Maryland - Jurisdiction Review | Benchmark Litigation

Saul Ewing

Firm overview

Saul Ewing’s Litigation Department features approximately 200 attorneys across 18 offices, including our newest locations in Los Angeles and Irvine, California. We handle a wide range of matters including complex business and commercial disputes, bet-the-company legal proceedings, and high-profile cases in state and federal courts and Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) forums across the nation. We represent local, regional, national and international organizations as well as individuals across a diverse array of industries, including but not limited to energy and environmental, financial services, construction, insurance, health care, food/beverage/agribusiness, life sciences, cannabis, higher education, sports/entertainment and real estate.

Our deep bench of litigators work to protect the interests of our clients and mitigate the impact of litigation on business operations in all phases of litigation, including investigation, pleadings, motions, fact and expert discovery and depositions, hearings, trials, appeals, settlement negotiations, and enforcement of judgments. Among our ranks are seasoned trial lawyers and former government officials and prosecutors, whose insight and strategic judgment are a valuable resource to our entire team.

Our core areas of focus include:

Appellate

Class Actions

Consumer Financial Services Litigation

Cybersecurity and Privacy

Employee Benefits & ERISA Litigation

Labor & Employment

Environmental Civil Litigation

Insurance Litigation & Arbitration

Intellectual Property Litigation

Title Claims & Coverage Litigation

White Collar & Government Enforcement

Within these core areas of focus, we have extensive experience representing clients in pursuing and defending claims of breach of contract, tortious interference with contracts and business relationships, fraud and misrepresentation, lender liability, property liability, negligence, unfair competition, unfair trade practices, antitrust violations, conspiracy, RICO violations, breach of fiduciary duty, defamation, trade disparagement, false advertising, malicious prosecution, theft of trade secrets, intellectual property infringement, trespass, conversion, trust and estate controversies, partnership and corporate dissolutions and claims arising in shareholder and partner derivative actions, among others.

Our Approach: We start by tailoring a strategy to meet our clients’ objectives and risk management priorities, whether those focus on litigation avoidance, early settlement, resolution through dispositive motions, or pursuing a case through adjudication at trial. Using early case assessment tools, we develop a detailed roadmap for each case. We recognize that litigation can be expensive, distracting and time-consuming, and that our clients need cost predictability. Depending on client needs, we are able to create customized litigation plans and budgets at the matter, phase and/or task levels. Our project management team carefully monitors work volume and billing metrics to help ensure that our services align with project scope and needs, and to maximize proactive communication with clients about changes in cost, scope and/or strategy.

eDiscovery: For cases requiring electronic discovery, we rely on our in-house Litigation Support Services (LSS) team, which is driven by members with sophisticated technical knowledge and credentialing by the Association of Certified E-Discovery Specialists. With extensive experience managing complex eDiscovery collection, processing, review and production, our LSS team leverages advanced analytics and technology-assisted review to quickly identify and locate relevant information, process and analyze data efficiently, and help reduce overall litigation costs.

Updated Sep 2024

Sanford Heisler Sharp McKnight

Firm overview

Sanford Heisler Sharp McKnight is a nationwide, plaintiffs-side law firm that was founded in 2004 by David Sanford and Jeremy Heisler to litigate public interest and social justice cases that make a significant difference in society. In 2017, Kevin Sharp, a former Chief Judge of the United States District for the Middle District of Tennessee, joined the firm as its third named partner. In 2024, H. Vincent McKnight Jr., Co-Chair of the firm’s Whistleblower and Qui Tam Practice Group, became a fourth named partner.

David Sanford has served as lead counsel in more than 50 class actions and numerous significant qui tam fraud cases; he has represented over 100 general counsel, in-house counsel, and lawyers in claims against their law firms and companies. Over the course of his 42-year legal career, Jeremy Heisler has achieved notable success in employment, civil rights, and consumer class actions and complex multiparty and multistate litigation, producing hundreds of millions of dollars in settlements to class members and individuals. Judge Sharp has nearly 30 years of experience litigating and/or presiding over complex civil litigation cases, qui tam and whistleblower matters, products liability claims, malpractice cases, class action matters, ERISA claims, and civil rights matters. H. Vincent McKnight Jr. is a leading voice on whistleblower law who has generated approximately $5 billion for the U.S. government and clients during the past ten years.

The firm has offices in New York, Washington, D.C., Palo Alto, San Francisco, San Diego, and Nashville. The firm has recovered over a billion dollars for its clients, and continues to move the needle in high-profile, precedent-setting litigation not only by winning significant compensation, but also through achieving real change in companies and institutions to create a more equitable environment and enlightened management policies.

