The Legal 500

The problem for any law firm seeking to gain an advantage in the energy arena lies partly in the long-term unpredictability of the sector itself. The litigation practice area is far from immune and practices built on long-standing models are changing in a number of ways.

Traditional upstream clients have long had to have a traceable trend towards familiar litigation scenarios, often depending on the price of oil and gas at any particular juncture. Leading firms, particularly the elite of the Houston market, have amassed legacy clients and are often their first port of call on these high stakes issues.

Transmission cases have often been less geographically restricted and much less consistent. The practices with the best records in this type of work are a more diverse assortment. Spin-off cases from the California refund litigation provide a solid source of work, although their number and profile is gradually diminishing. Thus, while the capacity to cater for downstream clients is a valuable asset to an energy practice, very few of the most successful practices have been able to build themselves around this type of work alone.

Regulatory litigation is a sought after capability, and a Washington DC presence has a distinct advantage when dealing with matters before the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). Several local firms have thrived on a flow of regular work, particularly from pipeline companies, and often with an international tilt.

The sharp distinction between these and the upstream powerhouses makes head-to-head comparisons difficult. However, as each practice seeks to grow and take on a wider variety of work, the distinctions between upstream and downstream orientated practices has become less clear.

Another such area is enforcement. The rising volume of enforcement mandates and high-profile cases involving the resolution of allegations of market manipulation, for example, has become a key concern for leading outfits. This type of work suits those practices with resources in white-collar and investigations and those firms that have been efficient in addressing this area of the market have reaped benefits.

Thus, a variety of models have been successful across this practice area, although there is a common thread of having a deep bench of trial experts and a prominent degree of regulatory expertise.

While many firms have outstanding energy practices and are able to support their transactional energy work with litigation services, this table addresses those practices that have been able to adapt and specialize in litigating cutting edge cases in the energy industry. As one client puts it: ‘When we look for outside counsel to tackle a specific dispute or regulatory matter, there are only a few firms that have the depth of industry knowledge required’.

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

PRACTICE: Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP has consistently been able to do what very few other practices have and that is win a remarkable volume of high stakes, high profile mandates across the pipeline, traditional oil and gas, and electric industries cross-section. Furthermore, its depth of expertise working on FERC and Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) matters is unsurpassed. ‘It is the only firm where we’re prepared to pay the top dollar, because it’s known to be the best, not just in any particular jurisdiction, but in the country’, say clients.

Based in Washington DC, one of the great achievements of the group has been the structure it has been able to grow around; a model that has encouraged a geographical flexibility and a wide pool of resources out of its Texas and West Coast offices. So while the practice’s origins are similar to several of the Washington DC outfits, it often competes in areas traditionally dominated by Houston firms. One client remarks on its ‘capability, wisdom and depth in all the areas of energy law’.

‘Unquestionably the sharpest team in the country...truly impressive’, states one client, the department includes several highly respected trial lawyers. The integration of this wealth of talent into a regulatory setup studded with ex-FERC members and one of the leading government investigations practices has resulted in a model that has kept the group at the pinnacle of the market.

Recent mandates with Entergy are an example of the group’s ability to draw on the necessary experience to get results in a variety of settings. The team represented the Entergy Nuclear Operations before the FERC and at the US Court of Appeals for the DC circuit. addressing station power issues, whilst counselling Entergy Services in the litigation before FERC regarding production cost allocations among its regulated utility subsidiaries.

Looking at the high visibility cases of alleged market manipulation that has been one of the cornerstones of the work the group has done in 2008-09, ongoing engagements with Energy Transfer Partners continue to stand out. The practice was able to put into action what clients describe as ‘an incredible potency of dispute resolution capabilities; it gave the kind of coverage and access to expertise that mark them out from everyone else’. In particular, the practice advised on a ground-breaking market manipulation enforcement proceeding before the FERC and in numerous civil actions with private plaintiffs in Texas state and federal courts, a mandate that serves as a sharp distinction from those firms with weaker enforcement and litigation practices.

CLIENTS: Clients include Exelon, Entergy, Xcel Energy, Duke Energy, National Grid, Calpine, EDF, Allegheny Energy, Dynegy, Constellation, Hydro-Quebec and Portland General.

