Bailey Glasser is pleased to announce that Washington, D.C. litigator Elliott McGraw has been elevated to partner effective January 2024.
“Congratulations to Elliott on her much-deserved promotion to partner at Bailey Glasser,” said Cary Joshi, Commercial & Environmental Litigation Practice Group Leader. “Elliott’s tenacity and strategic skills as a litigator are exceptionally valuable to our clients as she handles some of our most complicated matters.”
Elliott is a member of the Commercial & Environmental Litigation Practice Group, where she focuses her practice on complex commercial disputes in state and federal courts across the country and represents institutional investors and asset managers, as both plaintiffs and defendants, in contract and tort-based claims arising from financial fraud, accounting malpractice, and corporate malfeasance. Elliott has an extensive privacy and data protection background and was named a Best Lawyers Ones to Watch in Privacy and Data Security Law in Washington, D.C. in 2024.
Elliott commented: “I love practicing law with Bailey Glasser and I’m very excited about the additional opportunities to contribute to this world class group of litigators and our fantastic clients as a partner.”
Bailey Glasser’s Commercial & Environmental Litigation practice has a proven track record of successfully handling national high-stakes litigation in state and federal courts and before arbitrators and mediators across the country. We represent businesses in many industries and of all sizes from Fortune 500 companies to family offices, individuals, governmental entities, government servants, and even other law firms call upon us to lead bet-the-company litigation and parachute into cases and appeals when our deep experience and resources are necessary.
Elliott is a vital team member in some of our most complex matters. Notably, she was a member of the Bailey Glasser team that served as co-lead trial counsel representing the Official Committee of Talc Plaintiffs in its high-profile challenge against Johnson & Johnson’s “Texas Two Step” bankruptcy ploy to offset the liability of 38,000 lawsuits related to the company’s alleged cancer-causing baby powder. She has also contributed her time to litigating cases on behalf of women athletes in Title IX sex discrimination cases against universities across the country. Elliott’s experience also includes advising organizational and individual clients navigating government or internal investigations and has represented clients in front of Congressional committees, including the 2019 Impeachment Inquiry into then-President Donald Trump.
On October 2, 2023, Joshua Hammack, Nick Johnson, and Chris Smith continued their string of litigation wins on behalf of Foresight Coal Sales. For years, Foresight has argued a Kentucky law—SB 257—violates the Constitution by discriminating against interstate commerce. In February 2023, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit ruled that Foresight’s constitutional claim was likely to succeed. Put simply, it held Kentucky could not “have its cake and eat it, too.”
Kentucky filed a petition for certiorari, asking the Supreme Court of the United States to review the Sixth Circuit’s decision. To show Kentucky’s arguments were wrong, the Bailey Glasser appellate team turned to a timeless classic: Animal Farm. (This one is worth a read!) On Monday, the Supreme Court denied Kentucky’s petition for certiorari.
Today we announce that 42 Bailey Glasser lawyers have been recognized across various categories (including one as a “Lawyer of the Year”) in the 30th edition of The Best Lawyers in America® and the fourth edition of Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch in America®.
“Lawyer of the Year” honors are awarded annually to only one lawyer per practice area in each region with extremely high overall feedback from their peers, making it an exceptional distinction.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit has upheld a jury verdict and reinstated contract damages awarded by the jury after a three-week trial in July 2021.
Two years ago, Bailey & Glasser, LLP, on behalf of Ramaco Resources, Inc., won $7.6 million in contract damages in a lawsuit against insurance companies indirectly owned by Chubb INA Holdings, Inc. The lawsuit stemmed from Chubb’s denial of insurance coverage after the collapse of a coal storage silo, which occurred at Ramaco’s Elk Creek coal complex in West Virginia on November 5, 2018.