The firm is committed to helping and giving a voice to disadvantaged groups and individuals, assisting whistleblowers litigate their claims, representing employees seeking relief from employers’ retirement fund mismanagement and abuses, and advocating for employees and executives in a wide range of employment disputes, including severance negotiations, wrongful termination, retaliation, wage and hour violations, sexual harassment, and gender, sexual orientation, race, national origin, and disability discrimination. The firm also promotes social and economic change by increasing media awareness and stimulating public dialogue.

The firm’s lawyers are successful in protecting plaintiffs’ rights in federal and state courts, in settlement negotiations, and in arbitrations nationwide. The firm has forged ahead, often against the odds, and achieved success against major technology firms, including Oracle, Western Digital, and Alaska Communication Systems; pharmaceutical giants like Merck, Novartis, Sanofi, and others; premier law firms in the United States such as Chadbourne & Parke (now Norton Rose Fulbright), Sedgwick, Morrison & Foerster, and Proskauer Rose; and top universities, including Dartmouth College, Columbia University, New York University, and the University of Arizona. The firm has waged and won lawsuits that have protected thousands of employees’ rights to have their 401(k) retirement plans appropriately managed as required by the federal Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”).

The firm excels at holding institutions accountable when they cause harm, consistently advocating for victims of discrimination, harassment, and sexual assault, including employees at Fortune 500 companies, attorneys in Big Law, and university faculty and students, and routinely pursues cases against institutions such as schools, daycares, and religious institutions that fail to keep children safe from sexual abuse.

Most firms would shy away from challenging the most powerful interests in society. Sanford Heisler Sharp McKnight has taken on the largest corporations in the world and has succeeded.

Among the Firm’s Notable Successes.

In re: GE ERISA: In 2024, the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts granted final approval of a $61 million settlement of a nationwide class action lawsuit against General Electric (“GE”). Our firm originated the lawsuit, filed under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) in 2017, alleging that GE failed to offer any alternative investments to its own proprietary, under-performing mutual funds in its employee 401(k) plan. Our firm regularly represents employees invested in 401(k) plans against their employers for alleged breaches of ERISA, including by allowing investment advisors to charge plans unreasonable fees and for failing to monitor and remove poorly performing investment options.

Crime Victims’ Rights Appeal: On August 30, 2024, the Maryland Supreme Court ordered the Baltimore City Circuit Court to conduct a new hearing to determine whether Adnan Syed’s 1999 conviction for the murder of Hae Min Lee, the subject of the podcast “Serial,” should be vacated. Our appeal on behalf of Ms. Lee’s brother, Young Lee, argued that the Circuit Court violated Mr. Lee’s constitutional and statutory rights as a crime victim’s representative in 2022 by failing to give Mr. Lee adequate notice to appear, hear the evidence overturning Mr. Syed’s conviction, and comment meaningfully on whatever evidence the state could produce in support of vacating Mr. Syed’s conviction.

Robinson v. De Niro and Canal Productions: In 2023, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, a jury found Canal Productions liable for gender discrimination and retaliation and awarded our client, Graham Chase Robinson, $1.2 million. Ms. Robinson was Robert De Niro’s former longtime executive assistant. The jury also rejected Canal’s counter-claims of conversion, breach of fiduciary duty, and breach of the duty of loyalty.

Military Sexual Assault: The firm is representing 18 John Doe plaintiffs in Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) administrative complaints against the U.S. Department of the Army and the U.S. Department of Defense (collectively, “the Army”). The FTCA complaints seek to hold the Army responsible for failing to protect the plaintiffs from being sexually abused by an Army doctor who has been criminally charged for the sexual abuse of numerous soldiers and veterans in his care at Joint Base Lewis-McChord in Tacoma, Washington.

Whistleblower/Qui Tam: In 2023, our firm and the U.S. government settled a whistleblower action under the False Claims Act (FCA) with International Vitamin Corporation (“IVC”), a leading importer of dietary supplements. As part of the settlement, IVC agreed to pay the U.S. government $22.865 million to resolve claims that it systematically skirted customs duties on thousands of imports of nutritional supplements from China between 2015 and 2019 by fraudulently reporting incorrect tariff classifications and duty rates on the imports. The Complaint also alleged that IVC knew that it had evaded more than $10 million in duties but failed to inform the government and pay the duties as required under applicable law.

United States Marshals Service: In 2024, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) granted final approval of a $15 million settlement in a nearly 30-year-long race discrimination class action alleging that the United States Marshals Service (“USMS”) discriminated against African Americans in its promotions, recruitment, and hiring policies for Deputy U.S. Marshals positions. As part of the settlement, the USMS agreed to institute significant programmatic reforms to its hiring practices.

Updated Oct 2024

Review

Dispute resolution

Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough

In over 125 years of existence, Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough has grown beyond its humble South Carolina roots to enjoy nationwide acclaim. While still a regional powerhouse with offices in major markets like Atlanta, the Carolinas, and Florida, the firm also has locations on both the East and the West Coasts.

