The Legal 500

Gibson Dunn is one of the most experienced of US Supreme Court practices, and has argued 12 cases over the past three terms, winning eight of them. In addition to this, it continues its impressive success rate with certiorari petitions, having more than 30% of these granted. The firm enjoyed a particularly strong showing in the October 2010 term, in which it won three of its five arguments. Theodore Boutrous argued a landmark class action and employment discrimination dispute in Wal-Mart v Dukes, which resulted in a victory for client Wal-Mart when the US Supreme Court unanimously reversed an earlier ruling and denied class certification. The ruling will lead to a more stringent certification requirement for individualized monetary relief. In the same session, Mark Perry successfully represented Janus Capital in Janus Capital Group, Inc v First Derivative Traders, a securities case in which the firm secured for the client important protection against liability. Perry also argued a significant Hatch-Waxman case for Novo Nordisk before the US Supreme Court in December 2011. Former solicitor general Theodore Olson, who is regarded as being ‘at the height of his career’, obtained a landmark ERISA ruling in Cigna Corp v Amara, a decision that will lead to greater clarity and predictability in plan management. The firm is also extremely active at the appellate level for clients as diverse as US Chamber of Commerce, NFL Players Association, Allergan, and Cable Vision. It successfully represented the US Chamber of Commerce and the Business Roundtable in an appellate lawsuit to overturn the SEC’s Proxy-Access Rule, marking the fourth time the group has been successful in challenging the SEC’s rulemaking. Julian Poon in Los Angeles, James Ho in Dallas and the Washington DC pair of Thomas Dupree and Matthew McGill are widely regarded for appellate work.

Mayer Brown’s Supreme Court and appellate practice melds ‘outstanding written advocacy, excellent judgment, and legal knowledge’, and has argued 13 cases over the last three Supreme Court terms. Praise abounds for the litigators of this firm, with firm founder Stephen Shapiro very highly regarded. Shapiro argued Mayo Collaborative Services v Prometheus Labs before the US Supreme Court, a case which will determine the patentability of the correlation between blood test results and patient health, and will have implications for the free use of natural phenomena to develop better and cheaper drugs tests. Dan Himmelfarb, Evan Tager and Andrew Tauber are ‘go-to stars’, and ‘each is a brilliant and open-minded legal thinker, an expert written and oral communicator, and a business-savvy and trusted team partner’. Lauren Goldman is ‘super client-focused, extremely responsive, an excellent writer, and a poised and prepared oral advocate in her own right’. Andrew Frey is ‘a lion of the appellate bar’ and conveys ‘gravitas’; appellate specialist Scott Chesin is also highly recommended. Renowned advocate Andrew Pincus won a victory for AT&T Mobility in AT&T Mobility LLC v Concepcion, a case concerning fundamental issues of arbitration. As a result, California will now have to enforce even those arbitration agreements that stipulate for consumer complaints to be arbitrated individually. The Supreme Court’s decision, handed down in April 2011, has far-reaching implications for class action law nationwide. The firm also has a broad appellate practice, with 21 attorneys active in 2011 across 18 federal and state courts. The firm has been particularly active in antitrust and securities cases. For instance, before the Seventh Circuit in Minn-Chem, Inc v Agrium Inc, a team led by Shapiro represented a Canadian potash producer in a case involving a price-fixing claim. The firm won reversal of a lower court’s decision, and the case was dismissed.

Sidley Austin LLP’s ‘top-notch’ practice argued five cases in the US Supreme Court’s first session in 2012. The firm is notable for its capabilities nationwide and is particularly active before the Third, Seventh and Ninth circuits. Numerous lawyers from this firm attract praise from clients including managing partner Carter Phillips, who is ‘first among equals as an appellate and Supreme Court advocate’ and Constantine Trela, who is ‘a gifted appellate advocate’. Global appellate co-chair Mark Haddad ‘knows how to frame the issues and deliver results’, and product liability specialist Debra Pole ‘knows how to try a case’. In American Electric Power Company Inc v State of Connecticut, a Clean Air Act case before the US Supreme Court, Peter Keisler successfully argued the case for a team that also included Phillips and former principal deputy associate attorney general Joe Guerra. The Supreme Court unanimously reversed a previous verdict by the Second Circuit, and in doing so upheld the primacy of the Clean Air Act over federal common law. In the first term of 2012, Philips argued a US Supreme Court case for Fox Television, which will determine whether Fox has rights to control swear words under the First Amendment. On the appellate front, the firm scored a major victory for Star Scientific in a patent appeal before the Federal Circuit, which reversed each of the four earlier invalidity findings against the client. Other clients of this ‘superb’ practice include CSX Transportation, Bayer and Microsoft.

Chaired by ‘superstar’ Seth Waxman, WilmerHale has superb pedigree before the US Supreme Court. The firm has argued more than 130 cases in all, and impressively notched four wins in the October 2011 term. Waxman, Paul Wolfson and Daniel Volchok acted in Microsoft v i4i, which saw the filing of over 50 amicus briefs and was argued before the Supreme Court in April 2011. The court upheld a large patent infringement judgment that may impact across the whole US economy, as it led to a tougher standard for proving the invalidity of patents. Waxman also argued FCC v Fox Television Stations, Inc, et al, an important First Amendment matter, on behalf of clients Walt Disney and ABC. IP law is also a strength of the firm. In Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Jr University v Roche Molecular Systems, Mark Fleming’s argument for Roche Molecular Systems led to a significant development in technology transfer law as the US Supreme Court’s decision established the importance of drafting IP assignment agreements. The firm has a deep bench of appellate lawyers: in 2011 alone, 28 attorneys collectively made 44 oral arguments in state and federal appellate courts. Patent law is a strength: the practice has handled 35 such cases in the Federal Circuit over the last two years. Edward DuMont in Washington DC and Mark Fleming in Boston have superb reputations for appellate work.

Arnold & Porter LLP’s Lisa Blatt has a superb and growing reputation for US Supreme Court advocacy with one observer considering her to be ‘exceptionally skilled and with a really impressive portfolio’. Blatt has argued 30 cases and has been extraordinarily successful, winning 29 of them. In the 2010 US Supreme Court term, in Sorrell v IMS Health, Inc, Blatt successfully represented IMS Health, a pharmaceutical data-tracking company. The Justices held that Vermont’s Prescription Confidentiality Law violated the First Amendment and effectively extended the scope of First Amendment rights into the marketing sphere in a ruling which may be applicable to other regulated industries. In another highlight, Blatt represented the plaintiff in Henderson v Shinseki, in which the Supreme Court held that the statute of limitations for veterans to challenge disability benefit is not jurisdictional. Blatt also successfully handled a major class action ‘dry pricing’ dispute before the US Supreme Court as well as a DC Circuit case in which the firm successfully obtained a reversal for a pesticide manufacturer, thereby limiting the Environmental Protection Agency’s ability to take enforcement actions against registered pesticide products. Anthony Franze, who is noted for civil racketeer and price-fixing cases, and counsel Dirk Phillips have excellent reputations.

Esteemed former solicitor general Paul Clement joined Bancroft PLLC from King & Spalding LLP in 2011. Clement has argued an unsurpassed 55 cases before the US Supreme Court up to 2012. His practice also encompasses appellate matters, and he is particularly well known for constitutional litigation. In 2011, Clement successfully argued a Fourteenth Amendment case in the US Supreme Court, a securities case in the Ninth Circuit, an administrative law appeal in the DC Circuit, and a certified appeal in the New York Court of Appeals concerning auditor liability. Founding partner Viet Dinh is widely well regarded for Supreme Court cases.

Jones Day gives clients ‘exceptional service’ and ‘candid, helpful advice’. For instance, in State of Florida et al v US Department of Health & Human Services, the firm acted for National Federation of Independent Business in challenging the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, President Obama’s controversial healthcare legislation. The US Supreme Court will consider whether the act’s individual mandate to purchase health insurance is constitutional. This high-quality team includes Glen Nager, who has ‘outstanding mastery of certain legal areas, and is very innovative’, and Michael Carvin, who is ‘an extremely talented oral advocate, exceptional at strategy’. Additionally, Gregory Katsas is ‘an excellent writer, extremely responsive to client needs’, and Hashim Mooppan is ‘definitely a rising star in appellate litigation’. Meir Feder is also highly recommended, and scored an impressive success before the US Supreme Court in Goodyear Dunlop Tires Operations, SA v Brown, in which the firm secured a landmark ruling defining the limits on state court jurisdiction.

Washington DC-based litigation boutique Kellogg, Huber, Hansen, Todd, Evans & Figel, P.L.L.C. has built substantial US Supreme Court experience that is disproportionate to its size. In CSX Transportation v McBride, the firm successfully defended a jury award for an injured railroad worker in an action under the Federal Employers’ Liability Act. This decision should make it easier for railroad workers to prove liability against employers. In Matrixx Initiatives v Siracusano, the firm successfully represented investors in an action based on a drug manufacturer’s failure to disclose information about the harmful side effects of its products. The US Supreme Court unanimously held that the firm’s client could state a claim for securities fraud without alleging that the number of undisclosed adverse events had been statistically significant. Michael Kellogg, a former assistant to the solicitor general, heads this widely well regarded team.

Led by former solicitor general Gregory Garre, Latham & Watkins LLP enjoyed a superb year, with the firm arguing six of the cases that the US Supreme Court agreed to hear in the October 2011 term. In one particularly high-profile case – Maples v Thomas – the firm was granted certiorari in an unusual case where lawyers from a major New York firm, having agreed to represent a death row inmate in Alabama, left the firm in question, causing Maples to miss his deadline for filing appeal. The firm’s appellate practice is also thriving. In Prometheus Laboratories Inc v Mayo Collaborative Services, a team led by Richard Bress and Scott Ballenger persuaded the Federal Circuit to uphold the patentability of Prometheus’ medical treatment method patents, in the process overturning the trial court judgment. The decision may have far-reaching implications in the fields of biotechnology and personalized medicine patents. Another landmark case ended in a significant Ninth Circuit victory on behalf of client Monsanto, in which the firm successfully appealed against an extraordinary injunction that would have led to the destruction of hundreds of acres of genetically engineered sugarbeet.

O’Melveny & Myers LLP’s Jonathan Hacker is highly recommended for US Supreme Court work, and one client praises him and the ‘excellent’ Walter Dellinger for being ‘able to distil complex issues so laymen can understand them’. Hacker argued on behalf of Viad Corp in Kurns v Railroad Friction Products in November 2011, in a case in which the court was asked to decide whether federal laws governing road safety prohibit lawsuits against railroads under state law. Meanwhile, Dellinger’s name was on the docket in the US Supreme Court case, Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School v Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, a case which challenges the ministerial exception to exposure to employment-related suits. Despite Sri Srinivasan’s departure to the US deputy solicitor generalship, the firm also retains a robust and compact appellate practice, with strong partner-level strength on both East and West Coasts. Clients include household names such as Bank of America, ExxonMobil and Morgan Stanley.

Larry Robbins and Roy Englert, both formerly of the office of the solicitor general, are a formidable duo at Robbins, Russell, Englert, Orseck, Untereiner & Sauber. Since 2001, the firm has argued 47 US Supreme Court cases. In the October 2011 term, a team including Englert, Mark Stancil and Daniel Lerman (who argued the case) represented the petitioners in Armour v City of Indianapolis, a case concerning whether a municipal tax scheme violated the Equal Protection Clause. In another matter, Englert led another team in representing the Generic Pharmaceutical Association as amicus curiae in support of petitioner Caraco in Caraco Pharmaceutical Laboratories v Novo Nordisk A/S, et al. The firm’s busy appellate practice acts for clients including major hedge funds, airlines, healthcare providers, and an internet company. The firm is active in the US Courts of Appeals for the District of Columbia, and litigates regularly across the country. Donald Russell is known for antitrust work, and Alison Barnes is well regarded for all aspects of civil litigation.

