C&G partner C Evan Stewart examines how an 1879 Connecticut law influenced a number of consequential Supreme Court decisions.
C&G partner C Evan Stewart explores the contentious battle over the seat of Justice Henry Baldwin.
The status of ex-employees vis-a-vis the corporate attorney-client privilege is misunderstood by many lawyers and judges. As set forth in Mr. Stewart's article, there are, in fact, four different approaches to this issue at present. Can they all be right?
Mr. Stewart's article delves into complications surrounding inadvertent disclosure and previous answers to some of the most pressing questions posed by this vexing subject matter.
Herewith is the fourth installment of terrible Supreme Court jurisprudence, as explored and explained by Mr. Stewart.
Courts, unfortunately, often err when ruling on matters relating to the attorney-client privilege. As set forth in Mr. Stewart's article, the New York Court of Appeals recently stepped in it when it addressed the "common interest" privilege in Ambac Assurance Corp. v. Countrywide Home Loans
Herewith is the third installment of terrible Supreme Court jurisprudence, as explored and explained by Mr. Stewart.
The ethical rule on what lawyers are supposed to do when they come into possession of materials inadvertently delivered by an opposing party purports to be crystal clear. Unfortunately, it is not. As set forth in Mr Stewart's article, lawyers need to be very careful when dealing with the subject.
The Supreme Court's infallibility takes another hit in Mr. Stewart's latest article for the Federal Bar Council Quarterly, where he recounts the sorry decision in which the Court expressly affirmed racial segregation.
Perhaps many lawyers believe that the U.S. Supreme Court does not always get it right. But in his most recent article for the Federal Bar Council Quarterly, Mr. Stewart makes out the case for the worst Supreme Court decision, ever!
For 26 years the author has been writing about the eroding status of the attorney-client privilege and the fact that litigating privilege issues can be a very tricky business. Unfortunately, as this article makes clear, two recent (and wrongly-decided) decisions of the D.C. Circuit—in the same litigation—make these regrettable states of affairs all too true.
Would the course of American History have been different if Lyndon Johnson had been told the truth about the Cuban Missile Crisis? In his most recent article for the Federal Bar Council Quarterly, Mr. Stewart explores this little known episode and its consequences for our country's involvement in the Big Muddy (i.e., Vietnam).
Lawyers who represent public companies are faced with a problem about which most are clueless. In a number of states (including New York), lawyers’ confidentiality obligations are at odds with the requirements mandated by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. Is there a way out of this conundrum? Mr. Stewart attempts to get to the bottom of this matter in his latest article in the New York Law Journal.
Buying a pig In a poke is never a good idea. In this article, Mr. Stewart warns about two situations where this maxim applies. The first concerns making threats of criminal or regulatory action to gain an advantage in civil litigation; lawyers who believe there is a simple straightforward answer to deal with such a situation will be surprised. The second concerns attempts to restrict a lawyer's future conduct through the settlement of a matter; again, those who believe that there is a consensus view on this subject are in for a surprise.
Clement Vallandingham is a figure lost to history. Known to but a handful of American Historians, Vallandingham was a pivotal figure in the country’s political life up to and including the Civil War era. He also was a party in one of the Supreme Court’s Civil War jurisprudence. And finally, readers will be interested in the manner in which he concluded his career as a lawyer.
A prominent law firm is retained by a corporation to defend a sexual/employment discrimination claim. The law firm then contacts employees with first-hand knowledge of the facts. Assuring these individuals that it sees no conflict of interest, the law firm offers to represent them at the corporation's expense, which the individuals agree to. Plaintiff's counsel discovers this multi-representation arrangement and moves to disqualify the law firm for purported ethical violations. Could the law firm's actions possibly violate the "non-solicitation" rule? Read this article to find out.
Many lawyers and judges misunderstand and misapply the attorney-client privilege and work product doctrine. In his most recent New York Law Journal column, Mr. Stewart applauds the recent decision of Judge Moskowitz , in which she correctly ruled that the common interest privilege applies irrespective of the anticipation of litigation.
Little remembered today (except perhaps for a famous picture of Harry Truman holding up a 1948 newspaper headline), Thomas E. Dewey was one of the most important and prominent public figures of the 20th century. Mr. Stewart’s article focuses on Dewey’s legal career before he became Governor of New York State and almost President of the United States. As detailed in the article, Dewey’s work in the 1930s to fight corruption and illegality was unprecedented, and the young legal careers he mentored was equally impressive.
