Richard A. Martin

Partner
Securities Litigation & Regulatory Enforcement

Richard A. Martin, a partner in Orrick’s New York office, is a member of the Securities Litigation and Regulatory Enforcement Group. His practice focuses on accountants’ liability, securities and commercial litigation, as well as arbitration and international and domestic white-collar criminal law.

Mr. Martin has been involved in litigation in the state and federal courts of the United States, Europe and Asia for more than 30 years. From June 1987 to July 1990, Mr. Martin served as Special Representative of the Attorney General, located at the United States Embassy in Rome, Italy. There, he represented the Department of Justice in Europe and handled extradition and mutual assistance matters. In August 1990, Mr. Martin’s contributions were recognized when he was named “Commendatore al Merito della Repubblica Italiana,” the Italian Legion of Honor.

Prior to transferring to Rome, Mr. Martin served as an Assistant United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, from January 1980 to June 1987. Mr. Martin received numerous commendations for his work in the United States Attorney’s Office, including the Distinguished Service Award from the Department of Justice.

Representative Engagements

  • Bain Capital Partners, LLC v. Ernst & Young Global, Ltd, et al (No. 14-1765-D).  (Mass. Sup. Ct. 2014).  Represents India-based audit firms in litigation alleging fraud and negligent misrepresentation arising from a Bain subsidiary’s investment in an Indian business.  Plaintiffs claim losses of $60 million.  A motion to dismiss is pending.   
  • Securities and Exchange Commission v. BDO China Dahua CPA CO. Ltd., et al, Adm. Proceeding 3-14872-315116Co-lead counsel for EY Ernst & Young China member firm (EY Hua Ming) in SEC proceeding against big 4 China firms for failing to produce documents directly to the SEC.  EY Hua Ming and the other firms established at trial in July, 2013, that China law prohibited them from producing documents directly to the SEC without review and approval of the Chinese authorities.  In January 2014, the SEC administrative law judge ruled in favor of SEC.  That ruling is presently on appeal to the Securities and Exchange Commission.
  • Athale, et al v. SinoTech Energy Ltd, et al (CA No. 11-cv-05831) S.D.N.Y. 2011.  Successfully defended Ernst & Young Hua Ming in class action brought by investors in a China-based energy company that was publicly traded in the U.S.  Successfully obtained dismissal of case in February 2014.  See Athale v. SinoTech Energy Ltd., No. 11-cv-05831, 2014 WL687218 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 21, 2014).  Motion to dismiss amended complaint pending.
  • Midaminses SPLR, Ltd. v. KBC Bank, N.V. et al.  Represents Belgian Bank in an action in New York federal court alleging RICO-type claims.  Motion to dismiss based on forum selection clause granted (No. 12 Civ. 8089, March 18, 2014).  An appeal is pending.
  • AXA Mediterranean Holdings S.A. v. ING International B.V. (No. 652110/2010) NY State Supreme Court.  Successfully defended third party motion to compel Ernst & Young Mexican member firm  to produce documents in New York Supreme Court.  In a matter of first impression the court rejected claims by AXA that by stipulating to accept service of a subpoena for discovery (to avoid recourse to Hague process) the EY firm did not subject itself to personal jurisdiction in New York.  2013 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 5645, Index No. 652110/2010 (Sup. Ct. N.Y. Cty. March 5, 2013).
  • Lazare Kaplan International, Inc. v. KBC Bank N.V. and Antwerp Diamond Bank N.V. (No. 11 Civ. 9490 (ALC) (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 5, 2012), 2012 WL 3854618 (S.D.N.Y.)). Co-lead counsel for KBC Bank in a RICO action seeking US$1.5 billion against the bank and its subsidiary, Antwerp Diamond Bank, based on the banks’ alleged complicity in the loss of US$135 million in diamonds and diamond proceeds. The district court granted KBC’s motion to dismiss the action in favor of proceedings in Belgium based on forum non conveniens, and also rejected plaintiff’s application for an anti-suit injunction, (No. 11 Civ 9490, 2012 WL 3854618 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 5, 2012)). That decision was remanded to the district court for limited jurisdiction and discovery, 528 F. App'x 33 (2d. Civ. 2013) which is presently underway.
  • Sterling National Bank v. J.H. Cohn, LLP. (Index No. 650879/12 (MLS) (N.Y.Sup. Aug. 28, 2012.)). Successfully defended accounting firm J.H. Cohn in an action alleging fraud in connection with losses suffered by Sterling National Bank which made loans to J.H. Cohn’s audit client.
