The Legal 500

Gibson Dunn is ‘at the top of the list’ when it comes to its experience in US Supreme Court and appellate matters. Its track record speaks volumes: in the past three years, the firm’s ‘top-notch lawyers with a keen focus on client service’ have won eight out of ten cases, and have persuaded the Court to grant more than 30% of certoriari petitions in the past five years. For the 2010 term (starting October 1, 2010), the firm remarkably had five cases on the docket. Perhaps most notable among these was Wal-Mart v Dukes, the largest employment class action in US history, involving over 1.5m plaintiffs. Renowned advocate Theodore Boutrous is representing Wal-Mart in the case, which will assess whether the claims by the individual employees may be combined as a class action. The diverse nature of its caseload is illustrative of the firm’s broad expertise, with cases including a patent dispute where Thomas Hungar is representing Microsoft (Microsoft v i4i), and a securities dispute where Mark Perry is representing Janus Capital (Janus Capital Group, Inc v First Derivative Traders). The two remaining cases (Cigna Corp v Amara, and Mayo Foundation for Medical Education & Research v United States) are being led by Theodore Olson, the esteemed former solicitor general, who led one of the most significant victories in the 2009 term, acting for Citizens United to invalidate provisions in the McCain-Feingold Act that had restricted corporate and union expenditures on political speech. Highlights in the lower appellate courts include winning significant decisions in favor of Chevron in its titanic environmental dispute with Ecuadorian plaintiffs.

Mayer Brown’s undisputed position as a pioneer in US Supreme Court and appellate litigation stretches back to 1982 when Stephen Shapiro, regarded by some as ‘the best US Supreme Court advocate in the country’, founded this dedicated practice. Shapiro is ‘a brilliant strategist, has a keen analytical mind and the ability to write in an incredibly clear, persuasive and compelling way’. This ‘excellent’ and ‘very deep’ team now has 55 attorneys where the ‘bench strength is a never-ending parade of the best and the brightest’, including four former deputy solicitors general, and three former assistants to the solicitor general. Kenneth Geller is ‘a great asset’, while Evan Tager, Dan Himmelfarb and Andrew Tauber ‘combine scarily smart legal minds and outstanding communication skills with pleasing styles’. Timothy Bishop is ‘superb and provides exemplary service’, Andrew Pincus is an ‘excellent US Supreme Court oralist’, and Andrew Frey provides ‘a razor sharp intellect and sees legal issues in a clear and simple way. His ability to boil a legal issue down to its core is exceptional’. In the 2008 and 2009 terms, the firm argued eight cases before the US Supreme Court, and is scheduled for four more in the 2010 term. One of these is AT&T Mobility LLC v Concepcion, where the firm is representing AT&T in a matter that could have a huge bearing on other class actions or class arbitrations, as it will consider whether the Federal Arbitration Act preempts California’s Discover Bank rule on class waivers. Another case is for CSX Transportation, which will decide whether the Federal Employers’ Liability Act requires a plaintiff to prove proximate causation, a question of critical importance to the railroad industry that has long divided the lower courts. Other major clients include Altria Client Services (Philip Morris), which it is representing across a swathe of tobacco-related litigation; American Honda Motor; and Medtronic Inc.

Sidley Austin LLP’s litigators are ‘top shelf’, and ‘their strategic advice on US Supreme Court practice is worth its weight in gold’. According to one impressed client, ‘they deliver extraordinarily valuable legal advice and assistance. Their writing is so good that it makes me envious that I’m not that smart’. The firm’s partners are highly respected, most notably Carter Phillips, ‘one of the top US Supreme Court advocates in the country’ who ‘does not need recommendation. The weight of his experience and reputation before the Court is his calling card’. Another client favorite is Virginia Seitz, who is ‘brilliant and perceptive, and so warm and personable. She turns briefs around faster than anyone I have ever worked with’. The practice, which includes 15 former Supreme Court clerks, had four cases on the docket for the 2010 term. One of these was Kasten v Saint-Gobain Performance Plastics Corp, where Phillips argued for Saint-Gobain that an oral complaint of a violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act does not trigger the statute’s anti-retaliation provision. In the 2009 term, the group earned a significant victory for Duke Energy Carolinas and the Catawba River Water Supply Project in South Carolina v North Carolina. In this case, the Court held that the clients are entitled to intervene in a major dispute between the two states over apportionment of the waters of the Catawba River. This is the first time the Court has allowed a private party to intervene in an equitable apportionment action in an original jurisdiction case. On the appellate side, the firm won a key victory for Cinergy Corporation at the Seventh Circuit in United States v Cinergy Corp, which ended the country’s long-running enforcement suit against the client and will have a significant impact on the enforcement of the Clean Air Act.