For almost 25 years the author has been writing about the eroding status of the attorney-client privilege. Practitioners, legal academics, and judges (with a few notable exceptions) seem either not to understand the privilege, or believe that the purposes it serves are overstated or not important. One recent case--which purports to strengthen the privilege--further documents this disheartening state of affairs.
In a further analysis of Judge Rakoff’s multi-year attempts to discourage the SEC from seeking federal courts to put their imprimatur on regulatory settlements, Mr. Stewart questions whether the Second Circuit’s opinion was truly a “loss” for Judge Rakoff; indeed, it would appear that the Judge may well achieve what he wanted in the first place.
Published by Bloomberg BNA, the treatise covers all aspects of the FINRA arbitration process, including prehearing matters, motion practice, hearings, and awards, and also provides a detailed guide to FINRA investigations and enforcement actions.
Conflicts of interest is an ethical area that poses many challenges for practicing lawyers. These challenges are particularly acute for lawyers who practice in transnational and international law firms. The authors address one of the most prickly of them in the foregoing article.
Judge Jed Rakoff’s skirmishes with the SEC over the approval of settlements reached a head earlier this year when the Second Circuit vacated one of the Judge’s orders rejecting a Citigroup/SEC settlement. The Judge on August 5, 2014 reluctantly complied with the higher court’s ruling. C. Evan Stewart discusses the dynamics of these judicial decisions and what was really at issue.
C Evan Stewart discusses the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 and how the trial of Anthony Burns led to the Civil War.
C Evan Stewart discusses the ethics of providing witnesses with a written script with answers to questions they will be asked during their testimony.
This article focuses on the infamous and tragic MacDonald family murders (the subject of a best-selling book, Fatal Vision), the conviction of the husband/father for the crimes, and the import of Federal Rule of Evidence 804 (b)(3) on MacDonald’s conviction.
In this article, Stewart reviews the rules and regulations promulgated by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission to govern attorney conduct in response to congress’s passing the Sarbanes-Oxley legislation in 2002, and juxtaposes those rules and regulations with conflicting ethical standards enacted by the states. He then, based upon a recent decision of the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, predicts the likely outcome of preemption litigation that will one day ensue as a result of the conflict.
Because of the whistleblower provisions of federal statutes such as Dodd-Frank, recent case law, and various articles written on this subject, there has been a fair amount of disinformation as to whether lawyers are free to rat on their clients and then also profit thereby. This article explores related concepts with intentions of determining what is right.
This article is focused around Mr. Rifkind's famous client, Jacqueline Bouvier Kennedy Onassis, and the turmoil over her attempts to scuttle the publication of The Death of a President, authorized by William Manchester.
Mr. Stewart examines the evolving state of advance conflicts of interest waivers in the context of two recent court decisions.
A discussion of the ethical rules governing English lawyers in reference to why they are not allowed to prepare witnesses for their upcoming experience in the courtroom.
A discussion on Simon Rifkind and his role as a 'giant' in the legal profession during the 20th century.
A concise and informative review of Jonathan E Macey's book, "The Death of Corporate Reputation", which discusses the idea of recapturing our ethical standards while maintaining our economic standard of living.
A discussion about uniformed objectivity amongst the judges of the Second Circuit.
A discussion on United States v. Aldman and its implications on the attorney work product doctrine, specificaly in the context of confidentiality.
Given the steady erosion in attorney-client privilege, Stewart writes that it has been disheartening to see a New York court recently reach out and imitate the courts of Ohio.
C. Evan Stewart pays homage to Emory Buckner, the man who helped to create and sustain the Dewey firm and a lawyer to whom many famous lawyers owe their careers.
Examining the tales of Judge Kaplan and the Department of Justice and Judge Rakoff and the SEC.
The story of Myron Taylor, ex-Chairman and CEO of United States Steel Corporation, was appointed by Roosevelt in 1938 to help alleviate the deepening crisis of Jewish refugees attempting to flee the persecution of Hitler's Nazi regime.
Discussing the widespread legal implications of the Rivera decision.
In the very recent past, some prominent lawyers have gotten important body parts singed by their miscues on such matters. Perhaps a review of some of these episodes will help the rest of us avoid such problems in the future.
