Munger, Tolles & Olson’s appellate and Supreme Court practice is recognized as among the best in the nation and routinely handles the highest-stakes matters before the U.S. Supreme Court, U.S. courts of appeals, and state appellate courts. Our lawyers have secured victories in cases of historic importance and have won ground-breaking appeals around the country on a wide range of subjects, including antitrust, securities, intellectual property, cross-border disputes, and regulatory matters.
The team has an extraordinary depth and breadth of experience. It is led by Don Verrilli, who served as Solicitor General of the United States from 2011 to 2016 and has argued more than 50 cases before the U.S. Supreme Court, including landmark victories defending the Affordable Care Act and securing marriage equality. The team also includes three lawyers who served in the U.S. Solicitor General’s Office—Ginger Anders, Elaine Goldenberg, and Ben Horwich. Each has argued many times in the U.S. Supreme Court as well as in federal appeals courts and state appellate courts, and each has been recognized by Chambers USA–Nationwide Appellate as among the very best appellate lawyers in the nation. Others at the firm, including Jeff Wu, Dan Levin, and Aimee Feinberg, also have significant appellate experience, particularly in California courts.
Few other firms have such deep appellate experience or so consistently represent companies in their most complex, high-value appellate matters. Some of our recent matters before the U.S. Supreme Court and courts of appeals include representing:
- The American Hospital Association before the U.S. Supreme Court in successfully challenging a Medicare rule change that denied hospitals more than $4 billion in past reimbursements and threatened to deny billions more in reimbursements going forward.
- The U.S. House of Representatives in successfully defeating in the U.S. Supreme Court a challenge to the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act.
- The State of North Carolina in successfully arguing on behalf of the state in the U.S. Supreme Court that the Constitution’s Elections Clause does not strip state courts of their power to enforce state constitutions that limit the power of state legislatures when they set rules for federal elections.
- Mountain Valley Pipeline LLC before the U.S. Supreme Court and the Fourth Circuit in winning an emergency application to the Supreme Court to vacate stays placed on construction of a gas pipeline, and then winning a complete dismissal by a Fourth Circuit panel of lawsuits brought by the project’s opponents.
- The Financial Oversight and Management Board of Puerto Rico in successfully defeating in the U.S. Supreme Court a constitutional challenge to the Board’s authority.
- American Express Company in successfully establishing pathmarking antitrust precedent in the U.S. Supreme Court on multi-sided platforms.
- Lyft, Inc. in successful appeals in the First, Second, and Ninth Circuits defining the scope of the transportation-worker exception to the Federal Arbitration Act as applied to rideshare drivers and local delivery drivers.
- The four largest freight railroads in the United States in persuading the D.C. Circuit, in a sweeping antitrust matter that consolidates approximately 100 price-fixing cases against four rail carriers, to exclude on statutory grounds certain evidence relating to discussions between railroads about interline shipping.
- CVS Pharmacy, Inc., in a Sixth Circuit appeal of a $650 million verdict arising out of multidistrict litigation concerning the opioid crisis.
- Grayscale Investments, LLC, in successfully challenging in the D.C. Circuit a decision by the Securities and Exchange Commission to deny a proposal by a national securities exchange to list and trade shares of Grayscale Bitcoin Trust as an exchange-traded fund.
- AbbVie Inc. in winning an important Third Circuit appeal affirming denial of class certification on ascertainability grounds in long-running putative class actions by direct and indirect drug purchasers.
- Wells Fargo Bank NA in the California Supreme Court in a case establishing that lenders and loan services are not obligated to protect a borrower’s economic interests when processing a mortgage modification application.
- Google LLC in setting an important precedent for obtaining mandamus relief for patent infringement matters, as well as in multiple Federal Circuit appeals.
- Steves & Sons in successfully defending in the Fourth Circuit a judgment in an antitrust case in Steves’ favor ordering divesture of a key asset by one of Steves’ suppliers and awarding millions of dollars in damages—the first time a court in private litigation under the Clayton Act has awarded divestiture as a remedy for a completed merger.
- An individual defendant in United States v. Blaszczak et al. in securing a favorable decision from the Second Circuit overturning a first-of-its-kind criminal conviction that applied federal criminal fraud statutes to the alleged misuse of confidential government information.
- BNSF Railway Company in numerous successful Ninth Circuit appeals involving issues such as discriminatory taxation and preemption under the ICC Termination Act and other federal laws.
- Numerous public companies in successful representations in derivative suits and putative securities class actions in the Ninth Circuit.
- International organizations such as the International Finance Corporation and Interpol in appeals in numerous courts concerning international organizational immunity in the United States.
- Farmers and landowners in successfully defending in the Federal Circuit a trial court ruling awarding more than $10 million in compensation for the taking of farmlands through recurring flooding along the Missouri River that was caused by massive river alterations made by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
Munger, Tolles & Olson also has an active practice in the U.S. Supreme Court in seeking or opposing grants of certiorari and in representing amici at all stages. The firm is skilled at handling and opposing mandamus petitions and petitions for interlocutory appeal under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(f). And the firm’s appellate lawyers frequently handle dispositive motions and other complex legal issues in trial courts and in front of regulatory agencies, where they work closely with trial teams to frame the issues in the most persuasive manner possible and to preserve issues for appeal.
|Donald B. Verrilli, Jr.||Ginger D. Anders||Elaine J. Goldenberg|
|Benjamin J. Horwich||Daniel B. Levin||Jeffrey Y. Wu|