  • Innospec Fuel Specialties, LLC v. Isochem North America, (Civ. No. 10-1642, 2012 WL 3682988 (D.N.J. Aug. 24, 2012). Lead counsel for Isochem North America (a subsidiary of French chemical supplier SNPE) in its defense of breach of contract and other claims brought by Innospec. The court granted summary judgment in favor of Isochem.
  • Madoff Litigation. Successfully represented Ernst & Young Luxembourg (“EY Luxembourg”) in litigation in the Southern District of New York arising out of EY Luxembourg’s involvement in the audits of certain feeder funds that invested in Bernard Madoff securities. After intensive fact investigation, analysis of the legal issues and coordination, with counsel for nearly thirty other defendants, the Luxemburg firm joined in the motion to dismiss the claims against it and all other defendants. That motion was granted on November 29, 2011. The decision was affirmed (In Re Herald, Pringo and Thenar, 730 F. 3d 112 (2d Civ.2013)) and following application for the hearing consideration, affirmed again. F. 3d 110 (2d Civ. 2014). 
  • Stewardship Funds Litigation. Successfully defended Ernst & Young Bermuda (“EY Bermuda”) in litigations arising out of the Stewardship funds’ investment with a group of companies run by Thomas E. Petters, who was found guilty of running a US$3 billion Ponzi scheme. In response to investors’ initial filing in Connecticut state court, EY Bermuda successfully compelled arbitration in Connecticut federal court under the Federal Arbitration Act, on the ground that the investors’ claims were derivative, rather than direct, and, therefore, the investors were bound by the arbitration clause in the fund’s engagement letter. See Ernst & Young Ltd. Bermuda v. Quinn, 2009 WL 3571573 (D. Conn.). Mr. Martin also served as lead counsel for Ernst & Young Bermuda (”EY Bermuda”) and Ernst & Young Bahamas (“EY Bahamas”) in litigation arising out of the Stewardship funds’ investment brought by another group of investors. See, Isakov v. Ernst & Young Bermuda (Bermuda) and Ernst & Young Bahamas (Bahamas), 3:10-CV-1517 (D. Conn.). On March 9, 2012, the Court dismissed the federal securities claims against the Ernst & Young Firms and directed that all but one of their claims be sent to arbitration, as defendants had sought.
  • Bear Stearns Hedge Fund Litigation. Lead counsel for Deloitte & Touche Cayman Islands against claims arising out of the collapse of the Bear Stearns Cayman Islands hedge funds. Plaintiffs, representing the interests of the Cayman Islands liquidators of the hedge funds, sought recovery of US$1.5 billion. Following argument on June 24, 2010, the Court dismissed all claims other than negligence against DT Cayman. A motion to dismiss the final claim against DT Cayman was granted on January 5, 2011, when the Court dismissed the action in its entirety.
  • In re Parmalat Securities Litigation. Lead counsel for Deloitte & Touche SpA in the Parmalat Securities Litigation Class action (in re Parmalat Securities Litigation, 04 MD 1653), and the related action brought by the receiver of Parmalat, Dr. Enrico Bondi (Bondi v. Grant Thornton International et al., 322 B.R. 44 (S.D.N.Y. 2005). Successfully defended against remand motion filed by the receiver and had the action consolidated with other claims in the Southern District of New York. Also acted as coordinating counsel for related Italian civil, criminal and administrative proceedings.
  • FraternityFund Ltd. v. Beacon Hill Asset Management, LLC, 376 F.Supp.2d 385 (S.D.N.Y. 2005); Bullmore et al. v. Ernst & Young et al. 861 N.Y.S.2d 578. Successfully defended Ernst & Young Cayman Islands in hedge fund securities litigation claims by fund investors in federal action, where claims were dismissed. Successfully defended parallel action in New York State Court, where claims asserted by Cayman liquidators were dismissed on summary judgment, and recovered substantial reimbursement of legal fees and costs from the liquidator through an indemnification claim.
  • Sniado v. Bank of Austria et al., 174 F. Supp. 2d 159 (S.D.N.Y. 2001); 02-77012; 378 F.3d 210 (2nd Cir. 2004). Successful defense of Banca Intesa on claim of antitrust violation for alleged fixing of exchange rates in Italy. Certiorari granted, and dismissal affirmed by U.S. Supreme Court pursuant to ruling in F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd. v. Empagran S.A., 542 U.S. 155 (2004).
  • NYSE Euronext. On behalf of client, submitted amicus curiae brief in Morrison v. National Australia Bank Ltd., urging adoption of the bright-line transactional test which the Supreme Court enunciated in its June 2010 opinion 130 S.Ct. 2869.

