Based in the New York office of Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP, Gregory Laufer is a member of the Litigation Department and Co-Chair of the Investment Funds Litigation Practice Group. Greg represents clients in commercial litigation matters, with a focus on litigation involving investment advisors and their portfolio companies. Greg’s extensive experience includes representing clients in securities litigation, bankruptcy and restructuring matters, employment law, intellectual property matters and complex commercial disputes. He also has experience in international arbitrations, regulatory matters and internal investigations. Greg speaks to Benchmark Managing Editor Michael Rafalowich about his broad and varied practice, market trends, law firm culture and other observations.
1. You attend to a growing practice dedicated to investment funds. Could you elaborate on this practice and some of the issues that typically give rise to litigation in it?
I have a pretty broad commercial litigation practice in federal and state courts across the country, which includes a mix of securities and derivative litigation, restructuring litigation, and M&A/fiduciary duty litigation in Delaware Chancery Court.
I started doing work with private equity clients and other alternative asset managers when I was a junior associate, and my work for them has evolved and grown substantially since then, and now covers a wide swath of matters. I advise private funds clients at both the management company and portfolio company levels, and a significant part of my practice involves working with these firms on litigation and regulatory matters of all stripes. I also advise on deal or transactional issues before disputes emerge—and, more specifically, to try to avoid disputes down the road or to position the client as well as possible in the event of a dispute. The great thing about working with private funds clients is that, because of the nature of their businesses, the issues that can come up are extraordinarily varied, and include contract disputes, fraud cases, disputes with limited partners and seed funders, employment matters, internal investigations, and more—the list goes on and on.
No matter the nature of the matter, it’s critical to have about a deep understanding of how these firms are organized and the different types of counterparty relationships that can arise.
2. Are there any standout cases in this area that have been particularly noteworthy or novel?
Litigation in this area can be very wide-ranging because private fund clients have touchpoints with so many different industries and because the portfolio companies that they invest in can go through the entire lifecycle of a company, including going public, being taken private again, or going through bankruptcy.
Some of the more recent matters we’ve been involved in for private funds clients include lawsuits, most often brought in Delaware, alleging breaches of fiduciary duty in connection with a take-private or other type of transaction. We’ve also been involved in scores of contested proceedings in bankruptcy courts all over the country, in which our clients are often debt holders of the bankrupt company, and sometimes end up owning the company post-bankruptcy.
There have been cases in which portfolio companies of our clients have filed for bankruptcy and, given the number of stakeholders involved in bankruptcy matters—creditors, equity holders, contractual counterparties, employees of the debtor—numerous litigation issues can arise, including employment litigation, contract litigation and fraudulent conveyance litigation.
Regulatory issues are also a frequent driver. Private funds are ordinarily registered investment advisers regulated by the SEC. We advise them on issues related to investigations and enforcement proceedings and either try to prevent charges from being brought or, in the event that charges are brought, defend them in those litigations.
3. You alluded earlier to having a very broad litigation practice. Can you discuss how your practice started and how it’s developed and grown over the years?
Paul, Weiss has had a preeminent securities litigation practice for decades. I joined the firm in the late 2000s at the beginning of the financial crisis, which gave rise to a decade of investor lawsuits. That was our litigation focus for many years.
I did securities litigation for public companies in federal courts all over the country, including for the underwriters of AIG, for portfolio companies of private equity firms, for pharmaceutical companies, for manufacturers of doors and windows… The list goes on. Some were underwriter cases, others were issuer cases, still others involved representing boards of directors.
That was an enormous part of my practice and it’s still a significant part, although it’s waned a bit over the years as I’ve gained concentrations in other areas.
We also have one of the country’s premier restructuring practices, and I work very closely with our restructuring partners on litigation issues that come up in the context of bankruptcy proceedings. For instance, I’ve represented debtors as plaintiffs in adversary proceedings and in internal investigations, and in evaluating potential claims against former officers and directors. I’ve litigated employment—and mass employment—issues in the debtor context, and I’ve litigated fee issues and fraudulent conveyance matters.
Another part of my practice is representing companies in Delaware Chancery litigation, in fiduciary duty-type lawsuits, class actions, merger challenges and broken deal litigation.