WilmerHale’s ‘excellent’ practice is ‘among the very best’, and in group chair Seth Waxman, who has delivered 56 oral arguments in the US Supreme Court and is a former solicitor general, it has one of the most highly regarded advocates in the US. In the 2009 term, it won a landmark US Supreme Court victory for Odfjell SE and parcel tanker owners in Stolt-Nielsen v AnimalFeeds International Corp, where the Court held that a party may not be compelled under the Federal Arbitration Act to submit to class arbitration unless stipulated by contract. On the appellate front, the firm had an impressive 2010. Successes included the Ninth Circuit’s reversal and dismissal of an accounting and financial fraud conviction against former McAfee CFO, Prabhat Goyal. The firm also helped TiVo Inc win its long-running patent infringement case against EchoStar Communications, which affirmed a district court order finding EchoStar in contempt for violating a permanent injunction, and ordering it to pay over $300m in damages, sanctions and attorney’s fees. The firm, which has a particularly strong following in the life sciences and technology sectors, also achieved significant appellate rulings for Xilinx, in a tax appeal, and Medtronic Inc.

Covington & Burling LLP’s highly rated practice is headed by Robert Long, who is ‘outstanding as both a strategist and an advocate’. The practice includes a former federal court of appeals judge, Michael Chertoff; a former federal district judge, Roderick McKelvie; and six former assistants to the solicitor general and 17 former Supreme Court clerks. The practice argued three cases in the US Supreme Court in the 2009 term, with the highly experienced Gregg Levy representing the National Football League (NFL) in American Needle, Inc v National Football League. This high-profile antitrust case questioned whether the NFL and its member franchises operate as a single entity immune from antitrust liability when collectively licensing their intellectual property for use by third parties. Although the ruling was in favor of American Needle, the firm’s representation is indicative of its standing. In the ERISA-related case, Sally L Conkright, et al v Paul J Frommert, et al, the firm represented Xerox following two adverse decisions in the Second Circuit. The case was eventually remanded to the original district court for further proceedings consistent with the US Supreme Court’s decision in reviewing it. On the appellate side, the firm achieved a major victory for Eli Lilly when the Second Circuit reversed certification of a class action seeking $7.7bn in damages for alleged RICO statute violations, after third-party payers such as insurers claimed they had overpaid for the prescription drug Zyprexa. The decision is expected to end class claims of this type against the pharmaceutical industry.

Jenner & Block LLP’s practice is very well respected, with clients praising a team that ‘operates at the highest professional level and gets results’. Despite the 2009 departure of former group head Donald Verrilli to become Associate US Deputy Attorney General (currently the presidential nominee for the post of US Solicitor General), the practice remains active on leading cases. Now under the guidance of the experienced Paul Smith, in the US Supreme Court’s 2010 term the practice represented the respondents in Schwarzenegger v Entertainment Merchants Association, an important First Amendment case relating to the sale of violent video games to minors. It also acted for General Dynamics in General Dynamics v US, a case consolidated with Boeing Co v US, considering the issue of whether the government has the right to litigate claims against clients denied defense on grounds of state-secrets privilege. In the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, Susan Kohlmann led a team in successfully defending the Estate of Elaine Steinbeck, widow of the author John Steinbeck, against challenges made by his surviving son (of an earlier marriage) and a granddaughter, for the IP rights to his works.

Jones Day’s ‘excellent’ issues and appeals practice is headed by Glen Nager and is staffed by top-quality lawyers across the US, with the appellate side of the practice especially well regarded. Recently it successfully represented JPMorgan Chase Bank in a federal breach of contract case against the US government, in which the Court upheld a $356m damages award to the client that could potentially increase by another $200m. The firm also obtained three favorable decisions in the 2009 term of the US Supreme Court. Representing Free Enterprise Fund and Beckstead and Watts LLP in Free Enterprise Fund v Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, the firm convinced the Court to invalidate a key provision of the 2002 Sarbanes-Oxley Act. In American Needle, Inc v National Football League, the Court ruled in favor of the firm’s client American Needle by ruling that the NFL’s conduct is subject to scrutiny under antitrust laws. In Weyhrauch v United States, the team won a ruling in favor of Bruce Weyhrauch, a former Alaska state representative accused of federal fraud. Donald Ayer, Michael Carvin, Craig Stewart and Edwin Fountain are recommended.

