one day’s notice. And because my practice covers so many subjects at both the trial and appellate levels, I have to quickly shift from writing a Supreme Court brief on a complicated question of civil procedure to negotiating with the government. That is both challenging and exhilarating, and I wouldn’t trade the occasional stress it produces for anything.   

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

We don’t think of associates as “junior” or “senior” in the way that large firms do. There is no task that is truly off limits just because of the year a lawyer graduated law school. All associates, regardless of class year, are expected to—with supervision—draft entire motions or briefs, work with experts, take and defend depositions, negotiate with opposing counsel, and manage discovery. We even have had associates in paying cases cross-examine witnesses and argue important motions.

What are some typical career paths for lawyers in this practice area?

We don’t hire associates straight from law school. The path always includes at least one clerkship and more often two. From there, we hire associates with the expectation that they will become partners. The overwhelming majority of our partners either founded the firm or joined as associates and later made partner. Along the way to partnership, every associate receives substantive training to develop litigation skills, and partners go out of their way to help associates work on business development. Turnover is low and lawyers who have left have gone to government, great in-house positions, and even Supreme Court clerkships.

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

There are too many differences to list. As a small firm with few conflicts, we have the freedom to take cases that are off limits to the big firms. We can represent a class of plaintiffs against major banks or a patent owner against big tech companies, for example, while also representing Fortune 100 companies. We handle these cases with teams often as small as two, three, or four attorneys when our opponents have far larger teams. Because we work so closely together and hire only the best candidates, partners trust associates to appear in court against partners at other firms. Beyond the substantive case work, associates are involved with business development from day one. Associates participate in client pitches, help brainstorm potential cases, and even bring in new clients on occasion.

Ken Notter represents plaintiffs and defendants at the trial and appellate levels in state and federal court. His practice focuses on complex civil litigation, criminal defense, class actions, intellectual property disputes, white collar matters, and appellate litigation.  Before joining MoloLamken, Ken clerked for the Honorable Jerome A. Holmes of the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit and the Honorable Gerald J. Pappert of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.  Ken received his B.A. summa cum laude from American University and his J.D. magna cum laude from Harvard Law School.  During law school, he worked as a research assistant for Professors Michael Klarman and Jack Goldsmith and participated in Harvard’s Supreme Court Litigation Clinic.

Describe your practice area and what it entails.

I am a partner in White & Case’s Commercial Litigation practice. I have experience handling high-stakes matters concerning complex contracts, merger and shareholder disputes, business torts, securities, class actions, and alternative dispute resolution. Every case is different and presents new opportunities for strategic thinking and creative arguments. But the common denominator to all cases is a mastery of the facts and applicable law so that you can translate such knowledge into simple, common-sense themes and persuasive arguments for client advice, briefing, oral advocacy, and trial.  

What types of clients do you represent? 

I work with a diverse group of international and domestic clients that span different industries such as financial services, oil & gas, and pharmaceuticals & healthcare. I also work on pro bono cases involving criminal appeals and family and matrimonial law. 

What types of cases/deals do you work on? 

Most of our cases are complex commercial disputes where the financial stakes are high. For example, we represented Anthem in a nearly US$2 billion busted deal dispute with Cigna. In 2015, Anthem and Cigna agreed to merge, and at issue in the litigation was the merger agreement’s covenant for the parties to use best efforts to obtain antitrust approval and close the deal. It was a difficult road to obtain antitrust approval, and that difficulty was compounded when Cigna began covertly working against approval. After a district court blocked the merger as anticompetitive, Cigna tried to terminate the merger and sued Anthem for breach of the best efforts covenant, seeking the US$1.85 billion break-up fee, plus billions in damages. That same day, we sought a temporary restraining order (TRO) to prevent Cigna’s termination and the TRO was granted the very next day. We also sued Cigna for breach of its best efforts covenants. After an appeal court affirmed the lower court’s decision to block the merger, Anthem terminated the merger under a termination provision based on Cigna’s breaches of the best efforts covenant and which did not trigger the payment of any break-up fee. The lawsuit included two years of intense and contentious discovery where Cigna initially withheld damaging evidence as privileged. The case really came together when we moved to compel the production of the withheld documents, which resulted in our uncovering a large and colorful volume of evidence that Cigna was trying to block the merger. In 2019, a two-week trial was held in Delaware’s Chancery Court, which involved more than 4,600 trial exhibits, 111 lodged depositions and the entire record from the antitrust case. The trial court agreed with our arguments and found that Cigna willfully breached the best efforts covenant and that Anthem was not obligated to pay the US$1.85 billion break-up fee. In addition, we defeated each of Cigna’s claims of breaches against Anthem. Cigna then appealed the denial of the break-up fee, claiming that it was automatically entitled to the fee if the merger failed to obtain antitrust approval. In 2021, the Delaware Supreme Court affirmed our victory that Anthem was not obligated to pay the US$1.85 billion break-up fee because Anthem validly terminated based on Cigna’s breaches under a provision that did not trigger the break-up fee.