Michael Brown is recognized nationally as a Top 100 Trial Lawyer and leading practitioner in product liability and insurance defense. He has been described as a “formidable” opponent who most recently defended Johnson & Johnson against a series of personal injury product liability claims. Brown defended J&J in a case that went before a jury in Oakland, California. The plaintiff alleged that he had developed mesothelioma from asbestos exposure while using J&J’s baby powder. The plaintiff sued J&J for $500 million and was awarded $18.8 million. The case is still under appeal.

Baltimore’s Michael Blumenfeld specializes in commercial litigation, representing businesses of all sizes in disputes related to contracts, torts, employment, and product liability. Currently he is representing a family in an alleged negligence and wrongful death of an individual, who was making a delivery on their property. The parties are engaged in discovery and have a trial set for 2024.

Matt Sturtz, who also works in the Baltimore office, focuses his practice on construction, bankruptcy, and real estate litigation. He is the lead representative for the estate of Preston Ayars, Jr. in a contract dispute for the failure to close on a $5 million real estate transaction.

David Dukes, who is domiciled in the Columbia, South Carolina office, also holds the prestigious Top 100 Trial Lawyer status. He is known for his product liability practice and is serving as co-lead trial counsel with Marc Williams on behalf of Johnson & Johnson.

Appellate and product liability partner Marc Williams, of the Huntington, West Virginia office, presided as lead counsel for Johnson & Johnson before the West Virginia Mass Litigation Panel regarding claims filed by hospitals against opioid manufacturers. The cases allege that infants born to opioid-addicted mothers were exposed to opioids in the womb that resulted in developmental injuries. Williams argued the motion to dismiss these cases, which was granted by the West Virginia Mass Litigation Panel. The dismissals are under appeal.

Robert Massie handles high risk cases in West Virginia often involving wrongful death and injuries. He led the appeal of a wrongful death verdict for the client, Speedway, LLC. In that case, an employee of Speedway took drugs while on duty and became impaired. The employee left work and fell asleep while driving and fatally struck a motorcyclist. The jury returned a verdict against Speedway assessing damages of over $2 million and a second jury returned a verdict of more than $5 million.

On appeal, Massie handled the oral argument. In a unanimous opinion the court held that the trial court incorrectly submitted the case to the jury, determining that it was irrelevant that Speedway should have known that the employee was impaired as Speedway did not cause the impairment.

Mark Raymond is a litigation star out of the Miami, Florida office. His practice of more than 35 years includes complex commercial and probate litigation. He serves as the co-chair of the firm’s Securities and Corporate Governance Litigation Group and advises the Boards of Directors and General Counsel of leading companies as well as prominent Trustees.

Saul Ewing

Saul Ewing saw its genesis as a regional shop primarily focused on the Mid-Atlantic through its offices in Philadelphia, Baltimore, Wilmington and Newark and Princeton, New Jersey. It has since expanded its reach into Boston, West Palm Beach, Minneapolis and Chicago and, as of this past year, into California, officially bringing its national ambitions into fruition. The firm is appreciated by clients for “efficient, high-level legal services that are sensitive to the unique issues in the education industry, with a focus on client-centered advice that is cost effective for a non-profit entity. We use the firm because the lead counsel carefully reviews our needs and brings the necessary resources to help our businesses.”
     The firm’s dominance in the education area is undisputed, and acumen in this practice is frequently demonstrated by various partners. Jason St. John and Mark Simanowith, both in the Baltimore office, lead a team representing the Maryland State of Board of Education in defense of a challenge by a class of Baltimore City plaintiffs who are the parents of Baltimore City school children. Plaintiffs are attempting to revive a lawsuit from the early 1990’s and claim that the State has failed to comply with its constitutional duty to provide adequate education to Baltimore City school children, including adequate funding for Baltimore City public schools. Plaintiffs further claim that the State has failed to fix the crumbling school facilities in Baltimore City that leave children cold from broken heat systems in the winter, overheated from schools lacking air conditioning in the summer, and wet from pipe leaks throughout the year. The court granted the State’s motion for summary judgment on all claims in March 2023, and the case is now on appeal. Simanowith makes his debut as a future star in this edition. A former future star making the leap to litigation star in this edition, Philadelphia’s Josh Richards represents California Lutheran University in a case that arose when members of a softball team performed and placed on social media a routine where they dressed up as the Fresh Prince of Bel Air cast, with some of them coloring their faces darkly for the performance. The school responded to significant student concerns about the content of their performance and condemned its racial insensitivity. A lawsuit ensued, with two dozen plaintiffs suing the school on 13 counts, including defamation. “Josh is a smart, client-focused, fantastic attorney,” extols a client.
     Saul Ewing is plenty busy beyond the education capacity. John Stoviak and Cathleen Devlin, both resident in the Philadelphia office, serve as lead counsel defending Waste Management of Pennsylvania and Grand Central Sanitary Landfill in two putative class actions filed in by two groups of area residents, who alleged claims of negligence and public and private nuisance arising from alleged odors emanating from the client’s operations at a landfill in Pen Argyl, Pennsylvania. Devlin, the firm’s head of litigation, enjoys another year as one of Benchmark’s Top 250 Women in Litigation. Another former future star who is elevated in this edition, Justin Danilewitz was selected as counsel to the Court-appointed monitor in the District of Delaware Bankruptcy Court proceeding involving pharmaceutical entity Mallinckrodt. As part of Mallinckrodt’s bankruptcy and settlement with a broad coalition of state Attorneys General, the Bankruptcy Court entered an operating injunction, which requires the appointment of the monitor to oversee Mallinckrodt’s opioid compliance program and its compliance with the operating injunction more generally.
     Based in the Minneapolis office, Katie Barrett-Wiik is addressed as “a very talented appellate lawyer,” by a peer, who goes on to elaborate, “She is my primary contact with the firm. I refer appellate matters to her when appropriate. [She provides] responsive, skilled advocacy and client care. She is smart, skilled, dedicated and passionate about representing her clients; she is very well known and highly regarded in the local legal and judicial community.” Hilda Piloto, based in the firm’s West Palm Beach office, is championed as “an excellent technical and practical litigator,” by a peer, who goes on to testify, “I encountered her as we represented adverse clients in a very hotly contested litigation. She had a very difficult client but managed both that client's temperament and expectations very well.”