INDIVIDUALS: Clients are full of praise for practice head Clifford Naeve, to the extent where one says, ‘I think that any guide to the market would be incomplete without him - he is a giant’. ‘Among the best lawyers in the country’, say clients, former FERC commissioner Naeve ‘has seen every kind of case and has a great understanding of the different regulations that affect our business’.

Former FERC general counsel and chief of staff William Scherman is a partner blessed with a ‘a wide range of talents’, as a result clients ‘rarely use other firms for this work’. His regulatory understanding feeds into a diverse selection of work covering policy, transactions, litigation and appellate roles.

Scherman’s strength in enforcement representations has been essential to the practice’s recent progress, an area where John Estes is another prominent partner. Clients say of Estes and Scherman: ‘these professionals have demonstrated a great deal of dedication and commitment in relation to the matters handled for us’. Another client full of praise for the firm recognizes Estes as: ‘premium service, sure, but you do get what you pay for with individuals like John, unlike in plenty of other firms’.

These attorneys are all based in the Washington DC office.

Baker Botts, L.L.P.

PRACTICE: A major player in the energy space, Baker Botts, L.L.P.’s 40-strong global team is regularly instructed by some of the most significant clients in the industry. Ground has been gained on the top-tier by virtue of an increasingly sophisticated approach to market manipulation cases and the white-collar aspects of the practice.

‘A joy to work with’ and ‘part of an extremely good firm’, although the team lacks the breadth of coverage of the top-tier practice. The application it is able to bring to areas such as oil and gas litigation, and downstream commercial disputes is impressive and unsurpassed.

The group has been able to bring ‘a wonderful trial team’, as clients call it, to bear on several high profile cases recently. For example, it persuaded the Fourth Circuit to strike down local regulations designed to block the development of an LNG terminal on behalf of AES Sparrows Point. The practice also represented Marathon Petroleum in a putative class action alleging illegal tying, filed on behalf of 5,600 Marathon dealers.

Clients say of the practice that ‘it has consistently given a service that is far and away the best in the market because it has the best litigators and a tradition of giving its oil and gas clients huge wins’. Applying this reputation to downstream concerns such as market manipulation and transmission disputes, has been one of the main reasons for the team’s advancement in the market.

CLIENTS: Clients include Yemen Exploration and Petroleum, Coastal Habitat Alliance, Reliant Energy, CenterPoint Energy, FPL Energy Marketing and Weaver’s Cove Energy.

INDIVIDUALS: ‘One of the best energy litigators’, according to clients, practice group co-head J Gregory Copeland is ‘relentless in pursuing the best result for the client’. Although his experience is not limited to upstream representations, his extensive record of working with oil and LNG companies, including the likes of ExxonMobil and Marathon Oil, has been at the forefront of the practice’s activity.

His co-head Mark Robeck is someone of whom clients say they are ‘really satisfied with the service he’s provided over the years’. He handles a broad array of disputes including international arbitration and high stakes FERC investigations. Clients say he is ‘a great lawyer to have arguing your corner, you feel safe putting him in charge’.

Both Robeck and Copeland are based in Houston.

Elsewhere, Washington DC partner Randolph McManus ‘provides very sound and creative advice’, say clients. He is active in regulatory and transactional matters and regularly appears on high profile-matters before the FERC. One impressed client says that they’ve ‘been extremely happy with the work he’s done’.

Fulbright & Jaworski LLP

PRACTICE: A deep litigation practice has long been a characteristic of this Texas leviathan, as has its roots among the big upstream providers. Clients, however, point beyond this to the practice’s ‘responsive and shrewd knowledge of all facets of the power market’, traits which have engendered in them ‘a very high opinion of the way the practice has developed’.

The firm has long had market-leading experience across a range of dispute resolution scenarios and has built this into an international model. ‘well-staffed and well-organized’, the team has been engaged in a number of prominent energy-related disputes. For example, it advised Shell Oil and Pecten Orient in connection with disputed payments based on oil production and gas processing accounting issues under a service agreement with the Syrian National Petroleum Company.

