Practice Areas & Industries: Duane Morris LLP

 





Group Profile Lawyers in this Group Offices Locations for this Group
 

Practice/Industry Group Overview

Sophisticated consumers of legal services require certain qualities of their litigators. They look for depth, specific experience, geographic representation and a well-defined approach to complex matters.

Duane Morris' trial lawyers have the level of industry-specific litigation experience necessary to successfully manage large-case litigation for clients ranging from individuals to Fortune 100 companies.

What Sets Us Apart

Our clients tell us that our strength is in our know-how. Our process is to listen with an experienced ear, understand a client's business needs and objectives, and then fully evaluate appropriate strategies and combination of tactics. We employ an interdisciplinary approach – drawing on the appropriate practice group and industry-specific professionals.

We take our role as counselors seriously. This commitment distinguishes our litigation practice, which features:
    
Industry Experience and Teams

From electric utilities to chemical, from hospitality to telecommunications, Duane Morris lawyers represent clients in many industries in state and federal trial and appellate courts in the United States and in courts throughout the United Kingdom and European Union. Our collective capabilities are both deep and wide. We assemble teams of lawyers with particularized technical practice backgrounds, as well as individual industry experience.

Extensive Courtroom and ADR Experience

We call ourselves the "trial department" because we actually try cases to verdict. Whenever possible, however, we make use of alternative dispute resolution techniques such as arbitration and mediation to pursue the client's goals.

We advise clients on how to proceed and how judges have handled similar issues previously. We utilize a structured witness preparation program to educate witnesses on giving testimony. We are able to discuss an opponent's strengths and weaknesses. Our industry familiarity allows us to give on-point advice for industry-specific needs.

Geographic Coverage

Our numerous offices allow us to staff each case with local talent who have had experience with the courts, the regulatory authorities and other lawyers in the jurisdiction. Each lawyer's longstanding presence in the local legal community is supported by the firm's lawyers in our offices across the United States and in London.

In London, we try cases, appeals and appearances in specialist divisions of the Construction & Technology and the Commercial Courts. Our London lawyers frequently are retained to monitor activities of regional law firms in the U.K. and elsewhere in the European Union.

Effective Resource Management

We are familiar with an industry's issues and can mobilize human and technological resources immediately. For example, we know how to process and analyze thousands of documents; our computer capabilities are regularly employed by Fortune 100 companies; and we have been a leader in alternative fee structures, including contingent fee and success premiums.

With the firm's advanced Information Services Department, we assist clients by structuring and managing evidence databases, calling upon cutting-edge software for case analysis and risk assessment, and preparing and using multimedia trial presentations, Extranets and other advanced litigation support tools.

Contingency Fee Practice

Our active contingency fee practice is unique among large law firms. We regularly represent clients otherwise unable to pursue large-case litigation.

Here are some of the specific industry areas we serve and litigation practices we maintain:

  • Antitrust and Competition
  • Appellate Practice
  • Arbitration, ADR and Mediation
  • Aviation Law
  • Class Action Litigation
  • Commercial Litigation
  • Construction
  • Corporate Litigation
  • Employment Litigation
  • Environmental Litigation
  • Financial Institution Litigation
  • Franchise Litigation
  • Healthcare Litigation
  • Hospitality Industry Litigation
  • Insurance Coverage Litigation
  • Insurance Litigation
  • Intellectual Property Litigation
  • International Arbitration
  • Probate Litigation
  • Products Liability and Toxic Torts
  • Professional Liability Litigation
  • Risk Management
  • Securities Litigation
  • Surety and Fidelity Litigation
  • White Collar Criminal Litigation

 

Services Available

 
Group Presentations
Duane Morris Attorneys Patrick Matusky, Charles Hart, and Dawnn Briddell to Present the "Comparative Legal Ethics ¿ PA, NJ and Model Rules: You Mean They Are Different?" CLE Program, Tavistock Country Club, Haddonfield, NJ, April 8, 2014
Duane Morris to Host Watermark & Springboard Program on New Disability Regulations, April 1, 2014
Duane Morris Partner Nolan Atkinson, Jr. to Moderate the "Relationship 911: When the Price Tag for Litigation is not as Advertised" Panel at the 2014 MCCA CLE Expo, The Westin Bonaventure, Los Angeles , March 13, 2014
Duane Morris General Counsel Michael Silverman to Speak at the 13th Annual Legal Malpractice and Risk Management Conference, Westin Chicago River North, Chicago, Illinois, March 7, 2014
Duane Morris Partner Eric Breslin to Speak at the American Conference Institute's 3rd National Forum, Grand Hyatt Washington, Washington, D.C., February 27, 2014
See more...
 
Past Seminar Materials
Duane Morris Of Counsel Albert Zabin to Speak at the "Taking, Defending, & Preparing for Powerful Depositions" Telephonic Seminar, March 26, 2014
Duane Morris Partner Robert Fineman to Serve as a Panelist at the "Records Management, Retention and Destruction in California" CLE Seminar, Oakland, California, March 7, 2014
Duane Morris Attorneys Ray Wong, Terrance Evans and Tom Newman To Speak at the Insurance Coverage Litigation Committee CLE Seminar, Loews Ventana Canyon, Tuscon, AZ, March 6, 2014
 
 
Articles Authored by Lawyers at this office:

Federal Circuit Reverses District Court on Claim Construction in Patent Suit Involving Google's Street View
, March 20, 2014
On March 14, 2014, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled in a patent appeal case involving Google's Street View technology on a topic in patent law that has received considerable attention recently—claim construction. In Vederi, LLC v. Google, Inc., the Federal Circuit...