Washington DC litigation boutique Kellogg, Huber, Hansen, Todd, Evans & Figel, P.L.L.C. is extremely well regarded for its US Supreme Court and appellate work. One recent US Supreme Court highlight was the successful representation of investors in Jones v Harris Associates LP, in which the clients challenged excessive fees charged by a mutual fund investment adviser. The case had initially been dismissed, but the US Supreme Court unanimously vacated the lower court’s judgment in its interpretation of the fiduciary duty of the defendant. In Wyeth v Levine, the firm had the plaintiff’s judgment reaffirmed against the drug manufacturer and persuaded the Court to reject the defendant’s claim that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)’s approval of drug labeling provided federal preemption of failure to warn lawsuits. Michael Kellogg and David Frederick are outstanding for appellate and US Supreme Court cases, respectively.

King & Spalding LLP offers ‘outstanding, top-notch work: creative, thoughtful strategy and excellent writing’. Jeffrey Bucholtz, a former acting assistant attorney general, is ‘an extremely intelligent and thoughtful lawyer; outstanding in every way’. Ashley Parrish, who joined from Kirkland & Ellis LLP, is also considered ‘an intelligent, hardworking attorney with a strong base of experience. His ability to present complex technical and legal materials and arguments is a particular strength’. Daryl Joseffer, who joined the firm in 2009 after serving as Deputy Solicitor General, is ‘clearly a rising star’. Recent highlights include representing the National Rifle Association at oral argument in McDonald v Chicago, and filing an amicus curiae brief for 58 US Senators and 251 Representatives in support of the petitioners. The Court eventually found in favor of the client that the constitutional right of an individual to keep and bear arms is incorporated by the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and applies to the states. In Philip Morris v Jackson, the firm was principal US Supreme Court counsel for one of the petitioners, RJ Reynolds Tobacco Company, and has also been retained by Philip Morris to advise on US Supreme Court proceedings.

Kirkland & Ellis LLP has established an excellent reputation for high-stakes appellate work, and the ability to argue effectively before the US Supreme Court. This specialist group neatly complements the firm’s outstanding litigation team. Notable recent successes include representing The Dow Chemical Company and Rockwell International in a Tenth Circuit appeal against a $926m toxic tort judgment. The clients had been operating a nuclear weapons facility near Denver, Colorado, and local property owners claimed that plutonium emissions had contaminated their property. The Tenth Circuit ultimately reversed the judgment. Another highlight was acting for Teva Pharmaceuticals in an appeal challenging the FDA’s interpretation and application of the 180-day generic marketing exclusivity provisions of the Hatch-Waxman Act. Former Supreme Court clerk Christopher Landau is ‘likeable and friendly’ and ‘very well prepared’; he is ‘very knowledgeable about the inner workings of the Court’, and ‘respectful and engaging with the justices; he does not have a “Supreme Court” ego’. Richard Godfrey, Patrick Philbin and Mike Shumsky are also recommended.

‘The results have been outstanding’ at Latham & Watkins LLP, which boasts an ‘exceptional’ team of US Supreme Court and appellate lawyers. While the esteemed Maureen Mahoney is less busy with the fee-earning side of the practice, global chair Gregory Garre, a former solicitor general, has now settled in after joining the practice in late 2009. Garre’s track record in the US Supreme Court is enviable, having argued 30 cases and lost only four. At the US Supreme Court, the firm’s success for Monsanto in Monsanto Co v Geertson Seed Farms was a major highlight. In this case, the firm won a ruling that the Ninth Circuit was wrong in affirming a broad-based nationwide injunction against the planting of genetically engineered alfalfa. The firm also secured a US Supreme Court victory for University of California Hastings College of the Law in Christian Legal Society v Martinez. This case related to the college’s decision to refuse registered status to the Christian Legal Society on the grounds that it discriminated against students who refused to affirm a statement of religious beliefs or who engaged in unrepentant homosexual conduct. The US Supreme Court ultimately upheld the constitutionality of the college’s policy. In addition to Garre, Richard Bress and Scott Ballenger are also highly recommended. While the core group is based in Washington DC, clients also praise the ‘fantastic’ Kristine Wilkes in San Diego.