International Civil and Arbitration Matters

  • Core Furnace Systems Corp. v. DeAcero S.A. de C.V., 50T 110 00537 03. Representation of Mexican steel manufacturer in AAA arbitration and coordination of parallel patent/trade use claims in Mexico and Italy.
  • Confidential advice to an Italian energy supplier regarding arbitration provisions concerning joint venture with a U.S. company in Argentine energy supplier.
  • Confidential advice to a Hong Kong supplier in Singapore arbitration case applying New York law.
  • Representation in AAA proceeding of eyewear manufacturer.
  • Representation in AAA of Italian clothing designer and manufacturer against joint venture partner and distributor in the United States.

International Regulatory Proceedings and Investigations

Mr. Martin has conducted internal investigations of numerous multinational Fortune 500 corporations and presented results to corporate boards, U.S. authorities and committees, as well as foreign law enforcement and legislative authorities. He has also represented numerous corporate defendants and individuals investigated by foreign criminal and administrative authorities and in parallel U.S. proceedings, including the following.

  • Advised numerous foreign member firms regarding parallel U.S. and foreign regulatory investigation including Switzerland, Italy, Luxembourg, Mexico, the Cayman Islands, Bermuda and Bahamas.
  • Advised J. Paul Getty Museum regarding claims seeking forfeiture of antiquities, and claims against curator in criminal action relating to receipt of illegally excavated antiquities. Advised a U.S. medical supply manufacturer regarding investigation of commercial bribery in European subsidiary.
  • Advised a U.S. pharmaceutical manufacturer relating to investigation of sales through compensation to doctors recommending the use of the company’s product and claims of “permanent establishment.”
  • Defended three U.S. directors named in an asbestos-related prosecution and civil proceedings in Italy.
  • Advised a major cigarette distributor regarding claims of tax evasion by Italian authority based on presence of “permanent establishment” in Italy.
  • Advised a large U.S. securities dealer concerning investigation by CONSOB, the Italian equivalent of the SEC.
  • Assisted in the defense of a major U.S. banking institution in criminal charges against former officer who structured a “usufruct” transaction in Italy, and in related civil claims.
  • Advised several individuals prosecuted in Italy for possession of allegedly stolen artworks, and assisted with defense of civil claims in U.S. courts.
  • Assisted in the defense of the management of an Italian office of a U.S. public relations firm regarding commercial bribery charges.

Prior to joining Orrick, Mr. Martin was a shareholder at Heller Ehrman LLP, where he had served as Managing Partner and Head of Litigation in the New York office.

Richard Martin
, 2014
Speeches
  • July 30, 2010, EACC/NYSE MCLE Program and Webinar, “The Impact of the Supreme Court’s Decision in Morrison v. National Australia Bank Ltd. on Global Class Actions”
  • May 20, 2010, Ernst & Young MCLE Program, “Supreme Court 2009-2010 Term: Accountants’ Liability; Securities Litigation and Honest Services Cases; Legislative Responses”
  • March 10, 2010, NYSE Euronext and EACC Seminar, “Expanding in Europe – Global Visibility and Simplified Access to Capital”
  • January 8, 2010, Orrick and Deloitte MCLE Program, “Legislative, Regulatory and Litigation Developments Affecting the Accounting Profession in 2010”
  • May 6, 2009, EACC Program at the Harvard Club, “Resolving International Class Action Claims from the Global Financial Crisis to the Madoff Fraud”
Select Publications
Languages
  • Italian
Admitted In
  • New York
Court Admissions
Supreme Court of the United States
    United States Court of Appeals
    • Second Circuit
    United States District Court
    • Southern District of New York
    • Eastern District of New York

    Education
    • A.B., Magna Cum Laude, Phi Beta Kappa, Honors, Brown University, 1971
    • J.D., Associate Editor, New York University Law Review, New York University School of Law, 1974
    Honors
    • Chambers Global "Leader in Their Field," Dispute Resolution - Italy, 2013, 2014
    • Chambers Global "Foreign Expert," Litigation - USA, 2013, 2014
    • Chambers USA "Leader in Their Field," Securities Litigation - New York, 2013, 2014
    • Super Lawyers: Securities Litigation and International, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2014
    Clerkships
    • Hon. Jacob Mishler, United States District Court, Eastern District of New York, 1974-75
    Memberships
    • Association of the Bar of the City of New York
    • New York State Bar Association
    • American Bar Association
    • Board Member, Volunteers of Legal Services (2004-present)
    • Board Member, European American Chamber of Commerce (2008-present)

    Please do not include any confidential, secret or otherwise sensitive information concerning any potential or actual legal matter in this e-mail message. Unsolicited e-mails do not create an attorney-client relationship and confidential or secret information included in such e-mails cannot be protected from disclosure. Orrick does not have a duty or a legal obligation to keep confidential any information that you provide to us. Also, please note that our attorneys do not seek to practice law in any jurisdiction in which they are not properly authorized to do so.

    By clicking "OK" below, you understand and agree that Orrick will have no duty to keep confidential any information you provide.

    OK
    Cancel