Former assistant to the solicitor general Patricia Millett is an important component in Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP’s vibrant Supreme Court and appellate presence. Its lawyers continue to act as co-counsel, or to assist in briefing, in US Supreme Court cases including South Carolina v North Carolina, a matter pertaining to water apportionment for the Catawba River Supply Project. It is also handling Abbott v Abbott, a right of custody case in respect of the Hague Convention on International Child Abduction. On the appellate front, the firm won summary judgment in United Techs Corp v US Department of Defense. In this instance, Millet successfully secured a ruling on behalf of the claimant that the Defense Department’s disclosure of documents was arbitrary and capricious.

Covington & Burling LLP’s ‘outstanding’ team is consistently involved in US Supreme Court litigation both through representation of parties and the filing of amicus briefs. The practice is headed by the ‘very responsive, very knowledgeable’ Robert Long, who is ‘a delight to be around’. Long has been appointed by the US Supreme Court to argue in respect of the Anti-Injunction Act, during the critical challenge to President Obama’s healthcare legislation. The firm’s appellate practice is also highly regarded, with Robert Kelner, Robert Lenhard, Michael Francese and Steven Rosenbaum all considered to be ‘smart, reliable, and client-friendly’. Jonathan Marcus has also been hired by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission to defend a challenge to its new rule under the Obama administration’s sweeping Dodd-Frank financial reforms. The firm’s appellate practice – deemed by another client to be ‘the best in the business’ – represented the National Football League after a group of prominent football players brought a class-action antitrust case seeking to enjoin the NFL’s lockout of its player-employees. The parties subsequently reached settlement and a new ten-year agreement.

Farr & Taranto has a superb reputation as a niche appellate law practice with a record stretching back over 30 years. H Bartow Farr and Richard Taranto are both former assistants to the solicitor general. This highly respected two-partner team carries out a variety of complex appellate work, although it is best known on the antitrust, patent and constitutional side. In November 2011, Taranto was nominated by President Obama to serve as a judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

Hogan Lovells US LLP has been boosted by the arrival of former acting solicitor general Neal Katyal (15 US Supreme Court arguments since 2010) to complement the experienced Supreme Court and appellate lawyer Cate Stetson. The two are regarded as ‘superb brief-writers and advocates’. The firm’s active US Supreme Court practice notably includes recent cases such as United States Government in City of Ontario v Quon, which considered Fourth Amendment issues relating to cell phone signal interception, with Katyal arguing for the petitioners. The firm is also lead counsel for the United States in the pending case of United States v Jones. In addition, this ‘exceptional’ firm has built a busy appellate practice in respect of both federal and state appeals. In one highlight at the appellate level, a team led by Ira Feinberg and Dominic Perella represented former executives of Gen Re in United States v Ferguson et al before the Second Circuit. In this matter, the firm successfully reversed its clients’ convictions after persuading the court that prejudicial evidence and improper jury instruction had tainted the trial.

Jenner & Block LLP’s Supreme Court team has had several successes over recent terms, including the well-regarded Paul Smith successfully representing the respondents in Brown v Entertainment Merchants Association et al. In this important First Amendment case, the firm represented the makers of allegedly violent video games that were prohibited under Californian law from selling their games to minors. Having been granted certiorari in April 2010, Smith went on to win a 7-2 victory, with the Court ultimately ruling that the constitutional rights of the video game makers had been violated. In addition, Smith represented General Dynamics before the US Supreme Court in General Dynamics v US and Boeing Co v US, an important state secrets privilege case. Smith was also active at the appellate level on behalf of the plaintiff in the landmark copyright case Viacom v YouTube. The firm’s attorneys handle appeals in state and federal courts, and are particularly active in major cases before the Second Circuit (including Viacom v YouTube; City of New York v Exxon; and ST Microelectronic v Credit Suisse Securities). Barry Levenstam is widely well regarded.