How did you choose this practice area?

Growing up in a family where my parents were in the medical profession, I knew that I was not interested in medicine. I began exploring non-medical professions during college and one of my professors told me I would make a great lawyer. Given that I had no experience with the law, I decided to become a legal assistant before applying to law school. After receiving a number of offers, I chose White & Case because I loved all of my interviews, which helped set the firm apart from other firms. As a legal assistant, I was able to see cases from start to finish, assist with briefs, prep depositions, meet clients and become an integral part of trial teams. This experience solidified my decision to go to law school and join the same group as a lawyer.  

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

Every day is different for a litigator depending on what stage you are in your matters. Given most of my work is on very large cases, my daily tasks typically involve a tremendous amount of teamwork and collaboration given. A normal day involves meetings with the team to talk things through and see if there are fresh ways to approach the task at hand, whether it be drafting a brief or preparing for deposition or trial. In addition, litigation also entails a fair amount of reading comprehension—to be effective, you need to know your record (both good and bad) and the relevant case law so that you can assess the strengths and weaknesses of your case and anticipate the arguments of your adversary.  

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

My young children learn at school that practice makes progress, and I believe that applies here because the best way to develop the skills for this practice area is to immerse yourself in the experience. So I would recommend to someone who wishes to be in commercial litigation to take classes and/or look for opportunities that allow you to get on your feet and use the skills needed to be an effective litigator. For law students, this means clinical programs or trial advocacy classes. For the young lawyer, this means seeking out pro bono opportunities, which allow you to be the lead on the brief, trial, or oral argument. Also, effective oral advocacy (which involves both speaking and listening) is an important skill that does not always involve a courtroom. Litigators need to communicate effectively to not only the court, but also the client, your team members, and opposing counsel. Team meetings or meet-and-confer conferences with opposing counsel provide an opportunity to develop your oral advocacy skills. Writing is another important skill. You want to be as clear as possible, particularly for briefs because the audience is typically a very busy judge, who does not live and breathe a case like you do, and who will appreciate good organization and clarity.          

What do you like best about your practice area?

There are so many things I like that it is hard to pick one. I enjoy that every case brings a new subject matter or issue and thus, opportunities for creative thinking and maybe even new law. I also enjoy working with the people in my group, especially the associates. They infuse so much enthusiasm, energy, and creativity that you cannot help but be inspired and motivated. At one point in time, I was working on two very large matters where they overlapped for about a year in terms of being gangbusters-busy at the same time. Both of those cases would not have been as successful without the large team of associates really stepping up, taking ownership of the case, and being on top of everything and thinking strategically and working collaboratively. Collaboration is key, and I think it really motivates associates to perform at their maximum capacity because they know that if they meaningfully contribute, and show they are smart and invested, their input will be taken seriously. So that high-performance, high-energy environment is one of the best things about this practice.

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

Common tasks for litigators are drafting briefs, handling discovery disputes, preparing for depositions, preparing for trial, and drafting appeal briefs. Junior lawyers are very much involved in all of those tasks. Junior lawyers also do the lion’s share of the work when it comes to document review and legal research.  

