Practice/Industry Group Overview
No appeal is ever routine. And there is never a time when results matter more than on final appeal.
Whether as an appellant, appellee or friend of the court, a decision on appeal not only settles the case but becomes the law of the land.
Burr & Forman LLP is home to one of the most experienced appellate practices in the southeast region. Its lawyers are highly skilled in arguing the right issue, in the right way, with a deep understanding of how our appellate courts operate. The firm’s lawyers have handled literally hundreds of appeals at all levels of the state and federal system. Those cases have involved nearly every legal subject as well as challenges to excessive damage awards.
Representative appellate cases include:
Stoneridge Investment Partners, v. Scientific-Atlanta, Inc., 552 U.S. 148, 128 S. Ct. 761 (2008) (defense of securities fraud litigation)
W.R. Huff Asset Management Co., v. Kohlberg, Kravis, Roberts, 566 F.3d 979 (11th Cir. 2009)(preemption of state law by SLUSA)
Cottrell v. NCAA, 975 So. 2d 306 (Ala. 2007), cert. denied, 128 S.Ct. 1334 (2008)(defense of NCAA in defamation claim)
Mack Trucks, Inc. v. Witherspoon, 867 So. 2d 307 (Ala. 2004) (defense of product manufacturer)
Leverso v. SouthTrust Bank, 18 F.3d 1527 (11th Cir. 1994) (defense of bondholder in class action over condominium development)
Tucker v. Fearn, 333 F.3d 1216 (11th Cir. 2003)(defense of boat operator under maritime law).
Harbert International, Inc. v. James, 157 F.3d 1271 (11th Cir. 1998)(representation of bridge builder for non-payment)
McClain v. Metabolife International, Inc., 401 F.3d 1233 (11th Cir. 2005)(defense of diet supplement manufacturer )
American Radio Assn. v. Mobile Steamship Assn., 419 U.S. 215 (1974) (labor dispute over whether unions may picket foreign ships)
A complete list of Burr & Forman’s appellate cases is available upon request.
A key indicator of excellence is the number of clients who pick Burr & Forman for an appeal after suffering an adverse trial result, or who contact Burr to seek an emergency appeal. Another indicator is the many amicus curiae organizations who select Burr to file their briefs, such as the Business Council of Alabama, the Defense Research Institute, the American Council of Life Insurers, the Product Liability Advisory Council, the National Association of Mutual Insurance Companies, and the Alabama Defense Lawyers Association.
Burr’s appellate lawyers hold key leadership roles such as the Alabama Supreme Court’s standing committee on appellate rules. They are frequent writers and speakers on appellate practice, and they have been named by their peers in the appellate category of “Best Lawyers in America.”
Burr’s appellate capabilities include:
Strategic counseling during trial
Post-judgment discovery and enforcement
Post-judgment evidentiary hearings
Stays of judgment
Petitions for Mandamus
Petitions for Writ of Certiorari
Evaluations of appeal worthiness
Amicus Curiae Briefs
Represented trucking company in action brought by truck driver against former employer alleging wrongful termination where driver was laid off in a reduction of force but maintained the employer had ulterior, unlawful motives for the decision. Summary judgment affirmed on appeal.
Represented Alabama Improvement District in suit for injunction by developer of mixed-use property in order to prevent foreclosure by District. Injunctive relief denied.
Represented inspector of manufactured homes in litigation brought by purchaser of manufactured home alleging multitude of defects in property. Order compelling arbitration affirmed on appeal.
Represented parking lot owner/management company in defending action brought by elderly female who tripped in parking lot adjacent to courthouse resulting in severe injuries. Summary judgment affirmed on appeal.
Represented maritime insurer in pursuit of action for declaratory judgment construing insurance policy for vessel and to defend breach of contract and bad faith claims arising out of the sinking of yacht off the Alabama coast. Trial resulted in verdict in favor of maritime insurer on bad faith claim.