Practice Areas & Industries: Sullivan & Cromwell LLP

 





Group Profile Lawyers in this Group Offices Locations for this Group
 

Practice/Industry Group Overview

Sullivan & Cromwell has one of the premier appellate practices in the country.

Its lawyers have achieved success for the Firm’s clients in cases before the U.S. Supreme Court, federal courts of appeals and administrative agencies, state supreme and appellate courts, and numerous international tribunals. In the past five years alone, S&C lawyers have argued 10 times in the Supreme Court and dozens of times in other federal and state appellate courts.

These cases have spanned the Firm’s practice areas, including:

  • antitrust,
  • banking,
  • bankruptcy,
  • corporate and securities,
  • criminal procedure,
  • environmental,
  • false claims,
  • intellectual property,
  • labor and employment,
  • products liability, and
  • tax law.

Clients turn to S&C for their high-stakes appeals because of the Firm’s extensive appellate expertise and its deep understanding of their industries, issues and concerns. What sets S&C’s appellate practice apart is that its lawyers have handled virtually every phase of civil and criminal litigation on behalf of clients.

In addition to arguing and briefing cases in the U.S. Supreme Court and federal courts of appeals, S&C lawyers have also tried and arbitrated cases, conducted internal investigations, and represented clients in governmental investigations. Because of that broad experience, they are able to work collaboratively with trial teams to frame arguments persuasively at any level.

S&C’s appellate practice draws on the experience of 15 former U.S. Supreme Court clerks and more than 130 clerks to judges on all 13 federal courts of appeals and many state courts and international tribunals.

SELECTED REPRESENTATIONS

Recent appellate practice experience includes representations of:

  • Microsoft, as it prevailed before the Tenth Circuit in September 2013 in the company’s long-running antitrust battle with Novell.  After an eight-week trial led by S&C, the district court granted Microsoft’s post-trial motion for judgment as a matter of law, which dismissed Novell’s $4 billion suit.  On appeal, the Tenth Circuit affirmed that dismissal and agreed with the district court that Microsoft had not engaged in anticompetitive conduct.  Microsoft also prevailed before the Fourth Circuit, which affirmed the dismissal of more than $10 billion in claims by indirect purchasers of its software.
     
  • JPMorgan Chase, as it prevailed before the District of Columbia Circuit in May 2013, when that court refused to let creditors intervene in a dispute over Washington Mutual Bank’s obligation to repurchase defective loans out of mortgage-backed securities.
     
  • Enbridge, as it prevailed before the Delaware Supreme Court in May 2013, when that court declined to unwind the critical restructuring of an oil pipeline.  The Delaware Court of Chancery had dismissed various claims against the defendants and, after two separate arguments on appeal, the Delaware Supreme Court affirmed because there had not been any showing of bad faith.
     
  • Goldman Sachs, as it prevailed before the Second Circuit in March 2013, when that court reversed a lower court order declining to enforce an arbitration agreement with a former employee.  Because the issue was whether to carve out an exception to mandatory arbitration provisions for discrimination claims, the case drew the participation of many business and labor advocacy groups, as well as the attention of several national media outlets.
     
  • The St. Joe Company, as it prevailed before the Eleventh Circuit in February 2013, when that court affirmed the dismissal of a highly publicized shareholder class action concerning real estate valuation and disclosure.
     
  • J.P. Morgan Chase, Bank of America, Société Générale, UBS, Wachovia Bank, and many other of the world’s leading financial institutions, as they prevailed before the New York Court of Appeals in their challenge to the $5 billion restructuring of MBIA Insurance.
     
  • BP and its directors, as they prevailed in multiple appeals before the Fifth Circuit arising out of the Deepwater Horizon explosion and the ensuing Gulf of Mexico spill.  The court of appeals repeatedly affirmed the dismissal of various shareholder, derivative, and other class actions.
     
  • Barclays, as it prevailed before the Fifth Circuit in the Enron securities class action—widely considered to be the largest and most complex securities class action ever—when that court reversed class certification.  Barclays subsequently obtained summary judgment and dismissal of the claims in the district court.

 
 
Articles Authored by Lawyers at this office:

Federal Circuit Clarifies “Nexus” Requirement for Permanently Enjoining Patent Infringement: The Court of Appeals Vacates the District Court’s Denial of Apple’s Request for a Permanent Injunction Against Samsung With Respect to Smartphone/Tablet Utility Patents and Remands for Further Proceedings
, November 22, 2013
On November 18, 2013, in Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated the denial by the District Court for the Northern District of California of Apple’s request for injunctive relief against Samsung’s infringement of several utility...

First Circuit Court of Appeals Holds That Private Equity Funds Can Be Liable for Pension Liabilities of Portfolio Companies: First Circuit Holds that a Private Equity Fund Can Be a Member of an ERISA Controlled Group with its Portfolio Companies, and Thus Potentially Be Subject to Pension Liabilities of Portfolio Companies
, August 01, 2013
On July 24, 2013, in Sun Capital Partners III L.P. v. New England Teamsters and Trucking Industry Pension Fund, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit ruled that a private equity fund was a “trade or business” that could be part of a controlled group with its portfolio...