Client Collaborations
All Representative Cases
Barinaga, et al. v. Paulson Investment Company, Inc. and UBS PaineWebber, Inc., et al. This case was brought by an investor who engaged in “short-selling” stock. After a substantial share value drop, claimant alleged numerous claims, including that his loans of stock were investment contracts and thus constituted sales of securities in violation of state and federal securities laws. Claimant sought $52 million in damages, plus attorney fees. Four experts testified in support of claimant’s theory, but the three-member arbitration panel dismissed claimant’s claims in their entirety. The arbitrators also awarded our client UBS all its attorney fees incurred in defending the case.
Favorably resolved university employee’s lawsuit asserting claims under Title IX and negligence based on coworker’s allegedly harassing conduct.
Guided the co-founders of a new technology venture in the health care space through the corporate formation process, as well as locating and connecting them with appropriate regulatory counsel and compliance experts.
Counseled bank on a loan to tribal enterprise secured by specified tax revenues.
Assisted client in responding to regulatory inquiry regarding "true party of interest" matter. Successfully handled communication and factual background documentation, leading to "no-action" determination by agency.
Assisted company with complicated collective bargaining agreement in crafting policies for compliance with various state mandates.
Building and managing a portfolio on additive deposition systems using robotic deposition heads to build parts for larger systems.
Defended lender in lawsuit alleging that collateral assignment of key man life insurance policy was void. The policy was sole collateral for an otherwise uncollectible five-million-dollar loan. The case ultimately settled with full payment of the policy and complete satisfaction of the loan.
Wallace v. Hinkle Northwest Inc. Plaintiff alleged several claims arising from losses she incurred on investments, and after a week-long trial, the jury returned its verdict in favor of our clients, the brokerage firm and the stockbroker, on all claims. The court of appeals affirmed the jury verdict in part but remanded the case on one legal ruling by the trial court. On remand, the case was settled for a nominal amount.