However, this firm’s success in adapting to the changes in the industry and the impact this has had on litigation has been crucial to its current identity. Recently the practice represented Coral in prosecuting an action against a trading counterparty alleged that Coral should have delivered quantities of gas to it, despite force majeure events that disrupted the gas markets after hurricanes Rita and Katrina.

Described by clients as ‘a commanding authority on international disputes’, the team recently handled complex foreign trade issues on behalf of Canadian Energy, arising out of a termination of energy services.

The growing volume of market manipulation cases the team is undertaking and the establishment of an alternative energy group are further evidence that the team is one of the best positioned in the market. One client sums the team up as ‘worthy of respect for what it has always done and what it is capable of’.

CLIENTS: Clients include Enterprise Products, Cabot Oil and Gas, Kosmos Energy, Hillwood International, Canada Grande, Meridian Oil, Nova Scotia Power and Duke Energy.

INDIVIDUALS: Practice co-chair, managing partner of the Denver office Osborne Dykes is described by clients as ‘a special lawyer - one of a kind’. While his practice is not solely focused on energy representations, he is widely recognized as a ‘measured, precise litigator and a great reasoner’ and has frequently brought to bear his skills on behalf of the firm’s biggest energy clients.

Clients say his colleague in Houston, William Wood, is ‘a great lawyer with a great team behind him’. Indeed, ‘outstanding trial attorney’ Wood has a strong international facet to his work and continues a prolific streak of court representations on behalf of major upstream clients.

‘Terrific’, say clients, C Mark Baker also practices out of Houston and is co-head of the arbitration and alternative dispute resolution practice group. He is ‘very persuasive but suitably pragmatic’.

Sidley Austin LLP

PRACTICE: Sidley Austin LLP maintains the pressure on the top tier with an outstanding and diverse sequence of mandates, and a growth strategy that has begun to give it the scope to rival the market leaders. Clients say the practice is ‘tremendously reliable’, ‘excellent in execution’ and has ‘a high caliber of attorneys covering regulatory and commercial disputes’.

Having built a strong Washington DC offering, in part due to a history of working with Exxon (now ExxonMobil), the group has gone on to earn a reputation beyond its core expertise in pipeline representations. The recent addition of six partners from the now-dissolved Heller Ehrman firm, four of which have joined the San Francisco office, has given the litigation practice an extra dimension. This team’s history of working on high-profile rate cases for utilities is a considerable boost for a group seeking to broaden its range of services. .

As a whole, this ‘remarkably talented’ practice, maintains a stream of Washington DC-focused oil and gas work, including representing TransCanada’s Keystone Pipeline as defendant-intervenor in a suit brought by a national environmental organization. Elsewhere, the team worked with ExxonMobil on a recent series of defenses of three FERC orders as part of the long-running TAPS Quality Bank dispute. In these kinds of cases Sidley Austin LLP brings in a rounded package of respected trial lawyers and FERC veterans and is described by clients as ‘the one-stop shop’.

The surge of downstream work undertaken by the practice also benefits from this structuring of resources. This is exemplified by such recent work as major victories achieved by client Pacific Gas & Electric in the US appeal court concerning potential damages due companies from the government for partial breach of contract concerning nuclear waste storage.

Clients agree that the firm’s advancement in providing a range of sophisticated services makes it ‘a strong option’ and puts it ‘yards ahead of the competition, especially for regulatory matters’.

CLIENTS: Clients include TransCanada Pipelines, Alliance Pipeline, Flying J, Longhorn Pipeline, BP, Colonial Pipeline, CMS Energy, Exelon and Commonwealth Edison.

INDIVIDUALS: Practice group head Eugene Elrod has a heavy emphasis on FERC litigation. Clients describe him as ‘a rare breed of lawyer who can manage the business and legal requirements perfectly’, and say, ‘he’s one of the senior lawyers at the firm and he’s treated the roles we’ve given him in exemplary fashion’.

William Williams is a ‘wise counsel’ and clients ‘really recommend his services’. He is known for his representation of pipeline clients and recently worked on the Keystone oil pipeline project.

Both attorneys are based in Washington DC.

