skip to main content

The Paul, Weiss Litigation Department is led by a team of the country’s most accomplished trial lawyers. Our litigators in New York and Washington, D.C. handle the most complex and demanding lawsuits, class actions, government investigations, criminal prosecutions and restructurings. Our clients include Fortune 50 corporations and other prominent companies in the financial services, investment, medical device, pharmaceutical, sports, technology, energy, media and insurance industries. Every day, we are called on by chief executives, board chairs, general counsel, investors and entrepreneurs for our unmatched trial skills, sophisticated business judgment and renowned strategic advice.

Representative Engagements

The Paul, Weiss Litigation Department continues to be involved in cases that shape financial markets and corporate boardrooms, representing many of the world's leading corporations in their most sensitive and complex matters. Client matters have included:

  • Exxon Mobil Corp. in climate change-related investigations and suits brought by regulators, including state attorneys general deploying untested liability theories. These matters include representing ExxonMobil in an SEC investigation concerning climate change-related disclosures that was closed with a no-action determination. The firm also won a complete defense verdict in a landmark securities fraud action brought by the New York Attorney General seeking $1.6 billion in damages—the first climate change-related lawsuit to be tried to verdict nationally. Paul, Weiss is also advising ExxonMobil on government tort, shareholder securities, and other climate change-related matters arising in various proceedings worldwide.

  • The National Football League in the defense and landmark settlement, upheld on appeal, of hundreds of lawsuits filed by thousands of former NFL players seeking to hold the League liable for allegedly concealing the risks associated with concussions sustained while playing professional football.