Considering traditional antitrust principles, it is hard to conceive the government losing this case.
Mr. Stewart talks about how the SEC has suffered serious blows when it was forced to be an advocate in the federal courts.
Delving into the speech Lincoln made in New York City which many agree was the catalyst to his political career and ultimate presidency.
While much of the media has focused on the use of wiretapping in the successful criminal case brought against Raj Rajaratnam by the U.S. Attorney’s office in Manhattan, that is not the really “big show”. Rather, the main event is the prosecutorial scrutiny now being brought to bear on the fact that the hedge fund world has so heavily bought into the so-called “expert networks” in order to prosper.
As inexcusable as Patton’s behavior seems today, in the crucible of a life and death struggle is there a different way to consider Patton’s behavior? Interestingly, in Eisenhower’s eyes the answer seems to have been “yes.”
A look back at Seward's actions during the Civil War and their resonating impact on modern justice.
Consider this article as the flagging of the potholes that lie in the legal highway for New York lawyers going forward, as we practice law beyond the geographic boundaries of New York State.
Mr. Stewart opines on the growing consensus that class actions are not always the best means by which to resolve complex litigation.
Offering insight to multinational corporations in terms of navigating within, among, and between the different policies and agendas of antitrust regimes around the world.
This article examines and revels the American diplomacy displayed by two very predominent lawyers.
Litigation and Arbitration
The firm handles major cases in federal and state trial and appellate courts, before government agencies, and in a wide variety of domestic and international arbitration settings. Our experience in civil litigation covers a number of substantive areas, including antitrust and unfair competition, bankruptcy litigation and counseling, class action defense, commercial disputes, directors and officers litigation, employment, healthcare litigation, partnership disputes, products liability, real estate litigation, and securities litigation.
Our attorneys have significant experience handling appeals before federal and state appellate courts across the country and regularly represent organizations as amicus curiae in appellate matters presenting legal questions with broad policy implications. The firm has successfully handled appeals in cases where we represented a party in the lower court and in cases where we have specifically been brought in for our appellate proficiency. Our attorneys have clerked for judges on numerous federal district and appellate courts.
With every dispute, in any forum, we offer thoughtful counseling before a decision is made to litigate, and we have substantial experience in negotiating favorable pre-litigation settlements for our clients where appropriate.
If a pre-litigation settlement is not feasible or advisable, we are skilled at using the pretrial process to put our cases in the best posture for disposition by motion, settlement, or trial. Our litigators are first-rate trial lawyers: we have successfully handled hundreds of trials, arbitration hearings, and administrative procedures in state and federal courts across the country and in every major type of arbitration forum. We have an outstanding record in high-stakes, high-profile litigation, including cases involving claimed damages in the hundreds of millions of dollars.
Our trial experience helps us manage the discovery process efficiently and cost-effectively by keeping the focus on the facts that will advance our claims or defenses at trial. And that same focus — along with our intensity, creativity, and negotiating skill — helps us settle cases on excellent terms.
Our litigation and arbitration team has been recognized in leading rankings publications. Legal 500 described the firm’s strong commitment to client service and praised us as “one of the best mid-sized firms.” It also noted that the firm “differentiates itself by the creativity and flexibility it brings to its work, enabling it to handle disputes across an incredibly wide number of subject areas.” Chambers recognized the firm’s strong financial litigation practice, and noted that our attorneys “put themselves in their clients' shoes and use litigation as a tool to advance their clients' causes or solve their problems in a creative, efficient and cost-effective manner.”
White Collar Defense
Attorneys in the Chambers and Legal 500-ranked White Collar Defense group represent corporations and individuals in connection with federal and state regulatory investigations, proceedings before self-regulatory organizations, corporate internal investigations, and white collar criminal cases. Staffed by highly experienced former federal and state prosecutors and defense counsel, this group handles our clients' most sensitive, complex, and time-sensitive regulatory, investigative, and criminal defense matters.
Our attorneys have represented clients in many of the major investigations of recent years. We have defended institutions and senior executives in proceedings involving the United States Department of Justice, the Securities and Exchange Commission, the New York State Attorney General, the NYSE, FINRA, the FSA, and the Federal Reserve. We have also handled major corporate internal investigations.