Steptoe & Johnson LLP

PRACTICE: Another practice staking a claim for significant market share in both upstream and downstream litigation, by virtue of an expanding and increasingly diversified practice, is the ‘exceptional’ Steptoe & Johnson LLP.

The framework of this Washington DC orientated group, which now houses 15 dedicated partners, has been constructed with the firm’s outstanding record of pipeline representations, ‘a lifetime of industry knowledge’ as one client puts it, in mind.

With Lon Bouknight rejoining the firm from Edison International and David Raskin and Doug Greens’ electric power practices continuing to gain in reputation, the transmission and utilities element of the practice has gone from strength to strength. Clients highlight the practice’s ‘adaptability, competency and common sense’ as important factors in the success of these disciplines at both state and federal level.

On the pipeline side, the team’s regulatory prowess is frequently called into action in conjunction with its litigation services. Recently the practice defended Mid-America Pipeline and Seminole Pipeline’s rates at the FERC against challenges brought by various shippers. Notably, this was the companies’ first-ever cost of service rate case and one that entailed several high-profile issues relating to FERC’s policies.

Elsewhere, general transmission work has often been overshadowed by cases relating to the California refund litigation, in which the firm has had a role on several mandates. However, recent work, such as the team’s successful defense of Edison Mission in two class action cases in the federal district court of Chicago involving allegations of pricing collusion, reinforces the claims of clients that ‘its lawyers are pre-eminent at tidying up complex cases’.

These talents manifest themselves in the range of cases the group undertakes, which, while not consistently as high profile as those run by the top tier firms, certainly demonstrates a significant depth of understanding. For instance, high-value rate cases are balanced with roles as trial counsel for Southern California Edison in defense of a major action filed by Native American tribes.

CLIENTS: Clients include American Electric Power, Chevron, Colonial Pipeline, Northeast Utilities, PacifiCorp, TEPPCO Partners, Duke Energy, Dominion Resources and ConocoPhillips.

INDIVIDUALS: Steven Brose is head of the regulatory and industry affairs department, and has extensive experience of representing pipeline clients in FERC matters, notably being a key figure on the TAPS regulatory and litigation proceedings. ‘Very articulate and responsive’, clients also praise his ability to ‘bring a perspective and an understanding of the business that we haven’t found anywhere else’.

Steven Reed has his share of high-profile pipeline representations. ‘When we’ve needed him he’s always been available and prompt in giving his advice’, say clients, who are able to call on him for FERC and appellate litigation, as well as providing advice on federal policy issues.

Although David Raskin shares a reputation for excellence in dealing with the federal commission, his focus is on the electric area; an approach which has been key to the balance of the practice. Clients recognize Raskin as ‘user-friendly’ and ‘really good for litigating on power and transmission cases - one of the best’.

The recommended attorneys are based in Washington DC.

Van Ness Feldman, P.C

PRACTICE: With five partners dedicated to energy litigation, the Van Ness Feldman, P.C Washington DC boutique loses little to its larger competitors in terms of the focus it puts on the different facets of the industry. Indeed, the breadth of this ‘tremendous’ practice’s activity in 2008 dispels any notion that its size is a constriction. The practice was recently bolstered by the arrival of Michael McBride from Dewey & LeBoeuf LLP in 2008, an expert in regulatory and litigation matters with a substantial environmental component to his practice.

The team naturally draws heavily from expertise in disputes relating to federal matters. Recently it represented the Resale Power Group of Iowa in an appeal from a district court decision in which it contended that the Federal Power Act pre-empted claims for unjust enrichment and tort. Elsewhere, the practice successfully litigated at an administrative proceeding to consolidate three different intrastate and interstate pipelines.

This ‘incredible rate of return on cases involving application of federal law’ has, over the past few years, been instrumental in the group’s growing reputation and its propensity to take on cases that deal with issues at the frontline of the industry. For example, it is advising a number of clients, including natural gas pipelines and marketers on enforcement matters, including those related to FERC’s recent regulations regarding market manipulation.

Although in some specialist areas, for example, pipeline work, the firm lacks the same history of representing industry leaders and the international capacity of some of its competitors, it remains, to many clients ‘the most efficient, price-sensitive and litigation enabled practice in the country’.