Morrison & Foerster LLP’s four-partner practice provides an ‘excellent’ level of service, ‘timely advice and an excellent work product’, and is particularly strong on the appellate side. The group is chaired by Deanne Maynard, who joined from the solicitor general’s office in 2009, and also includes Brian Matsui in Washington DC and former appellate judge Miriam Vogel in Los Angeles. Clients also recommend Seth Galanter for being ‘responsive to client questions and top notch in his research and writing skills. Also his oral advocacy is excellent’. Highlights included representing Ralphs Grocery Company in the California Court of Appeal in winning its bid to stop a union from picketing on its private property, a victory for California retailers as a whole. The firm also successfully represented Gap in the Ninth Circuit in a case pertaining to a data security breach involving the theft of two laptop computers from one of Gap’s third-party vendors; the verdict confirmed that companies may not be held liable for inadvertent releases of personal information.

O’Melveny & Myers LLP is highly recommended for its US Supreme Court and appellate capabilities. The ‘terrific’ Walter Dellinger is one of the most experienced advocates in the market, while Sri Srinivasan – who has argued 17 US Supreme Court cases, including five in the past two terms – has quickly established himself as one of the very best of the new generation. One client, who watched Srinivasan represent a rival, says ‘I saw him argue and was completely impressed by his presence, sense of engagement with the judges, ability to think on his feed, and his sense of humor’. Jonathan Hacker is also ‘among the very best’. One of the firm’s biggest recent highlights was its representation of former Enron CEO Jeffrey Skilling in successfully petitioning the US Supreme Court for a review of his convictions. Following a unanimous ruling, the firm can now return to the lower courts to argue that Skilling’s remaining 19 convictions should be overturned. The firm achieved another unanimous ruling in the US Supreme Court for Hertz, in a case that establishes an important diversity jurisdiction standard. Elsewhere, in the Court of Appeal for the Ninth Circuit, the firm represented ACE Property and Casualty Insurance Co in winning its dispute with Hewlett-Packard, thereby reversing a $51m judgment made against its client.

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP has made a very good name for itself in US Supreme Court and appellate matters, not least through the ‘excellent’ Kathleen Sullivan, who is ‘a top-notch litigator’. Daniel Bromberg, Sandy Weisburst, Susan Estrich and Charles Verhoeven are also recommended. In the US Supreme Court, Sullivan and Bromberg achieved a victory for Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha (K Line), after the Court held unanimously that ocean carriers such as K Line are not subject to the Carmack Amendment, which governs domestic rail and motor carrier transportation, when they provide intermodal “through” transportation. Another major result came in the Second Circuit, which unanimously reversed a district court’s dismissal of claims to the Stolichnaya vodka trade mark by the firm’s client, Federal Treasury Enterprise Sojuzplodoimport, which is an agency of the Russian Federation.

Since the Washington DC-based litigation boutique of Robbins, Russell, Englert, Orseck, Untereiner & Sauber was founded in 2001, its attorneys have argued prolifically in the US Supreme Court, achieving 36 wins from 45 cases. Recent matters include representing the respondents in Monsanto Co v Geerston Seed Farms, regarding Monsanto’s ultimately successful challenge to a nationwide injunction against the planting of genetically engineered alfalfa. While the injunction was reversed, the Court justified this by stating that the clients’ interests were sufficiently protected by other relief that Monsanto did not challenge. The firm also regularly represents the US Chamber of Commerce in filing amicus briefs, most recently in the cases of Jeffrey K Skilling v United States; Delbert Williamson, et al v Mazda Motor of America, Inc; and AT&T Mobility LLC v Vincent Concepcion and Liza Concepcion. The hugely experienced Roy Englert is considered ‘one of the finest litigators of his generation’, while Mark Stancil and Lawrence Robbins are also highly recommended.

Winston & Strawn LLP’s seven-partner appellate and critical motions group, which is split between Washington DC and Chicago, divides its work between appeals and trials. The group has been representing Grant Thornton and other professional services firms as defendants in litigation stemming from the collapse of the brokerage giant Refco amid allegations of fraud. The New York Court of Appeals accepted the defendants’ position on all issues. The firm also won an important appeal for Hyundai in the Federal Circuit relating to the patentability of web-related technology. Hyundai was exposed to a $70m liability during the appeal and was up against a patent holding company controlled by the so-called “patent troll”, Erich Spangenberg. This was the first time a defendant successfully established on appeal the invalidity of one of Spangenberg’s patents. Gene Schaerr heads the group, which recently promoted Geoffrey Eaton to partner and was expanded by the recruitment of Elizabeth Papez, a former clerk to Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas.