4. Could you comment on the culture at Paul, Weiss?
Everybody probably says this about their firm, but I only know my experience here and what I’ve heard anecdotally of other firms. The firm has grown substantially in my time here, but there is still a very strong core culture that operates as a glue among the entire partnership and is probably one of the biggest differentiators between Paul, Weiss and other peer firms. Even as we’ve gotten bigger, our partnership is still comparatively small. In the New York office—the firm’s largest—we still have a partners’ lunch every Thursday. People actually go, and it makes a huge difference in my view.
There is also very little jockeying for position and credit compared to what you sometimes hear about at other firms. We have leading practitioners in every practice area, and when I call my partners and ask for help with a pitch, or to enlist their expertise on something, or to ask them to talk with a client about something, the answer is invariably “yes, yes, yes.” It doesn’t matter who or why or whether it’s viewed as worth their time. I have followed the same M.O. when my partners call on me. The answer is always “yes, yes, yes.” Also, and I would say luckily for me, one of the biggest drivers of my practice and business is the fact that I consider my partners to be in-house clients.
5. How does your practice interact with other core practices outside litigation?
We’ve got such a deep bench of talent here at Paul, Weiss. We have the premiere practice in public M&A, private equity M&A, bankruptcy/restructuring, and litigation of all stripes. When you put all of those things together, which we often do, both for pitches and for actual matters, there’s a wow factor there… I just worked, for instance, on a major, high-profile bankruptcy, which brought in people from real estate, litigation, restructuring, M&A, and employment/ benefits. There were probably people there from every single corner of the firm. And while the client hasn’t quite emerged from bankruptcy, it’s just a shining example of how, when you bring all these superstars together who are only focused on the end game and what’s best for the client and not our own silos, we can get the client exactly what it needs, efficiently and productively, and achieve incredible outcomes.
6. How do you actively engage younger partners in litigation to help foster the next generation of talent?
It’s only relatively recently that I’ve realized I need to stop thinking of myself as a junior partner! As I’ve gained in seniority I’ve made a real effort to bring younger colleagues along into the practice. I now have either a senior associate or a junior partner on most matters with me.
We’re obviously all so busy much of the time, but one of the reasons I am where is that more senior lawyers consistently took an interest in my education, growth and development as a lawyer. I have tried very hard, day in and day out, to carry that ethos forward with younger lawyers around me. It’s absolutely crucial to have in-person meetings, as often as possible, and I think it’s equally crucial to socialize with coworkers; there’s really nothing that makes a team more cohesive than going out together, getting to know each other on a personal level, and breaking bread together. In terms of teaching and mentoring from a professional standpoint, learning by example is of course a tried and true convention, but it’s just as important to give as many opportunities to younger lawyers as possible, whether it’s brief writing, conferring with an adversary, taking a deposition, leading a witness interview, or consulting with a client. And then you really have to go the extra step and offer guidance and feedback.
7. Any advice for other lawyers of your generation from your perspective?
The main advice I would give is to find the right balance between diversification of your practice and concentration in one practice area or a few practice areas. Despite the steady drumbeat toward specialization and the pressure to pick both majors and minors in order to be able to sell yourself, there’s still tremendous value in being able to promote yourself to a prospective client or existing client as a generalist who can pick up a file and do anything, including trying the case if need be. I feel like I’ve had some success in marrying those two somewhat divergent objectives.
Also, as much work as you have, don’t sit in your office all day. Force yourself to walk the halls and take associates out and do at least a couple of client events a week. First of all, it’s just good for the psyche to get out and about, but it’s also a business driver. It’s so important to stay top of mind with people. That’s something that our chairman has been reminding us about for years, and I’ve tried to take it to heart and put it into practice every day.
8. Are there others in your practice that you would like to take the opportunity to reference, particularly any colleagues of your vintage?
They might resist the notion that we’re of the same vintage, because they’re younger and spryer than I am, but Brette Tannenbaum and David Friedman are co-chairs with me of the Investment Fund Litigation Practice Group. They’re both fantastic people and extraordinary lawyers. Like me, they both have a generalist practice with certain concentrations, but they both do a lot of great work with many of our private equity and hedge fund clients.
I would also be remiss if I didn’t mention Andrew Ehrlich, who (no offense to him!) is before my vintage but who has been a major mentor and friend of mine here. Andrew co-chairs our preeminent Securities Litigation Group and is also very involved in the investment management litigation practice. I have tried to emulate his practice over the course of the past many years.
Billy Clareman is another terrific courtroom advocate and one of the most accomplished bankruptcy litigators. He and I made partner the same year, and it’s a pleasure to work closely with him on many high-stakes disputes.