CLIENTS: Clients include PacifiCorp, Interstate Natural Gas Association of America, Rochester Public Utilities, Edison Electric Institute and Dominion Resources.

INDIVIDUALS: Experienced appellate lawyer Howard Shapiro ‘excels at each stage of the trial process’ and is ‘a very strategic, aware, and sharp litigator’, according to clients. His practice encompasses environmental and antitrust law, while his track record of acting before the FERC and the Supreme Court makes him an important asset to the group.

Paul Korman has acted for pipelines, natural gas producers and downstream companies in his career at the firm and has gained a reputation among clients for being ‘great at oral presentation and arguing in every setting imaginable’. Clients say of the pair that ‘they have a love of the law and a love of the area, which is transmitted in their work - which is in itself excellent’.

Both attorneys are based in the Washington DC office.

Bracewell & Giuliani LLP

PRACTICE: Litigation is a vital element of an energy practice that aligns a considerable volume of trial expertise in Texas with the regulatory muscle of a solid Washington DC practice. One client describes the Bracewell & Giuliani LLP team as able to ‘bring together all the pieces of the puzzle - they’ve always had the edge’, although market sources underline the extent to which the top-tier firms have a wider scope of engagement with the industry as a whole.

Natural Gas and LNG are fundamental industry areas where the team has long had a presence, but a glance at recent trial activity shows that it also has a flourishing reputation in the electric arena. For instance, the practice has been representing Powerex in a series of cases arising from the California energy crisis.

This flair for handling complex multi-jurisdictional matters is at its most apparent in the high-profile oil and gas work the team undertakes. Recently it applied its ‘hardworking attitude and winning approach’, to the latest in a history of acting on cases for Shell Oil. The team was involved in a recent arbitration proceeding that arose from Shell and Amoco’s sale of their oil and gas properties in the Permian Basin to Oxy. The case has been active since 2006 and was recently resolved by arbitration award.

The practice exhibits the ‘traits that mark it out from competitors: persistence, commitment and lots of litigation experience in the bank’, says one client.

CLIENTS: Clients include Midland Cogeneration Venture, Pennzoil Quaker-State Company, Vetco Grey, Enerplus Resources and Pride International.

INDIVIDUALS: Co-head of the energy regulatory group Charles Shoneman complements his impressive FERC practice with a history of representing clients in regulatory litigation and appellate matters. Clients say he is ‘dependable, intelligent and has access to a great reservoir of knowledge on the industry’. He also provides a valuable Washington DC presence to a group that has a significant weight of trial lawyers in Texas.

Head of that particular group is J Clifford Gunter III, who clients say ‘has a great way about him, he’s a really inspiring figure and definitely a tough litigator’. Given the broad outlook of his practice out of the Houston office, Gunter has been able, in 2008 alone, to act on cases ranging from traditional oil and gas disputes to securities litigation and appellate matters.

Described by clients as ‘the complete package’, partner Sandra Rizzo is another Washington DC lawyer with experience of regulatory proceedings. Her activity in the electricity field is highly regarded and she has a reputation for ‘putting in the extra mile for clients’.

Covington & Burling LLP

PRACTICE: At the cutting edge of regulatory litigation, while Covington & Burling LLP’s energy practice may lack the size, breadth of industry coverage and historical presence of some of its rivals, there are very few who match this Washington DC team’s focus on FERC matters.

‘Brilliant on any number of issues’, says one client, of its approach, the team is regularly instructed by pipeline, utility and financial clients acting in the energy sector.

In addition, roles on enforcement matters continue to be an area where the firm has been able to take advantage of depth of expertise in government investigations to guide several leading players on their compliance programs. The team advises a number of companies on FERC and CFTC compliance requirements regarding energy trading and has recently provided counsel on several non-public investigations with respect to alleged market manipulation. Clients point to the attorneys’ ‘exceptional understanding of federal policy’ as a fundamental advantage in this area.