What kinds of experience can summer associates gain at this practice area at your firm?

Summer associates are given the same experience as junior lawyers and frequently attend court conferences, depositions, and trial. And all summer associates are assigned to work on at least one pro bono matter to help hone their skills.    

In what ways has the coronavirus pandemic affected your practice? How have you adjusted to lawyering in the wake of COVID-19?

Obviously, COVID-19 forced us to adjust to a new way of working remotely. As a litigator, you often travel for depositions and court, and that all changed quickly in March 2020. Nevertheless, our teams quickly adapted to work under the new normal of Zoom and WebEx so that we could continue to provide top-notch legal services to our clients. I think we all became more advanced in technology and thus, more efficient—which will have long-running benefits to the practice going forward.     

Claudine Columbres is a partner in the firm’s Commercial Litigation practice, with a wide range of experience in complex business disputes, securities litigation, merger litigation, and bankruptcy-related litigation. 

Claudine’s work has spanned a broad range of industries including financial services, food service distribution, energy, and oil & gas. She has worked with clients including Anthem, Inc., JPMorgan Chase & Co., Hess Corporation, the Votorantim Group, and Major League Baseball.

Dedicated to helping her clients achieve the best possible outcomes, Claudine has also successfully represented defendants in numerous pro bono cases involving family and matrimonial law.

Describe your practice area and what it entails.

Some lawyers develop practices that focus on ensuring a case never gets beyond the pleading stage, but the common thread across most of my cases is that they’re high-stakes matters likely to involve large amounts of discovery and a likelihood that the litigation will culminate in a trial or arbitration. Flexibility and an ability to quickly learn new issues and areas of the law is one of the most important skill sets for a generalist. Two short years ago, no one could have imagined all the issues currently litigated across all practice areas and industries arising out of and relating to the COVID-19 pandemic. The lawyers who didn’t hesitate to jump in and master new areas of the law with an eye toward creative solutions are the ones who clients think of first when they’re presented with a problem.

What types of clients do you represent?

My clients really run the gamut and span a range of industries. I represent insurance giant Chubb, recording artist Kesha, Hollywood studio The Walt Disney Company, banking institution Bank of America Merrill Lynch, and financial-technology company Klarna, Inc. I also do a lot of pro-bono work representing clinics that provide reproductive healthcare services in states where women’s access to care is increasingly restricted. 

What types of cases do you work on? 

This past year alone, I handled a defamation case arising out of a sexual-assault allegation; several business-interruption insurance coverage disputes arising out of the COVID-19 pandemic; a Hollywood breach-of-contract dispute relating to simultaneous distribution of the film Black Widow in theaters and through Premiere Access on Disney+; a Section 11 securities fraud case relating to a biopharmaceutical company’s public statements about one of its therapies; and a consumer fraud litigation addressing a financing alternative that allows consumers to pay for purchases in installment payments.

How did you choose this practice area?

I realized early in my career that I wanted to ensure I got out from behind my desk and was up on my feet advocating for my clients. For a litigator, that means trial and arbitration work, which is immensely challenging and rewarding at the same time. Because cases go to trial or arbitration in a wide range of industries and practice areas, trial lawyers tend to be generalists who can easily pivot between various subject matters and areas of the law.

What is a typical day like?

It’s impossible to describe a typical day, because the only thing I know at the beginning of each week is that a calendar or to-do list will constantly be adjusted. That said, daily practice as a litigator almost always involves some combination of client counseling meetings (or Zooms!), legal briefs, and witness interviews. And with the day-to-day unpredictability comes a really exciting career arc. Each three-year segment of my career would have been impossible to predict during the preceding three years; lean into the uncertainty and say yes to cases in new industries and new areas of the law––the next big opportunity or challenge can pop up in unexpected places.  

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

Get as much on-your-feet experience as you can. In law school, everyone spends a lot of time worrying about whether they’re taking the right classes and giving all the right answers in the Socratic Method leaning environment. All of that has its benefits, but there’s no substitute for getting up out of your chair and onto your feet. Sign up for the internships, the externships, and the clinics; hands-on experience interviewing witnesses, meeting with clients, and presenting argument will let you hit the ground running as a young litigator. 