Although King & Spalding LLP was weakened by the departure of Paul Clement to Bancroft PLLC, the firm continues to be praised for its ‘exceptional brief-writing and oral advocacy skills’. Daryl Jossefer (a former principal deputy in the office of the solicitor general), Ashley Parrish and Jeffrey Bucholtz are all deemed to be ‘extremely talented and creative lawyers’. Jossefer is particularly prominent in appellate cases and has argued a noteworthy number of appeals before the Federal Circuit for clients such as McKesson Technologies and CBT Flint Partners. Other clients include Franck’s Compounding Lab and Dynegy Midwest Generation. On the US Supreme Court side, the practice’s record includes having presented arguments – such as Schwarzenegger v Coleman, or PPL Montana, LLC v State of Montana – and filed amicus curiae briefs.

Kirkland & Ellis LLP’s ‘aggressive, smart, and tough’ appellate group is excellent for ‘big, complex, bet-the-company cases’. The team represented Raytheon in achieving victory before the Eleventh Circuit in a highly publicized lawsuit in which homeowners in St Petersburg, Florida, filed a $400m class action after groundwater contamination of their homes. Another significant victory was obtained for Teva before the US Supreme Court when Jay Lefkowitz argued a case which led to a ruling that federal law pre-empts state law tort claims against manufacturers of generic drugs. Lefkowitz ‘provides a depth of understanding and influence in some of the highest courts of our country’. Other clients include Morgan Stanley, Dow AgroSciences and Barr Pharmaceuticals.

McDermott Will & Emery LLP’s team is ‘responsive, hardworking, creative, communicative, and very knowledgeable in both the applicable law and the litigation process’. Clients also appreciate ‘the small teams the firm uses to work on matters’. Practice head Bobby Burchfield is ‘a nationally known expert on campaign finance litigation’, Eugene Goldman is ‘particularly good’, and Miller Baker is ‘well respected in his field’. The firm has been retained by the US Chamber of Commerce in respect of numerous lawsuits brought under a little known patent marking statute, an instruction which has illustrated Baker’s ability to spot difficult issues of law. In this respect, the firm also drafted an amicus curiae brief in support of Wham-O, a Frisbee manufacturer, arguing that the false marking statute is unconstitutional. Other clients include Arthur Andersen, Cisco Systems, and the Republican National Committee.

One illustrative piece of work for Morgan Lewis was the US Supreme Court patent infringement case, Global-Tech v SEB. In this instance, widely respected lawyers Ted Cruz and Allyson Ho won an 8-1 victory for client SEB, a French appliance manufacturer. Cruz and Ho handled both merits briefing and oral arguments, and persuaded the court to adopt a new legal standard of ‘willful blindness’, a test which will now be applied by courts across the country in deciding patent infringement cases. The case joined an impressive list of US Supreme Court matters the firm has argued, including ten cases on the merits in the last six years. Pharmaceuticals litigator Tom Peterson acted in the Ninth Circuit appeal, Golden Gate Pharmacy Services, et al v Pfizer, Inc and Wyeth, in which the firm argued for a fundamental redefinition in product markets, in relation to the Pfizer-Wyeth mega-merger. Other clients are AstraZeneca, Dentsply and Toyota. The appellate team undertakes significant work in a diverse number of courts from the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, the Tenth Court of Appeals in Texas, and the US District Court for the District of New Mexico. The firm also has strength in labor and employment litigation through Howard Radzely, environmental work through Ron Tenpas and contentious IP matters with Brett Schuman.

Morrison & Foerster LLP provides an ‘excellent overall level, including response times, business acumen, strength of team, and appropriateness of advice’. Its lawyers ‘focus exclusively on core issues’. The ‘excellent’ Deanne Maynard chairs the practice from Washington DC, while senior of counsel Miriam Vogel, a former appellate judge, is the key figure in Los Angeles. Maynard argued the first case of the US Supreme Court’s October 2010 term, scoring an 8-1 victory for client Bank of America in Ransom v FIA Card Services, as a result of which it will no longer be possible for a debtor who owns a car outright to be able to claim that he has any ‘reasonably necessary’ monthly expense for car ownership. Maynard was part of the team that successfully affirmed that independent state agencies serving as protection and advocacy services can sue other state entities in federal courts to seek enforcement of their federal rights. On the appellate front, the 45-lawyer team has bases on both coasts, and also in Denver. This ‘efficient and cost-effective’ group also achieved notable victories at the Californian Court of Appeal for Target as well as Bullis Charter School. Maynard, Michael Jacobs, Brian Matsui and Daniel Muino won an important victory at the Tenth Circuit for client Novell in its epic litigation with SCO Group, most recently winning affirmation of its copyright ownership rights. Seth Galanter joined the Obama administration in November 2011.