Elsewhere, this ‘rock solid’ practice has had a hand in several high-profile cases in more traditional litigation, with particular success in the offshore oil and gas arena. For example, it acted for 11 oil companies against the US in an action for breach of multiple leases, resulting in the Court of Appeals awarding more than $1bn, one of the largest ever affirmed by the Federal Circuit.

CLIENTS: Clients include KKR, TPG, COMPETE Coalition, Edison Electric Institute, Electric Power Supply Association, Public Service Enterprise Group, Energy Future Holdings, Sempra Energy and San Diego Gas and Electric.

INDIVIDUALS: Ex-FERC commissioner William Massey has a practice that sits at the juncture of policy, legislative and regulatory affairs. His services come ‘highly recommended’ by clients who say he is ‘knowledgeable’ and ‘never lets you down’.

Of Counsel Robert Fleishman eclectic clients base includes utilities, pipelines and financial institutions with a stake in the energy industry. His work with Energy Transfer Partners and, elsewhere, representing Pacific Gas & Electric Company, as a mediator, are of particular note. Clients comment that ‘on energy matters, he provides exceptionally reliable service’.

Both attorneys are based in Washington DC.

Hogan & Hartson LLP

PRACTICE: The success of the Hogan & Hartson LLP energy practice in 2008 has seen big pipeline transactions and complex compliance mandates jostle for attention with the activities of the elements focused on contentious work.

Resources are accordingly spread to provide a large palette of services for energy clients and commentators commend the group for its versatility. Thus, the focus of the practice is less on acting on the most high profile mandates as it is on providing sound contentious support to clients across a broader range of work.

A deep FERC administrative practice and an impressive presence in the FERC enforcement space are pillars around which the group is able to build. Indeed, this expertise was acknowledged by one market source as ‘typically excellent; they are supremely familiar with this territory and the regulatory ins and outs’,

Pipeline representations continue to be at the forefront of the practice’s most widely recognized work. This has extended from long standing work with the likes of Chevron Pipeline in the TAPS rate litigation case, to large scale rate cases, such as acting for Gas Transmission Northwest before the FERC. LNG and gas storage matters also remain significant areas of focus.

This pairing of regulatory acumen and trial expertise makes the firm ‘a truly outstanding competitor in the energy space’ and has given it a wide base to grow from, having acted on major downstream cases, such as the El Paso litigation.

CLIENTS: Clients include California Independent System Operator, Louisiana Energy Services, SunEdison, DuQuesne Light, Bonneville Power, Nicor, Dominion Cove Point, Palomar Gas Transmission and TransCanada.

INDIVIDUALS: Kevin Lipson is ‘one of the very few names I trust for regulatory advice’, say clients. He is also ‘well-known for being among the elite operators in front of the commission’. His experience in the field, which includes acting on major upstream and downstream regulatory representations, coupled with a long list of roles at trial and appellate level makes him a key member of the practice.

King & Spalding

PRACTICE: A practice ‘blessed with some fantastic attorneys’, providing a ‘vital and essential service’, according to clients, King & Spalding is in a position to rival several of the leading Texas players.

Such is its depth of expertise in the oil and gas field that it has recently won mandates for Texaco, Chevron and ExxonMobil. Clients describe the practice’s efforts in this area as ‘exemplary application of strong legal talent’, an outlook that has seen it continue to act on a notably diverse assortment of cases for industry leaders.

Another facet of the practice that has risen recently is the Washington DC element. The arrival of partners Neil Levy, who now serves as global energy co-chair, David Tewkesbury and Bruce Richardson from Kirkland & Ellis LLP adds considerable regulatory and litigation skills to the armoury. This movement towards balancing the FERC-related side of the practice with the long established traditional oil and gas practice is seen in the market as an indication of the ambition of this group.

On the international front, the group, described by clients as ‘completely at home at co-ordinating overseas dispute resolution’, is well respected for its international arbitration practice. It has acted for Ocean Energy in an ICC arbitration in Paris against a West African government for breach of the taxation and stabilization clauses of a production sharing agreement, a case which sits next to an impressive volume of arbitrations in several of the most active jurisdictions.

CLIENTS: Clients include Sempra Energy, ChevronTexaco, Nebraska Public Power District, Georgia Gulf, BP and Shell.

