As appellate lawyers, our specialties are legal strategy and writing; simplifying complex factual, technical, and legal concepts and making them simple and straightforward; providing a deep understanding of how appellate judges will approach and react to certain issues and arguments so that those issues can be teed up in the best possible posture; and perfecting a case for appeal. These attributes are just as valuable in the trial court as on appeal.
We work on all law-intensive aspects of a case. We specialize, in particular, in pre-trial, trial, and post-trial strategy; dispositive motions; procedural motions (including jurisdictional and venue objections); writs of mandamus and interlocutory appeals; jury instructions and objections; motions in limine and Dauberts; preservation of issues and objections for appeal; and mid-trial and post-trial motions and objections.
In what has been dubbed “The World Series Of Copyright Suits,” after prevailing on appeal, Orrick appellate lawyers led the briefing team for the retrial of Google’s fair use defense, leading briefing on all pre-trial, mid-trial, and post-trial issues, including jury instructions, motions in limine, Daubert motions, mid-trial objections and evidentiary issues, and motions for judgment as a matter of law and new trial.
Orrick appellate attorneys work seamlessly with the securities litigation team to develop legal strategies as well as brief and argue motions and appeals across a broad docket of high-stakes RMBS actions brought by investors, insurers, trustees, and state attorneys general.
Orrick appellate attorneys have been deeply involved in defending J&J against product-liability claims against its baby powder. This includes working with trial counsel to establish global legal strategy across thousands of cases, preparing and reviewing pre-trial dispositive motions and jury instructions, embedding in trials as lead appellate counsel, filing mid-trial objections, preserving objections and preparing the case for appeal, and drafting post-trial motions. Orrick’s appellate team also serves as a resource to trial teams from other law firms when legal issues and preservation questions arise.
In a $3B accounting malpractice suit stemming from the high-profile collapse of MF Global, Orrick appellate lawyers were brought in to assist a trial team from another firm on jury instructions, motions in limine, Daubert motions, and other pre-trial and mid-trial motions, including a mid-trial motion for a mistrial and a motion for judgment as a matter of law.
Orrick appellate attorneys were embedded throughout an antitrust lawsuit that DHL brought against United Airlines, alleging that United had conspired with many of its competitors to fix the price of fuel and security surcharges for a decade after September 11th. In addition to helping formulate the legal theories and strategy for trial, we led the briefing in opposition to United’s motion for summary judgment, where the district court not only denied United’s motion, but observed that it was more likely than not that United had engaged in the conspiracy. Not surprisingly, the case settled thereafter.
Working with a joint defense group across five law firms, each representing former KPMG employees charged with wire fraud and conspiracy to defraud the United States, Orrick’s appellate attorneys led briefing and argument on a motion to dismiss the novel theories of criminal liability pursued by DOJ in its indictment. Orrick’s appellate lawyers later led briefing on jury instructions and motions in limine, prior to our client pleading guilty before trial.