The superb Joshua Rosenkranz heads the team at Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP. Rosenkranz is described as ‘a star in every way’ for his role in high-stakes bet-the-company litigation. Among recent victories, Rosenkranz represented MGA Entertainment in an appeal that led to his client winning back the rights to the Bratz doll, thereby effectively salvaging the company. In another matter, the widely esteemed Rosenkranz worked alongside Neel Chatterjee in the high-profile representation of Facebook in The Facebook, Inc v ConnectU Inc, in which the Winklevoss twins – college classmates of Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg – claimed they had come up with the idea for the company. The case settled, and Facebook was released from all claims. The firm has an impressively deep bench, which was boosted by the arrival in August 2010 of Federal Circuit regular Mark Davies. Peter Coll, who represents PwC in high-stakes appeals, is also recommended, as is senior counsel M Laurence Popofsky for antitrust litigation, and Hopkins Guy for patent appeals.

Paul Hastings LLP’s 22-partner team provides ‘good customer service’, and its lawyers are ‘very knowledgeable in their fields’. The firm is best known for its employment and labor practice as well as for its involvement in landmark pro bono matters; Paul Cane is widely admired for employment appeals. The firm also has an impressive record of arguing commercial disputes before the US Supreme Court, an area in which Stephen Kinnaird excels. Having successfully argued the high-profile case of Padilla v Kentucky in October 2010, Kinnaird went on to argue Holder v Martinez Gutierrez before the US Supreme Court, an immigration matter concerning the statutory requirements for cancellation of removal of immigrants. Other clients include GlaxoSmithKine and UPS.

Proskauer Rose LLP is valued by clients for its ‘substantive’ advice across a range of matters from large copyright litigation to criminal work, including a case – Martin & Lilian Grosz v The Museum of Modern Art, et al – related to art seized during the Holocaust. In United States v Ferguson et al before the Second Circuit, a team led by Robert Cleary and Mark Harris represented Christopher Garand and succeeded in having his convictions thrown out. He had been accused of conspiracy, securities fraud and mail fraud, after a series of complex reinsurance transactions. In Union Carbide v Affiliated FM Insurance, Steven Gilford, Bruce Fader, and Marc Rosenthal orchestrated an appellate win which resulted in a more than $1bn recovery for the client.

Founded by John Quinn, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP has expanded to become a litigation powerhouse comprising over 600 attorneys. The firm has won a case at the US Supreme Court in each of the past three terms: the 2009 arranger liability Superfund case for Shell Oil; the 2010 Carmack Amendment case for K Line; and, most recently, the 2011 vaccine pre-emption case for Wyeth and Pfizer. The firm has been retained again by Shell to handle the US Supreme Court briefing and argument in the alien tort statute case, Kiobel v Royal Dutch Petroleum. The firm also has a strong record of amicus curiae briefs. The firm’s national appellate practice is particularly strong in Chicago, New York, Washington DC, and along the West Coast. Recent clients include Google, Oracle and Yahoo!. Daniel Bromberg and Margaret Caruso are well known in Silicon Valley; and Kathleen Sullivan Sandy Weisburst, Christine Chung, Adam Abensohn, and Andy Schapiro are recommended in New York.

Although it has no dedicated practice, clients recommend Sullivan & Cromwell LLP as an ‘outstanding’ firm for appellate work. One client enthuses: ‘They are great lawyers, they’re incredibly knowledgeable, it is the most prompt and responsive firm I have worked with, and it makes the right strategic calls.’ Among individual attorneys, clients variously praise Robert Giuffra as ‘a tireless worker, brilliant writer, creative thinker, and great tactician’); Rodgin Cohen, ‘perhaps the preeminent banking lawyer in the US’; and Matthew Schwartz for his ‘fantastic brief-writing and strategic positioning’. The firm represents Microsoft in numerous appeals as part of its ongoing antitrust litigation against Novell. The firm also acted for Banco Central de la República Argentina to secure a Second Circuit ruling entitling the bank to immunity in respect of accounts under the Foreign Services Immunities Act.