INDIVIDUALS: Managing partner of the Houston office Robert Meadows is ‘a hard-working efficient attorney’ and has ‘prowess in the court’. He has a diverse caseload, although his capability to litigate on behalf of upstream clients in a range of settings is a consistent asset to the group.

Also based in Houston, R Doak Bishop, has an excellent reputation for the representation of energy clients in international cases. Clients cite his ‘willingness to work round the clock to get the result’ as an important trait.

Vinson & Elkins L.L.P.

PRACTICE: While there can be little doubting this huge Texan outfit’s capacity for handling prominent litigation, suggestions in the market that its focus might be leaning recently toward the transactional areas have seen the group concede profile in the cutting edge disputes that distinguishes the top-tier practices.

Work from the 2008/09 has featured high value, complex cases for several of the firm’s biggest clients and it’s here that the team adds value to the overall offering of its energy practice. Clients highlight the ‘peak performance and professionalism they bring to every role’; a quality that sets the group apart from many competitors, especially when put in the context of the international mandates itoften undertakes.

The practice recently lost partner Michael Mengis to Baker Hostetler. However, it still maintains an armoury of litigation talent, described by clients as ‘a complete set of exemplary trial lawyers’. This gives the group a depth of litigation capabilities and a familiarity with a diverse set of dispute resolution scenarios, for example acting for Shell International Exploration & Production on the dismissal of a trade secrets claim.

CLIENTS: Clients include Shell, Duke Energy, Perenco, Huntsman and Plains All-American Pipeline.

INIDIVIDUALS: Houston-based co-chairs James Daniel Thompson and Karl Stern, both of whom practice out of Houston, are described by clients as ‘complete professionals’ and ‘long standing advisors totally in touch with the concerns of the modern energy company’. Thompson’s trial experience and his reputation for defending major oil clients is a significant asset for the group. Stern, meanwhile, garners praise from clients for his ‘speed of thought and practical approach’.

White & Case LLP

PRACTICE: A massive international presence in the market for energy work, this dual-centred group of New York and Washington DC attorneys is developing a domestic practice with the capability to add to the firm’s reputation at home. One client assesses the team as ‘spectacular… a credit to the White & Case LLP brand’, pointing to the strides it has made since its growth spurt two years ago.

In the downstream market, the practice has been able to cast a wide net and currently represents leading energy marketers, transmission companies and generators. The renown the group’s leading attorneys have at FERC has been an important part of the service provided to these clients and those from a more diverse background who look to the firm for energy litigation needs, such as GE Energy Financial Services.

One case that underlines what clients refer to as ‘vision and class in front of the FERC’ is the recent successful defense of DTE Energy Trading in two disputes concerning a complaint filed before the commission by the Illinois Attorney General alleging market manipulation and collusion following a state retail electricity auction.

Clients in particular highlight the ‘great resourcefulness they possess and great attention to detail they’ve always brought to their work’, as well as being ‘astonishingly good in the courtroom’ - important traits considering that at three partners it is one of the smaller practices in the market.

Other high-profile litigation includes the representation of Occidental on a panoply of cases, including winning litigation with Entergy and the Louisiana Public Service Commission in the district court over pricing arrangements. In another instance the team represented the company before FERC and the US court of appeals on a matter involving Entergy’s system agreement.

CLIENTS: Clients include US Power Generating, New Harquahala Generating, Starwood Energy, El Paso Electric and Pacific Gas and Electric.

INDIVIDUALS: Earle O’Donnell heads up the energy practice and is, in the words of one client, ‘an organized leader who knows how to get the best out of his team’. His clients come from both domestic and overseas origins, and his work with downstream clients before the federal and state commissions is a core component of the practice’s capabilities.

Donna Attanasio recently represented El Paso Electric as part of a string of high profile cases before FERC.

Both O’Donnell and Attanasio form the core of the Washington DC part of the team, while partner Stuart Caplan provides expertise out of the New York office.

Gibbs & Bruns LLP

PRACTICE: Being one of the top litigation outfits in Texas confers a serious advantage in arguing commercial matters for upstream clients in particular and it’s here that clients identify Gibbs & Bruns LLP as ‘a first-choice team’.