The case was litigated in the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia. The verdict included $7.6 million in compensatory damages and an additional $25 million for aggravation and inconvenience. After the jury trial was concluded, however, the district court reduced the contract damages and award of prejudgment interest believing the evidence could not support a conclusion that the critical “Period of Restoration” – during which Ramaco’s expenses and lost income were covered – could extend beyond November 30, 2018. Indeed, the district court reduced the verdict to $1.8 million in contract damages and further held that, because of the reduction, Ramaco had not “substantially prevailed” on its insurance lawsuit. As a result, the district court held that Ramaco was not entitled to any damages for aggravation and inconvenience. T
On behalf of our client Citynet LLC, Bailey Glasser eached a settlement with Frontier and other individual defendants, bringing the broadband whistleblower case to a final conclusion as to Citynet’s claims brought on behalf of the United States. As part of the $17,750,000 settlement with Frontier, the parties released the following statement:
“Citynet and Frontier Communications jointly announce that they have resolved their dispute regarding the State of West Virginia’s Obama-era BTOP grant funds, the subject of Civil Action No. 2: 14-cv-15947, which has been pending in the US District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia since 2014 and involves only matters occurring prior to that date. This settlement is comprehensive and marks an end to all the litigation and disputes involving these parties and other defendants, including claims for attorneys’ fees and costs.
Thank you to Chambers & Partners for our 2023 rankings, which includes two brand-new nationwide practice group rankings in the ERISA plaintiffs and Product Liability litigation categories. Having our lawyers and practice groups recognized by Chambers reflects how much we care about our clients and how hard we work to achieve successful outcomes for them.
We are grateful to all the clients and counsel (co-counsel as well as referring counsel) who took the time to participate in the process. Your time is valuable and we take that seriously. We appreciate you.
This past January 11, we wrote a blog post about the Supreme Court entertaining arguments on the scope of the attorney-client privilege in the context of dual-purpose communications paraphrasing a question from Justice Kagan during the argument to Petitioner’s counsel to comment on the adage, “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.”
Well, turns out the Supreme Court did not want to wade into that potential quagmire, and instead turned around and entirely dismissed the writ of certiorari granted in In re Grand Jury as “improvidently filed.” Accordingly, the Ninth Circuit’s opinion which had been appealed to the Supreme Court that had held the “primary purpose” test controls when assessing attorney-client privilege for dual-purpose communications remains in full effect. In re Grand Jury, 23 F.4th 1088 (9th Cir. 2021).This opinion is important reading for reasons other than the adoption of this test because the Ninth Circuit also discussed the disparate purposes of the attorney-client privilege and the work product protection doctrine and declined to adopt but did not fully reject the “a primary purpose” test. Continue reading ““Improvidently Granted”: Supremes Decline to Wade Into Attorney-Client Privilege Dispute”
The Supreme Court is currently considering a case that could expand the scope of the attorney-client privilege in the context of dual-purpose communications – such as, in this case, communications made to a law firm that also prepares tax returns. The question before the Court is: what is the appropriate test to determine whether a communication involving both legal and non-legal advice is protected by the attorney-client privilege? This case, In re Grand Jury, concerns documents that the Petitioner, a law firm specializing in tax law, claims are privileged. Petitioner asserts that these allegedly privileged materials concern tax law issues that arise upon expatriation from the United States and include legal advice regarding determining ownership of cryptocurrency assets, appropriate methods for asset valuation, and tax filing strategies. The Petitioner law firm also prepared filings for the client, an early promoter of bitcoin, including a certification of compliance with expatriation tax requirements.
Continue reading ““If It Ain’t Broke, Don’t Fix It” – SCOTUS Examines Expanding the Attorney-Client Privilege for Dual Purpose Communications”
Bailey & Glasser, LLP won a unanimous jury verdict on behalf of Shonk Land Company on Friday, May 6, 2022. Our team proved that the Defendants in the case committed five separate breaches of Shonk’s contractual rights of first refusal. As a result of those verdicts, Shonk will be restored as the rightful owner of 16,000-plus acres of valuable oil & gas property. In addition, Bailey & Glasser, LLP proved that the Defendants committed an intentional trespass, slandered Shonk’s title, tortiously interfered with Shonk’s rights, and were thereby unjustly enriched. In all, and in addition to its 16,000-plus acres of land, the jury awarded Shonk over $4.1 million in damages.
The trial team was led by partner Nick Johnson and included seasoned and talented litigator Sallie Gilbert and paralegal Christy Robinson.
“On behalf of our firm and our client, we thank the jurors who sat attentively through this case, and we are humbled that they awarded our client everything to which it was entitled, including the long-awaited return of its own land,” said Nick Johnson. “Throughout the trial, we felt as though we exposed some egregiously bad and intentional conduct committed by Defendant Diversified Gas & Oil Corporation, and the jury’s verdict vindicates our view of what went on in this case.”