  • Citigroup in virtually all of its major litigation and regulatory enforcement matters, including:
    • a complete defense win in an arbitral panel ruling, subsequently upheld by a federal district and an appellate court, in a $7.5 billion ICDR arbitration brought by the Abu Dhabi Investment Authority (ADIA);
    • a multi-year federal grand jury investigation of its compliance with BSA/AML requirements that resulted in a non-prosecution agreement and a significantly reduced penalty;
    • arguably the most important regulatory decision in the past decade, SEC v. Citigroup, which upheld the ability of corporations to resolve federal regulatory matters without having to admit liability;
    • a complete defense victory in which a jury in the Southern District of New York found Citigroup not liable for fraud in the 2007 sale of the music company EMI to London-based private equity firm Terra Firma; and
    • a complete defense win in a $30 billion claim against Citigroup brought by Parmalat, and a $364.2 million jury verdict, upheld on appeal, on Citigroup’s counterclaims against Parmalat, culminating in a judgment by Italy’s Supreme Court finding our verdict, by then tripled in value, final and enforceable in Italy.
  • News Corporation and its subsidiary News America Marketing (NAM) in several antitrust matters, including most recently in defense of an antitrust action brought by competitor Valassis Communications, Inc. alleging that NAM monopolized an alleged market for third-party promotions by engaging in a variety of exclusionary practices; securing the dismissal of an antitrust claim brought by competitor Valassis Communications, Inc. alleging that NAM violated a consent order resolving an earlier dispute through unlawful bundling and tying; and the favorable settlement of a significant antitrust class action brought by customers of NAM’s in-store marketing products, including consumer products companies Dial, Heinz and Smithfield Foods, claiming that NAM illegally monopolized an alleged market for in-store promotional services by engaging in a variety of alleged exclusionary practices.
  • IBM in connection with several high-profile litigations and settlements regarding enforcement of employee restrictive covenants, non-competition agreements and equity clawback contracts. 
  • Mastercard in three of the largest antitrust litigations pending nationally, including litigation challenges, and a subsequent settlement, of payment card “interchange” fees and certain rules governing merchants’ acceptance of payment cards; antitrust and consumer protection class actions on behalf of independent ATM operators and consumer groups challenging Mastercard’s ATM access fee non-discrimination rule; and an antitrust and consumer protection class action on behalf of merchants who incurred “chargebacks” for payment card fraud.
  • Blackstone Alternative Asset Management (BAAM) in the successful appeal in the Kentucky Court of Appeals of an adverse decision in Kentucky state court in a ground-breaking $50 billion derivative claim alleging that Blackstone’s alternative asset-management unit and other hedge funds unlawfully encouraged the plaintiff pension fund to invest in supposedly unduly risky funds of hedge funds while the state fund’s financial condition was deteriorating. That decision is now being reviewed by the Kentucky Supreme Court.
  • Oak Hill Capital Partners and individual directors of in securing the dismissal of all claims at trial in the Delaware Court of Chancery regarding Oak Hill's redemption of preferred equity in its portfolio company. The court found that defendants proved at trial that their conduct was entirely fair under Delaware’s most exacting standard of review—an exceedingly rare outcome.
  • Pfizer in multiple complex litigation matters, including the favorable settlement of a high-stakes class action filed by direct purchasers of pain management drug Celebrex who alleged that Pfizer obtained a reissue patent for Celebrex through fraud on the PTO, delaying generic competition and allowing the company to maintain an illegal monopoly; and in the favorable settlement of a high-value breach of contract dispute against Pfizer subsidiary Medivation brought by the Regents of the University of California alleging that Medivation owed them an additional share of profits on U.S. sales of a prostate cancer drug.
  • Tesla's independent directors in the favorable settlement of an SEC investigation into Elon Musk’s proposal to take Tesla private and Musk’s public statements and tweets.
  • Morgan Stanley in defense of criminal and civil regulatory investigations by the SEC, DOJ and CFTC and a parallel multidistrict litigation stemming from allegations that 26 of the biggest banks and securities brokers involved in the $13 trillion Treasuries market were involved in bid-rigging auctions for U.S. Treasury securities. Paul, Weiss was selected by all 26 defendants to serve on the defense steering committee. 
  • Fresenius, a German healthcare company, in a landmark ruling, affirmed by the Delaware Supreme Court, that Fresenius was justified in terminating a $4.8 billion merger agreement with Akorn due to Akorn’s post-signing decline and blatant breaches of FDA data integrity requirements, both constituting Material Adverse Events (MAE) under Delaware law.
  • Channel Medsystems, a medical device start-up, in a trial victory in connection with a “material adverse change” litigation in Delaware Court of Chancery in which Boston Scientific unsuccessfully sought to terminate its $250 million acquisition of the company.
  • Cumulus Media, the nation’s second largest radio station operator, in a multi-day chapter 11 plan confirmation trial in which creditors unsuccessfully challenged Cumulus’ valuation of the company’s assets.
  • Farelogix, an information technology company that connects travel agencies directly with airlines and travel services, as lead antitrust counsel in connection with the DOJ’s investigation and subsequent civil antitrust lawsuit seeking to block its proposed acquisition by Sabre, a leading global travel distribution intermediary between ticket agents and airlines and travel services, alleging that the merger would eliminate competition for booking services in the online and traditional travel agency markets. Following a two-week bench trial in federal court, the court issued an opinion in favor of Farelogix, ruling that the DOJ did not establish harm to competition on both sides of the two-sided market.
  • American International Group (AIG) in the dismissal, affirmed on appeal, of almost all claims in a multi-district litigation alleging a massive, industry-wide market allocation conspiracy encompassing all lines of commercial and employee benefits insurance, setting the matter up for an extremely favorable settlement.
  • Biogen in litigation against several of its major competitors on the fundamental patent covering the use of Biogen's top-selling product, the multiple sclerosis treatment Avonex®. This product was among the first therapeutic applications of recombinant DNA technology and was critical to Biogen's emergence as one of the world's leading biotech companies. In the litigation, Biogen has asserted that several of its competitors, including EMD Serono, Bayer Healthcare and Novartis, are infringing the patent in selling their own versions of recombinant beta interferon, the genetically engineered protein that is Avonex®.
  • Glencore International, in securing the dismissal of a multibillion-dollar antitrust, fraud and corruption lawsuit brought against international oil trading companies by a U.S. litigation trust allegedly established by Venezuela’s national oil company, Petroleos de Venezuela, S.A. (PDVSA), alleging that the oil trading companies conspired to obtain inside information about tenders for the sale and purchase of oil and oil products.
  • Simon Property Group in securing the dismissal of all claims at the trial level and on appeal before the New York Appellate Division, First Department of a judgment enforcement proceeding brought by Gronich, a commercial real estate broker, regarding an alleged unpaid commission arising out of an agreement between Longstreet LP, the then-owner of the General Motors Building on Fifth Avenue, and Gronich. Gronich alleged that Simon was responsible for the judgment because it fraudulently transferred assets from Longstreet to its parent in connection with Simon’s merger with the parent and was subsequently liable for the judgment.

See additional work highlights across a multitude of practice areas, such as:



© 2020 Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP

Privacy Policy