The limitations of the firm’s boutique model does mean that it concentrates mainly on state and national commercial dispute resolution, often with a Texas slant to them. Within this bracket though, the practice is known by its clients as ‘simply the best’ and ‘a beacon of exemplary legal advice’; a testament to its trial record.

Recently the group has had its share of high profile energy industry cases. For example, it represented PGET Energy Trading Power in long standing related arbitration claims and counter claims against Southaven Power concerning the termination of two long-term gas supply agreements. Here, as in several of the practice’s most prominent cases, the ability to assemble teams with a wide array of dispute resolution talent has been a key factor in its success.

Another example of far reaching activity has been the work with Frontera Resources in an international arbitration involving a significant oil and gas exploration lease in the Republic of Georgia, defending a claim of breach of agreement. Here this ‘organized and efficient’ firm, as clients put it, has been able to put into effect its ‘highly-valued disputes team’ on international matters for a long standing client.

CLIENTS: Clients include ConocoPhillips, Greenfield Energy, Duke Energy, Electroquil and Wood Group Logging.

INDIVIDUALS: Founding partner Robin Gibbs ‘takes a really strong position in litigation, the kind of fighter that’s earned real respect over the years’, say clients. From his background of acting on complex commercial litigation, he has built a strong base of energy clients for whom he is able to act on a panoply of dispute resolution situations.

His co-founder Phil Bruns is also recognized by clients, one of whom says they are ‘impressed by his courtroom presence, so much so that we sought him out and he’s never disappointed since’.

Both attorneys are based in Houston.

Jones Day

PRACTICE: Jones Day has a history of having acted on several landmark energy cases and although it isn’t the largest or the most prominent practice in any particular tranche of the sector, it continues to have a presence in this area that companies from across the tract look to.

The litigation faction of the team is spread across the country, playing into this ability to take on a breadth of cases rather than offer the deepest focus on any location or industry. Having a well-respected litigation brand with a global reach has proved an exceptional advantage and tended to give the group’s standout cases an international flavor.

One such mandate which was recently resolved is the trial victory in an alien tort statute case for Chevron and two of its subsidiaries concerning the take over of an offshore platform in Nigeria. The case has been pending in the Northern district of California and was one of the first of its type to be tried before a jury.

Domestically, the group divides its resources between oil and gas litigation and electricity litigation, meanwhile attorneys in the Washington DC office represent large players such as CenterPoint Energy and Xcel Energy on FERC issues, providing appellate support there.

Clients note the practice’s strength across these disciplines, identifying its ‘recognized commitment to energy’ and ‘excellent name in international arbitration, some of which is in big energy cases’, as commendable traits.

CLIENTS: Clients include Kellogg Brown & Root, Occidental Chemical and Columbia Gas Transmission.

INDIVIDUALS: Houston partner Tom Bayko is one of the firm’s senior litigators and is described by clients as an ‘astute negotiator’ and ‘fantastic’. His experience in international litigation and arbitration winning mandates for several of the firm’s prominent upstream clients makes him a leading figure for the group.

Morrison & Foerster LLP

PRACTICE: Although Californian firms have, by and large, a much more localized presence in the energy market and don’t compete on the same level as the dominant Texas and Washington DC practices, Morrison & Foerster LLP stands out for its continued efforts to litigate for a wider range of clients.

Although the California refund case and the work it engendered provided a plethora of work for the practice, pipeline representations, such as working on ADR related to the TAPS system, points to the breadth of the group’s capabilities. Recently, roles taken in renewable industries are a mark of the progression the team has made, including the representation of clients in the wind and solar spaces.

Power work still confers some of the most high-profile roles the practice undertakes, such as the role as lead counsel for Idaho Power in its defense of a suit brought by Wah Chang.

CLIENTS: Clients include Entergy, Avista, Sierra Pacific Industries, Calpine and Mid-American Energy.

INDIVIDUALS: Practice co-chairs Gordon Erspamer and Peter Hanschen both operate out of the Walnut Creek office and are highly regarded for their mixture of regulatory and litigation work, particularly with regard to acting before state PUCs.