Whiteford

Established in 1933 Whiteford Taylor Preston has deep, historical roots in litigation. One the firm’s overall litigation practice, a client reports, “The firm is outstanding regarding its expertise, efficiency, responsiveness and strategic thinking.” The firm has maintained a strong bankruptcy practice, in addition to business, product liability, intellectual property, labor and employment, construction, real estate, e-discovery, health care, administrative law and regulatory litigation.

While the firm operates from a network of 16 offices, it is best known for its Maryland footprint, particularly in Baltimore, where it hosts its highest concentration of litigation talent. Paul Nussbaum is the firm’s bankruptcy authority, serving as co-chair of the business reorganizations, bankruptcy and insolvency practice. He has been litigation counsel for two bankruptcy trusts established by the US Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware. In this capacity, the firm team is investigating claims against former directors and officers of various debtor entities pursuing those claims relating to breach of fiduciary duty. Another frequently mentioned all-purpose commercial partner and fellow of the American College of Trial Lawyers, William Ryan, has represented Landry’s in all of its commercial disputes related to the COVID-19 pandemic. Ryan is also defending direct and derivative action shareholder claims filed in October 2020 in the Delaware Chancery Court against consulting services entity Percona regarding open-source software and databases. The case involves alleged claims of breach of contract and fiduciary duty against corporate managers and concerns Delaware’s developing law regarding the management of limited liability companies governed by Delaware law and management’s potential liabilities to nonvoting shareholders, as well as valuation standards for emerging companies. After securing a dismissal of all claims from the Chancery Court through a Memorandum Opinion, he is now defending two additional actions against the company in Delaware Chancery Court. In a matter exemplifying the intersection of commercial and employment law, Ryan is also part of a team representing Medical Transportation Management, a nationwide transportation broker for non-emergency medical transportation services for Medicaid recipients, in defense of a collective class action under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act as well as a federal Rule 23 class action with respect to putative wage claims brought under federal and District of Columbia laws on behalf of employees of transportation companies providing Medicaid transportation services for the District of Columbia’s Medicaid program. The case is now pending before the DC Circuit after the court granted interlocutory appeal and appellate review on two rulings regarding the FLSA collective and “issues class”. Ryan defeated the plaintiffs’ certification of a liability and damages class. Harry Johnson serves as the firm’s product liability specialist. He is national trial counsel for Ford Motor Company in Maryland, defending claims related to asbestos automotive products. He secured a favorable settlement following a win on pre-trial rulings two days prior to the start of the trial in Oregon. Johnson has had a long-history of representing Baltimore City and other government entities. He recently successfully resolved a matter on behalf of Montgomery County, defending it against a religious organization challenging the County’s regulations of public sewer and land use in connection to restrictions on land development for religious purposes around Patuxtent River watershed. The issue, concerning the powers of local government in their efforts to protection watershed versus rights of property owners to religious land use pursuant to the First Amendment’s Free Exercise of Religion Clause and the Federal Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, nearly made it to the Supreme Court after Montgomery county won a judgment in its favor at trial court and succeeded again at the Fourth Circuit.