Paul A.
Paterson

A partner in the Litigation Department, Paul Paterson has substantial experience with a wide variety of matters in all phases of complex civil litigation. He has represented clients in bankruptcy, mergers and acquisitions, securities, ERISA, contractual and other complex commercial disputes. He has litigated high-profile cases in numerous jurisdictions and has substantial trial experience. He has also worked on multiple regulatory matters and internal investigations.

Paul’s recent experience includes representing:

• Revlon, a leading global beauty company, and certain of its subsidiaries in discovery, depositions and hearings related to their chapter 11 cases in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York and as counsel to Revlon in its successful defense in an adversary proceeding by pre-petition lenders alleging breach of credit agreements and other claims, achieving complete dismissal of all claims against Revlon.
• Proterra, a publicly traded developer and producer of commercial electric vehicle technology, including proprietary battery systems, electric transit buses and turnkey charging solutions, in its chapter 11 cases in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware.
• Enviva and its debtor affiliates, the world’s largest producer of sustainable wood pellets, in their prearranged chapter 11 cases in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, including successful settlements of valuation disputes and litigation with a substantial joint venture partner.
• An Ad Hoc Group of 2020 Secured PDVSA Noteholders in litigation in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York concerning the enforceability of a pledge securing more than $2 billion of bonds issued by a Venezuelan state-owned corporation.
• Fresenius SE & Co., a German healthcare company, in a landmark post-trial ruling, affirmed by the Delaware Supreme Court, that Fresenius was justified in terminating a $4.8 billion merger agreement with Akorn Pharmaceuticals due to Akorn’s post-signing decline and Akorn’s breaches of FDA data integrity requirements, both constituting Material Adverse Events (MAE) under Delaware law. The decision was the first to find an MAE justified based on post-signing financial decline and other factors.
• Channel Medsystems, Inc., a medical device start-up, in a trial victory in the Delaware Court of Chancery over Boston Scientific Corporation, which had unsuccessfully sought to terminate its $250 million acquisition of Channel based on an alleged MAE.
• Simon Property Group in expedited litigation concerning Simon’s invocation of an MAE to withdraw from its $3.6 billion acquisition of a majority interest in Taubman Realty Group. The parties settled on the eve of trial for an $800 million purchase price reduction—the biggest COVID-19 related discount to date for a major deal.
• Advance, a privately-owned investment company, and several current and former officers and directors in a stockholder class action brought in the Delaware Court of Chancery asserting breach of fiduciary duty claims related to the $43 billion merger between AT&T’s WarnerMedia and Discovery Inc.
• Grupo Salinas in a dispute with AT&T relating to indemnification claims brought by AT&T following its $2.5 billion acquisition of Iusacell, Grupo Salinas’ Mexican wireless provider.
• Bain Capital in a shareholder class action alleging that Bain aided and abetted a breach of fiduciary duty by the former controlling stockholder of one of its portfolio companies.