Vinson & Elkins L.L.P. has both Supreme Court and appellate expertise. Houston-based Marie Yeates is arguably the firm’s most prominent lawyer, and recently completed her 100th oral argument in Occidental Permian, Ltd. v Marcia Full French et al before the Eleventh Circuit. John Elwood in Washington DC has a constitutional law practice, and he obtained a victory before the US Supreme Court for Nevada Commission on Ethics in Nevada Commission on Ethics v Michael A Carrigan, a case involving First Amendment issues surrounding government officials’ voting rights. Thomas Leatherbury worked successfully for the Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth in a landmark matter about church assets, and is recommended, as is Gwen Samora. Another major client is Playboy, for which the firm recently achieved a major victory reversing an adverse multimillion-dollar verdict in a Texas state appeals court.

Williams & Connolly LLP was founded by well-known Supreme Court litigator Edward Bennett and it retains this core strength under the current guidance of the prolific Kannon Shanmugam, who recently won a landmark case before the US Supreme Court during his pro bono representation of Juan Smith in Smith v Cain, in which he was comprehensively involved at the merits, briefing and oral argument phases. The 8-1 win was a victory for defendants’ rights to due process. Shanmugam also argued before the Eleventh Circuit representing the plaintiff’s claims under the Alien Tort Statute against former President of Bolivia, Gonzalo Sánchez de Lozada. Outlining the firm’s depth at the appellate level, F Lane Heard III argued the procedure-related case of Rick v Wyeth before the Eighth Circuit, and Paul Mogin featured in United States v Ford before the Sixth Circuit, a case about the jurisdiction of the federal false statements statute. Both attorneys are highly regarded.

‘Outstanding in every respect’, Winston & Strawn LLP is particularly well known for business litigation. Its recently founded appellate group is already arguing Caraco Pharmaceuticals Labs v Novo Nordisk A/S, its sixth case before the US Supreme Court. That matter involves issues of competition between generic and proprietary pharmaceuticals manufacturers, and the firm is considered to be ‘one of the best’ for Hatch-Waxman litigation. The firm also represented Grant Thornton in litigation following the discovery of Refco’s criminal fraud. In that instance, the firm achieved dismissal of a $2bn trustee suit before the Second Circuit and the New York Court of Appeals, and established a critical new accountant liability precedent. In May 2012, Adam Kaiser and Jeffrey Kessler joined from Dewey & LeBoeuf LLP.

Cravath, Swaine & Moore LLP is known for its ‘incredible strategic and creative thinking, unparalleled responsiveness, and on-the-mark advice’. Evan Chesler, Richard Clary, Robert Baron, and Sandra Goldstein all have superb reputations. Anthony Ryan, who has ‘very good technical strengths in the areas of accounting and auditing standards’, represented PwC in a slew of courts in Teachers’ Retirement System of Louisiana, et al v PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, et al. This included a derivative action brought by AIG shareholders against PwC, and an action filed under California’s Unfair Competition Law. In each of these aspects, the firm was successful. Another important client is Barnes & Noble, which Goldstein’s team successfully defended in a challenge to a ‘poison pill’ rights plan designed to protect shareholders from billionaire investor Ron Burkle’s rapid accumulation of the company.

Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP’s New York office handles complex litigation and is fully capable of undertaking appeals despite the lack of a formal appellate practice. Mary Kay Vyskocil made a successful oral argument before the New York appellate division on behalf of United States Fidelity and Guaranty, achieving an award of $420m for the client as well as a further $47m in post-judgment monies. In another highlight, the renowned Barry Ostrager represented Washington International Insurance in an appeal before the Federal Circuit in a high-profile customs bond dispute. Other clients include Blackstone, RBS and DISH Network.