Complex Litigation
Our lawyers are not afraid of a challenge. With almost 70 years of combined experience, attorneys Charles Williams and James Skilling are comfortable litigating difficult issues that require thoughtful and innovative trial strategies. We handle large, complex matters, and can serve as either lead counsel, co-counsel or local counsel.
Charles and James are experienced in complex litigation strategy, case management, and coordination, and are dedicated to maintaining and deepening their knowledge of the underlying subjects of the cases they handle.
Representative Engagements:
-We served as co-counsel for plaintiffs in a case involving sexual abuse of minors attending a private school.
-We represented a large multistate refuse company with claims relating to an illegal scheme for the provision of workers compensation insurance.
-We served as co-counsel for plaintiffs in a case in Minnesota against General Motors arising out of defective airbag sensors in certain 2010 and 2011 Chevrolet Camaros.
-We represented a national surety company with respect to a myriad of claims flowing from the bankruptcy of a large commercial contracting company and complex settlement negotiations involving the Trustee and the parent company that had guaranteed the surety bonds of its subsidiary.
-We served as liaison counsel for plaintiffs in Borboa, et al. v. Chandler, et al., Civil Action No. 3:13-cv-00844, a putative class action pending in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. Plaintiffs allege that former officers and directors and others of LandAmerica Financial Group, Inc. breached fiduciary duties owed under ERISA to the LandAmerica 401K plan and plan participants.
-We served as co-counsel for plaintiffs in an environmental tort case and putative class action in federal and state courts in Louisville, Kentucky.
-Our attorneys filed a lawsuit in federal court, and also filed over one hundred mechanics liens in state courts, to assist a utility clearing contractor obtain payment for its work on a multi-state natural gas pipeline.
-Our attorneys successfully sought contractual death benefits for the widow of a deceased executive of a national mass media company in Williams v. CDP, Inc., 474 Fed. Appx. 316 (4th Cir. 2012)(unpublished).
-Our attorneys played a leading role in the defense of more than fifteen lawsuits filed in Virginia state and federal courts against a supplier of fill material used in the construction of numerous big box stores, grocery stores, schools, and churches. See, e.g., Kohl's Dep't Stores, Inc. v. Target Stores, Inc., 290 F. Supp. 2d 674 (E.D. Va. 2003). Collectively, these cases sought over sixty million dollars, and the litigation spanned more than seven years. The cases were resolved to the satisfaction of the client and its insurance carriers, and our attorneys were instrumental in reducing the claims and in ensuring that parties responsible for the damage in each case were “at the table”.
-Our attorneys represented a bond manager/trader recruited by a brokerage firm to leave his employment in New York and move his family to Richmond. When the brokerage firm failed to live up to its promises, the broker demanded arbitration. The brokerage firm denied all wrongdoing, but the arbitration panel disagreed and awarded the client a substantial sum following hearings over several days.
-Our attorneys represented a franchisor in a dispute with a franchisee over the payment of royalties. The franchisee also alleged fraud in the inducement in an effort to escape its obligations under the franchise agreement. Our client prevailed in a bench trial and was paid in full.
-In a dispute involving a non-compete agreement between two bidders on a construction project for the federal government, our attorneys successfully defended a lawsuit which sought to enjoin the client from bidding on the contract. The non-compete agreement was declared anti-competitive and void, and the case was dismissed with prejudice. The client went on to obtain several contracts with the government.
Charles and James are experienced in complex litigation strategy, case management, and coordination, and are dedicated to maintaining and deepening their knowledge of the underlying subjects of the cases they handle.
Representative Engagements:
-We served as co-counsel for plaintiffs in a case involving sexual abuse of minors attending a private school.
-We represented a large multistate refuse company with claims relating to an illegal scheme for the provision of workers compensation insurance.
-We served as co-counsel for plaintiffs in a case in Minnesota against General Motors arising out of defective airbag sensors in certain 2010 and 2011 Chevrolet Camaros.
-We represented a national surety company with respect to a myriad of claims flowing from the bankruptcy of a large commercial contracting company and complex settlement negotiations involving the Trustee and the parent company that had guaranteed the surety bonds of its subsidiary.
-We served as liaison counsel for plaintiffs in Borboa, et al. v. Chandler, et al., Civil Action No. 3:13-cv-00844, a putative class action pending in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. Plaintiffs allege that former officers and directors and others of LandAmerica Financial Group, Inc. breached fiduciary duties owed under ERISA to the LandAmerica 401K plan and plan participants.
-We served as co-counsel for plaintiffs in an environmental tort case and putative class action in federal and state courts in Louisville, Kentucky.
-Our attorneys filed a lawsuit in federal court, and also filed over one hundred mechanics liens in state courts, to assist a utility clearing contractor obtain payment for its work on a multi-state natural gas pipeline.
-Our attorneys successfully sought contractual death benefits for the widow of a deceased executive of a national mass media company in Williams v. CDP, Inc., 474 Fed. Appx. 316 (4th Cir. 2012)(unpublished).
-Our attorneys played a leading role in the defense of more than fifteen lawsuits filed in Virginia state and federal courts against a supplier of fill material used in the construction of numerous big box stores, grocery stores, schools, and churches. See, e.g., Kohl's Dep't Stores, Inc. v. Target Stores, Inc., 290 F. Supp. 2d 674 (E.D. Va. 2003). Collectively, these cases sought over sixty million dollars, and the litigation spanned more than seven years. The cases were resolved to the satisfaction of the client and its insurance carriers, and our attorneys were instrumental in reducing the claims and in ensuring that parties responsible for the damage in each case were “at the table”.
-Our attorneys represented a bond manager/trader recruited by a brokerage firm to leave his employment in New York and move his family to Richmond. When the brokerage firm failed to live up to its promises, the broker demanded arbitration. The brokerage firm denied all wrongdoing, but the arbitration panel disagreed and awarded the client a substantial sum following hearings over several days.
-Our attorneys represented a franchisor in a dispute with a franchisee over the payment of royalties. The franchisee also alleged fraud in the inducement in an effort to escape its obligations under the franchise agreement. Our client prevailed in a bench trial and was paid in full.
-In a dispute involving a non-compete agreement between two bidders on a construction project for the federal government, our attorneys successfully defended a lawsuit which sought to enjoin the client from bidding on the contract. The non-compete agreement was declared anti-competitive and void, and the case was dismissed with prejudice. The client went on to obtain several contracts with the government.