Access the profiles of the more than 350 Lowenstein Sandler lawyers who provide critical legal counsel to clients in virtually every sector of the global economy...
Discover the latest updates and developments about Lowenstein Sandler...
Access our insightful thought leadership, including articles, client alerts, and blog posts...
Class actions and other multiplaintiff litigation can cause irreparable damage to a company's brand and reputation. We are committed to helping our clients address these challenges, protecting their reputations and all that their businesses have achieved.
Our nationally recognized Class Action Litigation group works to develop the most effective, appropriate, and timely strategies to defend these cases-whether that means defeating class certification, pursuing a settlement with favorable terms, or taking a case to trial. With deep experience in the life sciences, hospitality, telecommunications, and utility industries, we craft expedient solutions, often using the applicable regulatory regime to limit the client's exposure to the public. We are particularly adept at defending against class actions alleging claims under consumer protection, securities, and environmental laws, and have prevented class certification or secured orders decertifying classes in the early stages of these types of litigation.
Our lawyers are sought after for their skills in synthesizing sprawling claims and addressing complex, high-stakes cases in an efficient and cost-effective manner. We utilize state-of-the-art legal project management systems and develop alternative fee arrangements when it is in our clients' best interests to do so.
Our lawyers also work to shape this evolving area of the law by appearing as counsel for amicus curiae in appellate matters of particular importance. We represent as amici such public interest organizations as the United States Chamber of Commerce and the New Jersey Civil Justice Institute.
Currently representing several startup technology companies that sell goods and services over the internet that have been accused of deceptive sales practices under the California Automatic Renewal Law, the California Unfair Competition Law, and New York General Business Law sections 349 and 350.
Defending investor-owned utilities against class action claims arising from widespread blackouts. Defeated certification of a class suing a Massachusetts utility for power outages caused by an ice storm in a matter litigated to that state's highest appellate court. Defeated certification of a class of more than 1 million customers suing a utility for Hurricane Sandy outages. In another case that sought damages on behalf of 150,000 customers who lost power when an electric utility implemented rolling blackouts, won the first-ever decertification of a class action pending in New Jersey state court, as well as a decision dismissing a classwide damages model that established new law on the admissibility of such models.
Defeated class actions against the pharmaceutical and life sciences industries. In a key decision from the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, secured dismissal of civil RICO, consumer fraud, and other claims brought by a putative class of third-party payors, in which the plaintiffs alleged injury from the defendant's supposed marketing of oncology drugs for "off-label" indications. Also defend branded pharmaceutical companies in "pay for delay" class actions by third-party payors arising out of patent litigation settlements. In a case against a leading sunscreen manufacturer, employed the monograph system of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to secure dismissal of consumer fraud claims. Secured dismissal of consumer fraud claims against a leading manufacturer of animal health products accused of hiding safety risks of a spot-on pesticide, and then resolved the remaining claims on a non-class basis.
Represent telecommunications carriers in class litigation. Defeated certification of a class of real estate developers suing a large telecommunications company claiming they had been improperly charged for expenses involved in relocating infrastructure in order to accommodate their developments. In another case involving claims of deceptive sales of inside wire maintenance plans, defeated certification of consumer fraud claims and then settled antitrust claims for corrective disclosure to the class. In another case, achieved a nationwide settlement of claims that a carrier charged unlawful early termination fees, which ended lengthy litigation in California.
Won dismissal with prejudice of a TCCWNA class action pending in federal court against a nationwide home security monitoring vendor, where the plaintiff claimed that the form contract used by the defendant violated the Door-to-Door Retail Installment Sales Act and other statutes.
Won dismissal of parallel TCCWNA class actions against car dealers challenging the order forms used for vehicle leases and sale, where the plaintiff contended that the phrase "unless prohibited by law" violated the TCCWNA and entitled all lessees and purchasers to statutory penalty damages.
Represented a nationwide self-storage company in a TCCWNA class action that challenged its form of lease agreement, contending that the form of agreement violates the Self-Storage Act, the Bankruptcy Code, and other authority.
Won dismissal of TCCWNA claims against a telecommunications carrier challenging its terms of agreement for provision of certain kinds of services to business customers.
Appeared as counsel for amicus curiae for the United States Chamber of Commerce and New Jersey Civil Justice Institute in trial court and appellate matters regarding the scope of TCCWNA liability and the certification of classes under TCCWNA.
Defended a large pharmaceutical company in a mass tort proceeding involving over 500 environmental tort suits, consolidated in the state and federal courts of New Jersey, alleging personal injury, wrongful death, property damage, and medical monitoring arising from claims that a historic manufacturing plant released toxic substances into the surrounding community.
Represented a client in a putative state class action involving property damage allegedly suffered by area homeowners as a result of environmental discharges from the company's facility.
Represented a client in a putative class action filed on behalf of more than 1,000 individuals in which the plaintiffs alleged that they contracted cancer and other illnesses, and incurred property damage, as a result of releases of chemical contaminants from two manufacturing plants.