Our engagements have involved virtually every major industry, including securities and banking (including broker-dealers, mutual funds, hedge funds, investment banks, and foreign and U.S. commercial banks), accounting, aviation, insurance, pharmaceuticals, construction and real estate, e-commerce, energy, hospitality and travel services, and technology.
Class Action Defense
Our attorneys have extensive class action defense experience. We have represented major public companies – including manufacturers, consumer products companies, and financial services companies – in a broad range of putative class actions, including cases alleging products liability, product defects, consumer fraud, antitrust, false advertising, and securities law claims.
The firm's attorneys have successfully handled the most complex problems facing class action defendants by defeating motions for class certification, successfully arguing for removals and dismissals, enforcing class releases, and negotiating innovative settlements. Our lawyers have defeated class certification in over thirty consumer fraud class actions and have settled hundreds of liability cases on favorable terms.
Our lawyers also counsel clients on initiatives to address litigation risks and exposure, thus reducing the potential for future class actions. We strive to help our clients implement "best practices".
Our Chambers and Legal 500-recognized Commercial Litigation group represents clients in a broad range of complex commercial, business, and financial disputes in districts throughout the United States and in the international arena. We represent clients in lawsuits involving contract disputes, derivatives claims, breach of contract, shareholder disputes, fraud, tortious interference complaints, professional malpractice claims, unfair business practices, and private equity transactions. Our clients span multiple industries, including finance, software and technology, hospitality, and real estate.
Our attorneys employ their extensive trial experience to bring a strategic approach to each claim. We offer thoughtful counseling, and we scrupulously research each matter and are prepared to effectively and vigorously defend our clients at trial. We have successfully handled numerous trials, arbitration hearings, and administrative procedures in state and federal courts across the country and in every major type of arbitration forum. We have an outstanding record in high-stakes, high-profile litigation, including cases involving claimed damages in the hundreds of millions of dollars.
The firm has extensive expertise in all aspects of securities, shareholder, and derivative litigation. We have a deep understanding of complex financial products and the operations of the financial services sector, and we frequently represent broker-dealers, investment advisors, hedge funds, and private equity funds in securities litigation and FINRA arbitrations. Our Chambers and Legal 500-recognized Securities Litigation group has successfully represented clients in connection with the prosecution and defense of claims brought under the Securities Act of 1933, the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Investment Advisors Act of 1940, myriad SEC and FINRA regulations, and various state securities laws.
Our recent engagements include the defense of billion-dollar mortgage-backed securities class actions, the successful representation of a major broker dealer in multiple FINRA arbitrations related to the sales and marketing of auction rate securities, the representation of issuers and their senior executives in connection with claims of improper disclosure and securities fraud, and the representation of clients in litigation related to bond offerings. The firm is equipped to effectively handle the most complex securities cases in a manner that provides superior and cost-efficient results for our clients.
In addition to representing clients in over one hundred securities arbitrations, we recently authored a FINRA Arbitration and Enforcement treatise for Bloomberg BNA. It examines proceedings involving FINRA in its dual capacities as a forum for dispute resolution and as a securities industry regulator.
Arbitration and Mediation
The firm’s Arbitration and Mediation attorneys advise clients in connection with every aspect of arbitration, mediation, and other alternatives to traditional litigation. We handle substantial matters before a variety of domestic and international arbitration platforms, including the AAA, FINRA, ICC, JAMS, and UNCITRAL. We recognize that arbitration and mediation matters require a different approach from traditional litigation, and we guide our clients through the process in a cost-efficient and streamlined manner.
In addition to the advocacy done by our litigators, our corporate attorneys regularly advise clients on and negotiate arbitration clauses in prospective transactions. We provide advice on clauses relating to every aspect of arbitration, including forum choice, pre-dispute resolution negotiation and mediation, and arbitration rule selection and modification.
Our attorneys have significant experience handling appeals before federal and state appellate courts across the country in connection with a diverse range of issues. We also have substantial experience representing organizations as amicus curiae in appellate matters presenting legal questions with broad policy implications.
The firm has successfully handled appeals in state and federal courts, both in cases where we represented a party in the lower court and in cases where we have specifically been brought in for our appellate proficiency. Our attorneys have clerked for judges on numerous federal and state courts at both the trial and appellate levels, including U.S. District Courts for the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York and the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. Collectively, our attorneys have handled over 100 appeals.
Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Disclaimer