U.S. Supreme Court Restricts Challenges to Pretrial Seizure of Defense Funds
, March 07, 2014
The U.S. Supreme Court recently weakened a criminal defendant's ability to challenge the Government's pretrial seizure of assets that a defendant has allocated for mounting a defense. In Kaley v. United States, the Court eliminated a defendant's right to challenge a grand jury's finding of probable...

Second Circuit Ruling Appears to Limit Ability of U.S. Bankruptcy Courts to Assist Foreign Debtors
, December 19, 2013
In Drawbridge Special Opportunities Fund LP v. Barnet (In re Barnet), Case No. 13-612, 2013 WL 6482499 (2d Cir. Dec. 11, 2013), the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held that in order for a foreign representative to achieve "recognition" of a foreign debtor's...

U.S. Supreme Court Issues Significant Forum-Selection Decision
, December 06, 2013
There has been confusion in the courts over the years regarding the appropriate mechanism to enforce forum-selection clauses, which are now routinely included in many commercial and personal contracts. Such clauses typically require any dispute between contracting parties to be resolved in the...

Glaski Decision Appears to Place Lenders on Notice to Verify Accuracy and Effectiveness of Loan Assignments
, September 11, 2013
The recent decision in Glaski v. Bank of America, National Association, et al., 160 Cal. Rptr. 3d 449 (2013), may, at least in certain circumstances, impact the ability of residential mortgage-backed security and commercial mortgage-backed security lenders to keep pooling and servicing agreements...

IRS Guidance Addresses Federal Tax Impact for Employers in Light of Supreme Court Ruling in U.S. v. Windsor
, September 04, 2013
In Revenue Ruling 2013-17, the Internal Revenue Service (the "Service") addressed for the first time the impact of United States v. Windsor, the Supreme Court decision which held that section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act was unconstitutional because it violates the principles of equal...

U.S. Department of Labor Updates FMLA Guidance Documents to Implement Supreme Court's DOMA Decision
, August 16, 2013
On August 9, 2013, U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) Secretary Thomas Perez issued an internal memorandum to DOL staff members on the Department's efforts to implement the U.S. Supreme Court's recent decision in U.S. v. Windsor, which struck down as unconstitutional the provisions of the Defense of...

Supreme Court Holds FDCA Preempts Common Law Design-Defect Claim Against Generic Drugs
, July 04, 2013
On June 24, 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court held in Mutual Pharmaceutical Co., Inc. v. Bartlett that the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA) preempted the respondent's common law claim for damages arising from the alleged defective design of a generic pharmaceutical. The Supreme Court had...

Second Circuit Shifts Burden of Showing Assets to Defendants; Clarifies Monsanto Decision
, June 25, 2013
Both civil and criminal agencies charged with enforcing U.S. laws have turned increasingly to broad based use of "asset freeze orders." Legal counsel and their clients should understand the issue, particularly as there is a split in the Circuits and the Supreme Court has not yet addressed...

Supreme Court Affirms Class Action Waiver Even Where Litigation of Separate Claims Economically Infeasible
, June 25, 2013
On June 20, 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court in American Express Co. v. Italian Colors Restaurant upheld a provision in an arbitration agreement that barred class actions, even where litigation of individual claims would be economically infeasible.

The Applicability of the Massachusetts Wage Act Swells in June 2013
, June 25, 2013
In late June 2013, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ("SJC") and the Massachusetts Appeals Court (the "Appeals Court") issued two decisions broadly expanding the breadth of the Massachusetts Wage Act (the "Wage Act") by (i) increasing the types of entities and...

U.S. Supreme Court Resolves Circuit Split in Bullock v. BankChampaign, N.A.
, June 25, 2013
One of the primary purposes of bankruptcy is to provide for the discharge of certain debts in order to enable a debtor to obtain a "fresh start" post-bankruptcy. Notwithstanding this specific purpose, section 523 of Title 11 of the United States Code, 11 U.S.C. § 101 et seq. (the...

U.S. Supreme Court Issues Unanimous Limited Arbitration Ruling in Oxford Health Plans LLC v. Sutter
, June 14, 2013
On June 10, 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court in Oxford Health Plans LLC v. Sutter upheld an arbitrator's determination that a physician's claim against Oxford may proceed on a class basis. The Court held that because the parties agreed that the arbitrator should decide whether their contract authorized...

D.C. Circuit Court Vacates the NLRB's Notice Posting Rule
, May 16, 2013
On May 7, 2013, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit held in National Association of Manufacturers, et al. v. National Labor Relations Board, et al., No. 12-5068, that the National Labor Relations Board's (NLRB) August 2011 rule requiring most private-sector employers to...

Second Circuit Establishes Relevant Time Period for "Center of Main Interests" Determination Under Chapter 15 of the Bankruptcy Code
, May 02, 2013
In Morning Mist Holdings Limited v. Krys (In re Fairfield Sentry Limited), Case No. 11-4376, 2013 WL 1593348 (2d Cir. April 16, 2013), the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit (the "Second Circuit") held that the relevant point in time for determining where the...

U.S. Supreme Court Endorses Employer Efforts to "Pick Off" Named Plaintiff in FLSA Collective Action, but Declines to Resolve Circuit Split Regarding Mootness Issue
, April 24, 2013
On April 16, 2013, the United States Supreme Court in Genesis HealthCare Corp. v. Symczyk, 569 U.S. --- (2013) (No. 11-1059), held that a trial court properly dismissed as moot a Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) overtime collective action where the employer had made an offer of judgment to the named...