Represented a global pharmaceutical company as co-counsel in a shareholder derivative action relating to alleged breaches of fiduciary duty by certain senior officers and directors in connection with alleged failures to disclose how certain manufacturing difficulties might affect FDA approval of a new pharmaceutical product.
Represented a pharmaceutical company as co-counsel in the defense of parallel securities fraud and shareholder derivative claims arising out of the clinical trial of one of the company's flagship products.
Represented a leading accounting firm as co-counsel in a matter involving federal securities and common law claims arising from an alleged failure to discover alleged fraudulent practices while serving as the independent auditor.
Represented an Ivy League university in a prominent derivative litigation that raised a number of issues of first impression involving donor intent, academic freedom, and the fiduciary duties of directors of a supporting charitable corporation.
Served as counsel to the special committee of the board of directors of a leading pharmaceutical company in connection with claims asserted in various shareholder demand letters and derivative complaints. Pursuant to those shareholder demands, investigated claims regarding alleged off-label promotion of pharmaceuticals and alleged violations of the FDA's Current Good Manufacturing Practice regulations, which in turn led to numerous product recalls.
Represented a global pharmaceutical company as co-counsel in a shareholder derivative action relating to alleged breaches of fiduciary duty by certain senior officers and directors in connection with alleged failures to disclose how certain manufacturing difficulties might affect the approval of a new pharmaceutical product.
Represented a special litigation committee of the board of directors of a nationwide provider of financial guarantee insurance in connection with shareholder derivative litigation in federal and state courts that alleged wrongdoing regarding the issuance of financial guarantees on structured products.
Represented the officers and directors of a public company and successfully opposed a derivative action brought in federal and state courts in New York in connection with alleged accounting irregularities. After we filed motions on behalf of the special litigation committee to terminate both actions, the federal and state plaintiffs withdrew their complaints.
Law360 Pulse includes comments from Lowenstein Chair and Managing Partner Gary M. Wingens in its article on the firm’s eight new partners and 14 new counsel; Wingens says: "We are delighted to welcome these talented lawyers to our partnership. These attorneys have distinguished themselves with their extraordinary commitment to our clients, colleagues and communities in unprecedented times. They have also consistently strengthened our firm through their commitment to our firm's values."
New partner Craig Dashiell of Lowenstein’s Business Litigation and Class Action Litigation groups adds: “I look forward to carrying on the tradition of advocacy and public service for which Lowenstein litigators are known, as well as continuing to help my clients achieve their business goals."
Bloomberg Law, Reuters, NJBiz, and ROI-NJ also reported Lowenstein’s recent promotions.
Joseph A. Fischetti talks to Law360 about the proposed rule change for class actions in New Jersey that would allow an automatic right to interlocutory appeals for orders granting or denying class certification. Fischetti, who co-chairs the New Jersey State Bar Association's Class Actions Special Committee, praises the proposal, saying: "It can be tremendously important to get appellate review before final judgment…Class cert can often make or break a case.”
Fischetti cites a 2015 appellate decision in Daniels v. Hollister that held that appeals on certification orders should be liberally granted due to the significant impact of certification on the resolution of class actions. "A class cert decision, one way or another, can often result in a settlement and the case never makes it up on appeal,” he says.
In an interview with Law.com, Reynold Lambert, partner in Lowenstein’s Business Litigation and Class Action Litigation groups and one of the New Jersey Law Journal’s 2021 Diverse Attorneys of the Year, discusses his career and his views on creating a culture of inclusivity in law firms. Lambert says, “I lucked out [at Lowenstein]. I have spent my entire career at a law firm that truly values diversity and fosters an inclusive working environment. Working with a diverse team is not only the right thing to do, it allows us to provide superior service to our clients.”
Lambert describes his role as President of the Hispanic Bar Association of New Jersey as a career-defining moment. He says, “I have the awesome responsibility of leading a statewide organization charged with advancing the interests of Latinos and Latinas in our community and profession, and fighting against a long history of oppression and disenfranchisement.” His advice to attorneys from underrepresented communities echoes the words of his father, an immigrant from Cuba: “Echa pa’lante y guapea” (loosely translated as “keep moving forward and keep fighting”).
Thomas E. Redburn Jr., Chair of Lowenstein’s Securities Litigation group, comments in Law360 on the wider impact of the recent Ninth Circuit ruling that business communication platform Slack can be held liable for alleged misstatements leading to its direct listing. Redburn says: “The real question to me is whether this decision can be applied to expand the scope of liability in more traditional IPOs.” He adds that this issue should encourage Congress to take a new look at the liability provisions of the Securities Act of 1933, in part because “the rise of paperless trading has made tracing harder to pinpoint. One could argue that it really is better if Congress takes up that task itself and does a refresh given the way the markets currently operate.”
Joseph A. Fischetti was interviewed for Thomson Reuters’ Practical Law: GC Agenda on the future of class action lawsuits involving claims of statutory violations in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez. In TransUnion, the Court held that class members must allege more than a bare statutory violation to satisfy Article III standing in federal court.
