Last month, the Delaware Chancery Court drastically reduced – from $275,000 to $50,000 – a mootness fee award requested by plaintiffs’ counsel in a lawsuit challenging the merger between PayPal and Xoom Corporation, finding the supplemental disclosures that flowed from the lawsuit provided only minor benefits to stockholders. In re Xoom Corp. Stockholder Litigation. The steep fee reduction reinforces Trulia’s admonition earlier this year that the days of $250,000-$350,000 attorneys’ fee awards for meaningless additional disclosures are over, as Delaware judges will carefully scrutinize attorneys’ fee requests for litigation that yields disclosures of little or no value.
Brad is a sought-after counselor and trial lawyer whose broad litigation practice spans all varieties of high-stakes disputes on both the plaintiff and defense side. He represents some of the world’s largest public and private companies, sports leagues and teams, asset managers in the private equity, private credit and hedge fund space, and high-net-worth individuals and their family offices, most often in state and federal courts in New York and Delaware, and before domestic and international arbitration panels. Brad regularly handles matters involving securities, contract disputes, real estate, fraud, business torts, disputes between GPs and LPs, trade secrets and non-compete claims. In addition to his litigation practice, Brad serves as outside general counsel for a number of his family office clients, a role in which he is relied upon for his pragmatic and sound advice.
Equally comfortable in the courtroom and the boardroom, Brad is known by his clients – and his adversaries – as a “straight shooter” and a “problem solver” who is called upon to help his clients navigate through their most complex and challenging bet-the-company disputes. He takes a practical and holistic approach to each of his clients and their matters, working closely with them to devise and execute winning strategies to secure the most favorable results, whether at the negotiating table or before a judge and jury.
Earlier in his career, Brad was selected to serve as a Special Assistant Corporation Counsel for the City of New York as part of a Proskauer externship program. While working for the city, Brad served as a trial lawyer in the Manhattan Trial Unit, where he was lead counsel for the City of New York in 17 jury trials.
Brad maintains an active pro bono caseload and has received numerous accolades for his commitment to his pro bono clients. He previously led Proskauer’s public service deposition and trial programs, supervising and mentoring dozens of young litigation and labor associates in their defense of all varieties of claims brought against the City of New York. He has also served as a board member of the Young Professionals Committee of the Innocence Project, a national litigation and public policy organization dedicated both to exonerating wrongfully convicted people through DNA testing and reforming the criminal justice system to prevent further injustice.
For trial lawyers, hostile adversaries are par for the course. But judges are supposed to be irreproachably impartial, right? That is, after all, the very cornerstone of our judicial system. So when you find yourself trying a case in front of a judge who is openly hostile to your witnesses or your client’s case – particularly if you feel the hostility is unwarranted or comes seemingly out of the blue – it can rattle even the most seasoned trial lawyer. And while it can be an incredibly frustrating experience to say the least, you don’t have to let it throw you off your game. Below are six tactics to keep in mind when your trial judge clearly, unequivocally, and openly, isn’t buying what you’re selling: