The Legal 500

Twitter Logo Youtube Circle Icon LinkedIn Icon

White & Case LLP

1221 AVENUE OF THE AMERICAS, NEW YORK, NY 10020-1095, USA
Tel:
Work +1 212 819 8200
Web:
www.whitecase.com

Martin Toto

White & Case LLP

Work Department

Antitrust/Competition, Commercial Litigation, Mergers & Acquisitions

Position

Partner

Career

To read more, visit: www.whitecase.com/people/martin-m-toto


United States: Antitrust

Cartel

Within: Cartel

Global antitrust chair Mark Gidley spearheads White & Case LLP’s practice, which is recommended for high-stakes US and global investigations and associated civil litigation. Christopher Curran and Eileen Cole are working with the Tokyo office to advise Maruyasu Industries on a DOJ investigation into price-fixing and market allocation of multiple automotive parts. Christopher Curran and New York-based Martin Toto and John Chung are other notable members of the team, as are recently promoted partners Heather Burke in Silicon Valley and Kate Dyson in Boston. Peter Carney is a rising star.

[back to top]

Civil litigation/class actions

Within: Civil litigation/class actions

Led by global antitrust head Mark Gidley, White & Case LLP’s group, which has ‘great business acumen and industry knowledge’, has an enviable track record in class actions, individual actions (covering the gamut of claims) and merger litigation. The team has a particularly outstanding reputation in pharmaceutical sector cases; among a string of recent successes in this arena, in a precedent-setting case, a Washington DC-based team including Gidley, Peter Carney, Eileen Cole, Noah Brumfield (Silicon Valley and Washington DC) and others successfully defended Warner Chilcott at the Third Circuit against product-hopping claims connected with acne medication Doryx. The firm also represented Allergan in a putative class action concerning its Botox product and a licensing agreement with Korea-based Medytox, the result of which would have allegedly delayed entry into the US of a competing product to Botox (manufactured by Medytox). Elsewhere, Christopher Curran and New York-based Martin Toto and John Chung are defending Toshiba against a billion-dollar lawsuit brought by the Illinois Attorney General against manufacturers of LCD panels. Jack Pace and Robert Milne (both New York), Eric Grannon (Washington DC) and recently promoted partner Heather Burke (Silicon Valley) are also recommended.

[back to top]


Back to index

Legal Developments worldwide

Legal Developments and updates from the leading lawyers in each jurisdiction. To contribute, send an email request to
  • New requirement for all issuers operating on the Luxembourg Stock Exchange

    On 10 August 2017 the Luxembourg Stock Exchange announced that all domestic and foreign issuers operating on the regulated market (Bourse de Luxembourg) or on the multilateral trading facility (Euro MTF) of the Luxembourg Stock Exchange must provide their legal entity identifier (“LEI ”) codes to the Luxembourg Stock Exchange before 15 September 2017.
  • Luxembourg law on the exploration and use of space resources entered into force

    The Luxembourg law on the exploration and use of space resources of 20 July 2017 entered into force on 2 August 2017 and placed Luxembourg among the most innovative space-oriented nations in the world.
  • VAT in the GCC – Q&A updates from the UAE Ministry of Finance

    On 9 July the United Arab Emirates (UAE) Ministry of Finance (MOF) published an update of the Value Added Tax (VAT) FAQ section of its website.
  • PRIIPs KID: The final pieces of the puzzle

    The pieces of the puzzle are finally falling into place. The long-awaited level 3 and 4 measures have been published earlier this week, half a year before the PRIIPs KID becomes compulsory.
  • MiFID II: Further guidance on product governance requirements

    Amongst the numerous topics covered by the Markets in Financial Instruments Directive II (MiFID II), the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) has decided to provide further guidance on the requirements regarding product governance through its guidelines dated 2 June 2017 which focus on the target market assessment by manufacturers and distributors of financial products.     
  • Arendt & Medernach is again the “Luxembourg Tax Firm of the Year”

    The partners of Arendt & Medernach are pleased to announce that their firm has been awarded once again the prestigious “Luxembourg Tax Firm of the Year” title during the International Tax Review’s European Tax Awards ceremony held at the Savoy Hotel in London on 18 May.
  • Signature of the Multilateral instrument – reservations made by Luxembourg

    On 7 June 2017, the official ceremony for the signing of the multilateral instrument (“MLI”) took place bringing to a close a process initiated last year when a consensus was reached on the wording of the MLI on 24 November 2016 (see also our newsflash dated 2 December 2016, available on our website www.arendt.com section Publications/Newsflash).
  • Arendt & Medernach: Luxembourg Law Firm of the Year

    Luxembourg, May 2017 – Arendt & Medernach is proud to have been named “Luxembourg Law firm of the year” both by Chambers & Partners and IFLR (International Financial Law Review). The prestigious trophies were both received in April in London at the respective ceremonies of the Chambers Europe Awards 2017 and the IFLR European Awards 2017.
  • First VAT EU case law on the cost-sharing VAT exemption

    The question of the scope of the cost-sharing VAT exemption, also referred to in the Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 as amended ("EU VAT Directive") as “Independent Groups of Persons” or “IGPs”, is currently being debated at the Court of Justice of the EU (“CJEU”) in several cases. Last Thursday marked the first milestone regarding this specific VAT exemption since the CJEU released its judgment in the case Commission v Luxembourg (C-274/15).
  • An Introduction to Corporate Guarantee

    In the UAE, the risk management activities inherent in running a corporate or investment banking business remain of crucial importance, not least because of the strong local characteristic of “name lending”, by which is meant lending or providing other banking facilities to family or other private businesses, primarily on the strength of the “name” or “names” of the proprietors standing behind the business, rather than on the strength of the asset quality and underlying credit of the particular business. Of course, in practice, there is commercial overlap between the proprietors and the companies which they own, but the credit analyses can break down where poor banking practices and procedures result in poorly constructed legal documentation and gaps in guarantee and security support documents.