The TransUnion decision gives defense counsel new tools to obtain early decisions on the size of a putative class. It can be part of a strategy to narrow issues for discovery, simplify case management, and streamline class certification arguments. With the aid of TransUnion, defense counsel may also obtain early guidance that will reduce a client’s exposure and legal spend.
Joseph A. Fischetti appears on “Common Questions,” the podcast of the American Bar Association’s Class Action & Derivative Suits Committee, discussing the U.S. Supreme Court case, Transunion LLC v. Ramirez, and the likely impact of the Court's forthcoming opinion on class action practice. Fischetti discusses how the Court’s decision on issues of Article III standing and typicality could have “profound repercussions on how you choose a class representative.”
Law360 reports that Lowenstein Sandler is representing the National Women’s Law Center, the National Asian Pacific American Women’s Forum, the National Latina Institute for Reproductive Justice, SisterLove, Inc., and 50 other groups in opposing the Trump Administration’s efforts to limit contraception benefits under the Affordable Care Act. These amici join “twenty states, 32 cities, 186 federal lawmakers and dozens of interest groups” in urging the Supreme Court to strike down regulations allowing employers to stop covering workers’ birth control. Jeffrey Blumenfeld, Naomi D. Barrowclough, and Rachel Moseson appeared on the brief.
Zachary D. Rosenbaum is quoted and Frank T. M. Catalina is mentioned in a Law360 article discussing Lowenstein’s defeat of a renewed motion to dismiss brought by Apex Fund Services (US), Inc.’s Bermuda-based parent and other affiliated entities. On behalf of over 30 investors who were victims of a Ponzi scheme, Lowenstein filed suited against the Apex entities for common-law fraud, securities fraud, and RICO claims, among other claims. Defendants filed the motion on jurisdictional grounds, but the court denied their motion, keeping them in the case. (subscription required to access article)
Reuters and Law360 highlight Lowenstein Sandler’s filing of a class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey against various federal agencies and their leaders on behalf of young immigrants wrongfully disqualified from receiving Special Immigrant Juvenile Status (SIJS). According to the suit, the plaintiffs’ SIJS applications were unfairly denied because they were between 18 and 21 years old when they obtained child welfare findings from a state juvenile court, a necessary predicate to applying for SIJS. At least 100 other immigrants in New Jersey are facing similar denials. (The Lowenstein team included: Catherine Weiss, Natalie J. Kraner, Craig Dashiell, Eric R. Suggs, Tracy F. Buffer, and Claudia Lorenzo.) (subscription required to view certain content) View Lowenstein’s news announcement about this case.
Reuters and The D&O Diary note Lowenstein Sandler as counsel to opt-out plaintiff investment funds that secured a $42.5 million settlement with VEREIT to resolve the funds’ securities fraud actions against American Realty Capital Properties Inc. (Lowenstein team: Lawrence M. Rolnick, Marc B. Kramer, Thomas E. Redburn, Jr., Michael J. Hampson, and Sheila A. Sadighi.) View Lowenstein’s news announcement about this transaction.
Law360 notes Gavin J. Rooney and Joseph A. Fischetti in an article highlighting a victory for our clients in two related class actions in which the New Jersey Appellate Division affirmed the lower court’s dismissal of the actions. Plaintiffs alleged violations of the New Jersey Truth-in-Consumer Contract, Warranty and Notice Act, but Lowenstein Sandler won a threshold motion to dismiss (affirmed on appeal) for failure to show harm. The case is Gregory R. Duke, et al. v. All American Ford, et al. (subscription required to access article)
Michael S. Etkin is quoted in Bloomberg regarding the appearance of Lowenstein Sandler on behalf of several putative class plaintiffs in the Facebook/Cambridge Analytica data breach litigation in the Chapter 7 bankruptcy proceedings of Cambridge Analytica and its affiliate. The U.K. political consulting firm filed for Chapter 7 liquidation in May following the scandal concerning the release of personal data in connection with the 2016 U.S. presidential elections. Representing these representative data breach plaintiffs, Etkin contended that all options were being considered in the Chapter 7 cases to protect the interests of the victims of the data breach and release of personal information.
The New Jersey Law Journal and Law360 note Gavin J. Rooney and Naomi D. Barrowclough as counsel to Bil-Jim Construction Co. Inc. executives for whom our lawyers secured dismissal from a putative class action brought under the New Jersey Prevailing Wage Act.
Joseph Fischetti is quoted in Law360 regarding his comments on a panel at the New Jersey State Bar Association Annual Meeting and Convention on the subject of recent developments and trends in New Jersey class action practice.
Gavin Rooney comments in Forbes about the implications of defeating class certification in the federal worker misclassification lawsuit filed against Uber.
CLICK HERE FOR AWARD INFORMATION & METHODOLOGY
No aspect of this or any advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court of California, the District of Columbia Court of Appeals, the Supreme Court of New Jersey, the New York State Court of Appeals, or the Utah Supreme Court.