What do you feel are the benefits of taking a generalist approach in litigation versus pursuing a more specialized practice?

Taking a generalist approach to practicing as a litigator is a great intellectual challenge. There’s a lot of comfort that comes in practicing in the same areas year after year; when a new pleading comes in or the client needs counseling on a strategic issue, you know exactly what to do. The same isn’t true for generalists: each new pleading and question comes with a challenge of applying your judgment and experience against a new backdrop of industry-specific nuances and potentially new areas of the law. The job is never boring, and mastering something new to secure a favorable result for a client is incredibly rewarding. 

What do you like best about your practice area?

The opportunity to continuously learn and master new things; it keeps me on my toes.

What misconceptions exist about your practice area?

Some people might assume that generalists don’t have specialized knowledge, but that’s not true. A general litigator needs to become an expert in a wide range of issues and areas of the law. At various times in my practice, I have been a subject-matter expert in the European drug-approval process, California state law treatment of non-competes in employment contracts, and music-production royalties. Being a generalist doesn’t mean that you practice at surface level; it means that you need to be prepared to roll up your sleeves and master almost anything.

How do you see this practice area evolving in the future?

It’s impossible to say, and that’s what makes the work of a generalist so engaging. Five years ago, no one would have predicted the business-interruption litigation that’s become the current norm in view of the COVID-19 pandemic. The only thing you can reliably predict as a general litigator is that your practice will evolve over time.

Leah Godesky is a trial lawyer who represents an array of clients in headline-making litigation, including singer/songwriter Kesha, Twentieth Century Fox, and insurance giant Chubb. A committed champion of crucial social causes, Leah is also a tireless advocate for pro bono clients. She has prevailed in numerous reproductive rights cases while working with the ACLU to challenge the constitutionality of state abortion statutes in Kentucky and Arkansas, helping to ensure women’s access to safe healthcare. In 2021, The American Lawyer selected Leah as one of six “Young Lawyers of the Year.” Leah’s additional recognitions in 2021 include being named to Billboard’s 2021 Top Music Lawyers List, to The National Law Journal’s list of Sports, Gaming, & Entertainment Trailblazers, and to Variety’s Legal Impact Report.

Describe your practice area and what it entails.

My litigation practice generally involves counseling clients through challenging disputes, both in and out of the courtroom. My recent matters have largely been on the plaintiff’s side. In those cases, my teams begin working with clients to investigate and develop potential claims in the pre-litigation stage, often at the first indication that the client may have been wronged. We start with a deep dive into all of the pertinent facts and let those facts guide which claims ultimately have merit and should be pursued. We usually attempt to reach a negotiated resolution before filing a complaint, but all of our preparation is guided by how the claims would ultimately unfold in front of a judge or jury at trial. 

I’ve also had quite a bit of experience defending corporate clients, mostly against federal and state antitrust claims. The process is a bit different on the defense side and involves a lot of predicting and preempting plaintiffs’ maneuvers. My work developing and pursuing claims on the other side of the aisle provides a unique benefit in that respect. 

What types of clients do you represent? 

I’ve handled antitrust matters in the dental supplies and equipment industry, the containerboard manufacturing industry, and the computer screen technology industry, among others. 

I’ve also handled commercial matters on either side of the aisle for pharmaceutical and medical device manufacturers, energy and petrochemical companies, and financial services providers, to name a few. 

I’ve assisted our restructuring teams in complex reorganizations for companies in the retail, telecommunications, energy, and technology industries. 

I also maintain an active pro bono practice largely focused on clients who have experienced housing discrimination and landlord mistreatment, as well as women fleeing hostile and abusive situations seeking legal residence in the U.S.

What types of cases/deals do you work on? 