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP’s team remains in very capable hands under Patricia Millett – who has argued 28 US Supreme Court and 30 appellate courts – following Thomas Goldstein’s return to his former firm, Goldstein, Howe & Russell, P.C.. During the 2009 term, the firm presented oral arguments in three cases: Hamilton v Lanning; United States v Stevens; and Samantar v Yousuf. In appeals, the firm successfully represented United Technologies in a dispute with the US Department of Defense over the proposed publication of quality control documents.

Cravath, Swaine & Moore LLP’s ‘expertise in litigation matters is deep and the lawyers are remarkably adept at wrapping their minds around highly technical problems. Response is quick, thoughtful and polished’. The firm’s appellate capability forms part of its ‘excellent’ litigation department, whose lawyers have very impressive track records in the appellate courts. These include Evan Chesler, Richard Clary, Rowan Wilson, the ‘experienced, hardworking and responsive’ Antony Ryan, and Robert Baron. Highlights for 2010 included representing Shell at the Second Circuit in its defense against a putative class action suit brought by former residents of the Ogoni region of Nigeria, who argue the company aided and abetted the Nigerian government’s alleged suppression of the Ogoni resistance movement. The Second Circuit panel ruled in favor of Shell, holding that all of the plaintiffs’ claims must be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, since corporations cannot be held liable under the Alien Tort Statute for alleged violations of customary international law.

Dewey & LeBoeuf LLP’s busy appellate practice is co-chaired by ‘highly knowledgeable’ global litigation head Jeffrey Kessler. While the focus is primarily on the appellate side, the firm also has US Supreme Court experience and filed an amicus brief for players associations of the NFL, NHL and NBA, which supported the NFL’s stance in American Needle, Inc v National Football League. Ralph Ferrara is also experienced in the US Supreme Court, having argued five cases there. In appellate matters, the firm fields specialists by sector, including Kessler for antitrust and international arbitration appeals, as well as sports and entertainment matters; Harvey Kurzweil for securities litigation and corporate governance issues; and the ‘brilliant’ Alan Salpeter for class action litigation and disputes involving large groups. IP cases are led by Henry Bunsow, who was recruited from Howrey LLP prior to its dissolution.

Formed in 1981, Farr & Taranto is a small but very well regarded appellate law boutique, ably led by its two name partners H Bartow Farr and Richard Taranto, both of whom are former assistants to the solicitor general. The firm regularly represents private individuals, state governments and commercial clients, and has a strong track record in antitrust, patent and constitutional law. While the firm cannot handle the same volume of cases that most others in the rankings can, its reputation is excellent.

McDermott Will & Emery LLP’s practice co-heads Miller Baker and Rory Little are both highly recommended. Respectively based in Washington DC and Silicon Valley, Baker and Little (and their wider team) offer extensive experience around the state and federal circuits. Among recent highlights, the firm represented Cisco Systems and 32 other affected multinationals in filing amicus briefs in support of Xilinx’s Ninth Circuit petition in Xilinx v Commissioner of Internal Revenue. The panel ultimately reversed its own decision in the tax dispute, and adopted the arguments of Xilinx and the amici led by Cisco, thereby saving the clients billions of dollars.

Morgan Lewis’ appellate group is jointly headed by the highly regarded Houston-based partners Ted Cruz and Allyson Ho, and Thomas Peterson in San Francisco. The firm has had a good run in the US Supreme Court recently, and is representing Groupe SEB in Global Tech v SEB, a major IP case concerning the standards of intent required for inducement to infringe a patent. The firm also represented USA Funds in USA Funds v Espinosa, a case addressing the circumstances in which student loans may be discharged in bankruptcy. One of the most prominent cases was the pro bono case of Thompson v Connick, et al, the concluding installment of litigation that had spanned two decades and been made into a movie. This matter concerned John Thompson, for whom the firm had won numerous stays of execution and the dismissal of a robbery conviction that had been used by prosecutors in a murder case that landed him on death row. Following a full acquittal, the firm achieved a $14m damages judgment for the client against the Orleans Parish District Attorney’s Office. Gordon Cooney and Michael Banks led the case.

Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP is ‘excellent’, with its ‘outstanding’ lawyers being ‘imaginative, pro-active, knowledgeable and timely’. In particular, group head Joshua Rosenkranz is ‘an excellent orator, strong strategist, and overall an outstanding advocate’, while Richard Mark and Daniel Thomasch are also recommended. The firm successfully appealed for MGA Entertainment in its titanic “Barbie Wars” dispute with Mattel over the Bratz brand of dolls. After the lower courts transferred the rights to the entire $1bn-a-year Bratz brand to Mattel and prohibited MGA from further production, Rosenkranz argued the case before the Ninth Circuit, which overturned the ruling and erased Mattel’s $100m jury verdict on damages. The case has now been remanded to the district court to address errors in the original ruling.

Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker LLP is preeminent in employment law appeals, where practice co-chair Paul Cane has an excellent reputation. One of the practice’s biggest highlights was Sprint v Mendelsohn before the US Supreme Court, in which Cane achieved a unanimous victory for Sprint Nextel in an age discrimination case. In California, the firm acted for a subsidiary of Sun Microsystems to overturn a $12.9m verdict in a wrongful termination case, where the plaintiff was ultimately ordered to pay $110,000 in fees and costs. Cane’s fellow co-chair Stephen Kinnaird has a more general commercial disputes practice and is also extremely well regarded. He appeared before the US Supreme Court in a pro bono case arguing on behalf of Jose Padilla, a Honduran national resident in the US for 40 years, who was being subjected to mandatory deportation after pleading guilty to state drug offences on the erroneous advice of his attorney. The US Supreme Court ruled that a criminal defendant has a Sixth Amendment right to competent advice about the deportation consequences of a guilty plea, which would entitle Padilla to withdraw his guilty plea.

Proskauer Rose LLP is another firm with an excellent reputation for employment disputes, an area where practice co-head Edward Brill holds sway, although its expertise goes well beyond the confines of one sector. Clients say that ‘the level of service in all areas is outstanding’, and co-head Mark Harris is an ‘excellent brief writer and, from the client perspective, is very responsive and easy to work with. Mark is an outstanding oral advocate’. Acting alongside Charles Sims and Jon Baumgarten, Harris won a significant US Supreme Court victory for Reed Elsevier in Reed Elsevier Inc et al v Muchnick et al. In this long-running litigation, freelance authors and their organizations sued the client and other defendants in copyright infringement class actions concerning the republishing of articles. The Court ultimately overruled more than 200 lower court cases by ruling that copyright registration is not jurisdictional.

Sullivan & Cromwell LLP does not have a standalone appellate group, but many of its top litigators combine ‘outstanding’ appellate expertise with sector-specific knowledge, and 14 are former Supreme Court clerks. For example, some clients regard Richard Urowsky as ‘the most knowledgeable lawyer on antitrust matters in the US’. This expertise was brought to bear when Urowsky represented Tenaris and Maverick Tube Corporation in a major dispute arising out of Tenaris’ acquisition of Maverick. The Second Circuit ultimately upheld the district court’s decision that the acquisition did not trigger a public acquirer change of control provision. Brendan Cullen and Garrard Beeney are also recommended.

In 2009, Vinson & Elkins L.L.P. recruited John Elwood, a former assistant to the solicitor general, thus significantly strengthening its base in Washington DC and augmenting the firm’s ‘elite’ Texas-based practice. Practice co-head Marie Yeates in Houston is ‘an excellent appellate lawyer with a proven track record’, while Gwendolyn Samora is recommended for her ‘outstanding judgment and experience’, and co-chair Thomas Leatherbury is also highly recommended. A major highlight for the team was representing Fluor Corporation in obtaining appellate reversal of a $100m judgment against it. Vinson & Elkins L.L.P. was not involved in the original trial, but was brought in for the appeal and has been appointed as trial counsel for the retrial.

Williams & Connolly LLP is a Washington DC-based firm with an excellent reputation across most areas of litigation, and its US Supreme Court and appellate team is a core component in this, allowing it to take cases throughout the court system from beginning to end. The ‘up-and-coming’ Kannon Shanmugan is a former assistant to the solicitor general who receives good reviews from clients and peers alike. Shanmugan’s arrival in 2009 represented the first time the firm had laterally recruited a partner in 22 years. Since then, the team has been involved in several major cases argued before the US Supreme Court, including Merck & Co v Reynolds and Textron v US.