David Black practices in the areas of complex civil litigation, business disputes, commercial litigation, class action defense, and intellectual property litigation.
David also practices in the areas of energy and electric-utility law including corporate governance issues, capital credit practices, electric-service rights, eminent domain, territorial assignment, and all aspects of litigation, regulation and counseling, with an emphasis on cooperative organizations. David represents clients before the Public Service Commission as a regular part of his practice.
While in law school at the University of South Carolina, David received the Justice Ness Academic Honors Scholarship. Prior to joining Nexsen Pruet, he served as law clerk to the Honorable Kenneth G. Goode of the Sixth Judicial Circuit.
David has an AV rating in Martindale Hubbell, the highest such rating available to any individual lawyer.
In 2008, The State Newspaper, Columbia Business Journal, highlighted David as a rising star in the South Carolina Business and Legal community.
During 2012 David was a featured national speaker for the NRECA. He spoke to hundreds of Electric Cooperative Attorneys and CEOs throughout the United States about Electric Cooperative class actions and corporate governance litigation in Orlando, Florida; Washington DC; Vail, Colorado; and Monterey, California.
Procurement Law Update - January 2007
Procurement Laws Revamped: Changes impact how businesses do work with state and contract dispute process.
David taught a CLE on the South Carolina Tort Reform Act, A Primer on South Carolina Tort Reform: A look at the history and meaning of tort reform in South Carolina.
Outside Nexsen Pruet
When David is away from the office he can often be found on the soccer field coaching his son and daughter’s South Carolina United soccer teams. David is also an avid cyclist and runner. When he is not in the office or coaching soccer, he enjoys running marathons, participating in cycling races, and competing in other endurance related charitable events.
|Reported Cases||Notable: James Brown Litigation; 5/2013; Billy Wilkins and David Black represented the James Brown Trust and Estate (Bauknight) before the South Carolina Supreme Court concerning an order removing former fiduciaries and a compromise settlement agreement. The South Carolina Supreme Court affirmed the Circuit Court'sremoval of the former fiduciaries and reversed the compromise settlement agreement. The matter is currently pending on remand before the Circuit Court.; 10/2010; David Black and a team of Nexsen Pruet attorneys represented the James Brown Trust and Estate (Bauknight) in two separate appeals involving former trustees attempting to return to a position of authority over the trust and estate. Both appeals have been successfully resolved other than an award of attorneys' fees that may be asserted against Cannon for contempt of court proceedings.; 7/2010; David Black represented the James Brown Trust and Estate (Bauknight) in a declaratory judgment, accounting, and copyright action filed in the United States District Court for the Central District of California. In this matter, Ms. Hollander argued that she was entitled to over half of James Brown'sroyalties and intellectual property pursuant to an alleged oral agreement. Mr. Black filed a motion to dismiss on the basis of improper personal and subject matter jurisdiction. The District Court granted the motion ruling that personal and subject matter did not exist in the California federal court.; Corporate and Business Litigation; 10/2009; David Black represented a multinational global 500 company in a products liability and accounting action challenging the design of drywall fasteners. Prior to engaging in lengthy discovery and mediation, he assisted the client in negotiating a favorable settlement dismissing both actions.; 7/2009; David Black, and a team of Nexsen Pruet attorneys, represented a database developer in a contractual dispute concerning contract terms, payment, and the absence of a termination clause related to development of the database. After a weeklong trial in Federal District Court, the Court held that the contract did not run into perpetuity and that termination was proper on a prospective basis.; Electric Cooperative Litigation; 8/2013; David Black represents Santee Electric Cooperative in a purported current member derivative class action challenging the Cooperative'scompliance with statute, bylaws, and other corporate governance issues.; 8/2013; David Black represents seventeen South Carolina electric cooperatives in a purported former member class action challenging the cooperatives' compliance with statute, bylaws, and capital credit retirement policies. The former members seek early retirement of over 250 million dollars in capital credits.; 5/2008; Marc Manos and David Black won a directed verdict in favor of their client, Aiken Electric Cooperative, Inc., in Edgefield County Circuit Court. The case involved a challenge to a substation expansion and multi-million dollar distribution line easement along a US. Highway.; 3/2008; Marc Manos and David Black filed an Amicus Brief for the Electric Cooperatives of South Carolina, Inc., portions of which the South Carolina Court of Appeals heavily relied on in its opinion in City of Newbery v. Newberry Elec. Coop., Inc., 2008-UP-200 (S.C. Ct. App. March 24, 2008).; 8/2007; David Black and a Nexsen Pruet team represented a South Carolina electric cooperative in a federal lawsuit concerning annexation, territorial service rights, and a $16 million dollar infrastructure investment. Through mediation, he assisted the client in negotiating a favorable settlement that will preserve the electric cooperative's post annexation territorial service rights.; Intellectual Property Litigation; 11/2008; David Black represented a nationally recognized award winning home plan designer in a copyright and trademark action involving the illegal publication of house plan renderings. Without the aid of a mediator, he assisted the client in negotiating a favorable settlement ending years of litigation.; 12/2003; David Black and a team of Nexsen Pruet attorneys represented a United Kingdom software developer in a copyright action involving point of sale computer source code. Without the aid of a mediator, they assisted the client in negotiating a favorable settlement that will provide international protection for the software code.; Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA); 1/2007; David and a team of Nexsen Pruet attorneys represent the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) in more than sixty federal actions filed throughout South Carolina involving copyright infringement and illegal peer-to-peer file sharing.; South Carolina Pharmacy Benefit Manager Contract; 9/2005; Marc Manos, David Black and a Nexsen Pruet team convinced the Procurement Review Panel to reverse a Chief Procurement Officer order, awarding the firm's health care industry client a multi-million dollar state contract for pharmacy benefit management.; 8/2004; David participated in a marathon 17-hour procurement protest hearing involving the award of the State Employee Pharmacy Benefit Manager Contract. A later settlement resulted in the contract being awarded to Nexsen Pruet's client.; Reported Decisions: Wilson v. Dallas, In re: The Estate of James Brown, et al., 403 S.C. 411, 743 S.E.2d 746 (S.C. 2013); Cannon v. Georgia Attorney General, In re: James Brown, et al., 725 S.E.2d 698 (S.C. 2012); Jacqueline Hollander v. The Irrevocable Trust Established by James Brown in August 1, 2000 et al. 2: 10-cv-03357-PSG -AJW (2010).; In Re: Protest of Express Scripts, Inc.; Appeal of Medco Health Solutions, Inc., South Carolina Procurement Decisions, SCPD Case No. 2005-8 (October 6, 2005).; SCE&G v. Aiken Electric Cooperative, Inc., and the South Carolina Public Service Commission, 2005 UP 292 (Ct. App. 2005); In Re: Protest of Palmetto Unilect, LLC; Diebold Election Systems; iPServices, LLC; Maximus, Inc.; and Election Systems & Software, Inc. Appeal of Palmetto Unilect; Diebold Election Systems; and Election Systems & Software, Inc., South Carolina Procurement Decisions, 2004 WL 2516305, SCPD Case No. 2004-6 (July 1, 2004).; SCE&G v Palmetto Electric Cooperative, Inc., South Carolina Public Service Commission Decisions, Case No. 2002-0192-E (October 23, 2003).; Carolina Trucks and Equipment, Inc., v. Volvo Trucks, N.A., 2003 WL 23873007 (4th Cir. Jan 21, 2003)(No. 02-2410).; SCE&G vs. Aiken Electric Cooperative, Inc., South Carolina Public Service Commission Decisions, Case No. 2000-0242-E (April 23, 2002).|