As noted above, my practice is fairly broad and includes general commercial disputes, lawsuits related to private equity acquisitions, antitrust cases, and restructuring litigation. My recent cases have largely involved representing corporate plaintiffs in breach of contract and tort cases against current and former joint venture partners, and private equity firms pursuing fraud and insurance claims relating to misrepresentations in acquisition agreements. I also recently won dismissal of state antitrust and unfair practice claims that had been brought against a client in the dental supplies industry in Illinois and California. 

How did you choose this practice area?

I didn’t know any lawyers growing up, but I always enjoyed public speaking and problem solving—I gleaned from all of the legal TV dramas that litigators get to do both of those things for a living in high-stakes situations. I also took a few practice-based classes in law school, which confirmed that I had made the right choice. 

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

My days vary a lot, but one thing they all have in common is teamwork. I spend part of each day on the phone or in meetings (or, these days, on Zoom) discussing strategy with my partners, associates and our clients. Depending on the stages of my ongoing cases, the rest of the day could be spent working closely with associates and paralegals to prepare for trial proceedings, motion arguments or depositions; combing through discovery and corresponding research to understand and develop potential claims or defenses; drafting motions or responses thereto; preparing witnesses to testify in depositions or in court; or any number of the infinite—and often unpredictable—tasks that may arise in the course of representation. Every day has some degree of variability, which is one of my favorite things about being a litigator. 

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

Good legal writing is certainly an asset, and one of the easiest ways to stand out on day one. Prioritizing clarity is key in separating legal writing from academic scholarship. 

As far as substantive classes go, I encourage law students to take what interests them instead of trying to develop some sort of specialization. You may stumble upon a new subject you didn’t expect to find as interesting and incorporate that into your practice (as I did with antitrust law). Perhaps more importantly, you’ll enjoy law school more and likely do better as a result. 

What do you like best about your practice area?

Representing such a wide variety of clients in matters relating to different industries keeps things interesting and exciting. In order to provide the best possible representation, our development of claims and defenses involves gaining a deep understanding of the client’s business and the circumstances leading up to the dispute. As a result, each new case provides an opportunity to “master” a new industry or subject matter. 

In addition, we often deal with matters of first impression, which can be exciting. Developing and advocating a solution to an issue that has not previously been determined or implemented always feels like a great deal of responsibility—and winning those cases is all the more rewarding. 

What misconceptions exist about your practice area?

There’s a common myth that being a good litigator requires one to be consistently adversarial and uncompromising. To the contrary, good client advocacy requires maintaining civility with opposing counsel and, more broadly, careful consideration of which fights are worth having. Among other things, constant and unreasonable bickering can diminish a litigant’s credibility with the court and ultimately harm the client. 

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

Junior associates at Kirkland are able to have just about any experience they’re looking for. Many associates take depositions, argue motions, and attend trials in their first few years—Kirkland’s open assignment system helps enable associates to find substantive work they’re interested in. For example, after a year or so at the firm, I specifically sought trial experience, and ended up with primary responsibility for witness preparation on two trial teams. I can’t imagine a better learning opportunity for a new lawyer than to participate in a complex trial early on. 

In what ways has the coronavirus pandemic affected your practice? How have you adjusted to lawyering in the wake of COVID-19?

I’ve been very fortunate that my practice wasn’t severely disrupted by the pandemic. In the early stages, just about every court canceled or delayed proceedings, so we’re still handling matters that were initially scheduled to conclude in 2020. And many of those matters are now being handled remotely, with attendees at home or in their offices. I certainly never thought I’d argue motions from my living room!

That said, one of the reasons I didn’t experience a substantial disruption was because we’ve always had top-notch remote capabilities, so the transition to working from home was seamless. The firm has done a great job of scheduling virtual social events and creating opportunities for us to stay in touch outside of work meetings, though there’s no real substitute for in-person lunches and happy hours at the office (which I’ve been happy to see return in recent months). 

Jaran Moten is a litigation partner in Kirkland’s Chicago office whose practice includes a wide range of complex disputes. Jaran represents corporations facing antitrust claims and government investigations, private equity firms in disputes arising from mergers and acquisitions, distressed companies in connection with bankruptcy litigation proceedings, and a host of clients in various contract and tort matters.