Whiteford

Maryland

Review

Dispute resolution

Established in 1933 Whiteford Taylor Preston has deep, historical roots in litigation. One the firm’s overall litigation practice, a client reports, “The firm is outstanding regarding its expertise, efficiency, responsiveness and strategic thinking.”  The firm has maintained a strong bankruptcy practice, in addition to business, product liability, intellectual property, labor and employment, construction, real estate, e-discovery, health care, administrative law and regulatory litigation. 

While the firm operates from a network of 16 offices, it is best known for its Maryland footprint, particularly in Baltimore, where it hosts its highest concentration of litigation talent. Paul Nussbaum is the firm’s bankruptcy authority, serving as co-chair of the business reorganizations, bankruptcy and insolvency practice. He has been litigation counsel for two bankruptcy trusts established by the US Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware. In this capacity, the firm team is investigating claims against former directors and officers of various debtor entities pursuing those claims relating to breach of fiduciary duty. Another frequently mentioned all-purpose commercial partner and fellow of the American College of Trial Lawyers, William Ryan, has represented Landry’s in all of its commercial disputes related to the COVID-19 pandemic. Ryan is also defending direct and derivative action shareholder claims filed in October 2020 in the Delaware Chancery Court against consulting services entity Percona regarding open-source software and databases. The case involves alleged claims of breach of contract and fiduciary duty against corporate managers and concerns Delaware’s developing law regarding the management of limited liability companies governed by Delaware law and management’s potential liabilities to nonvoting shareholders, as well as valuation standards for emerging companies. After securing a dismissal of all claims from the Chancery Court through a Memorandum Opinion, he is now defending two additional actions against the company in Delaware Chancery Court. In a matter exemplifying the intersection of commercial and employment law, Ryan is also part of a team representing Medical Transportation Management, a nationwide transportation broker for non-emergency medical transportation services for Medicaid recipients, in defense of a collective class action under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act as well as a federal Rule 23 class action with respect to putative wage claims brought under federal and District of Columbia laws on behalf of employees of transportation companies providing Medicaid transportation services for the District of Columbia’s Medicaid program. The case is now pending before the DC Circuit after the court granted interlocutory appeal and appellate review on two rulings regarding the FLSA collective and “issues class”. Ryan defeated the plaintiffs’ certification of a liability and damages class. Harry Johnson serves as the firm’s product liability specialist. He is national trial counsel for Ford Motor Company in Maryland, defending claims related to asbestos automotive products. He secured a favorable settlement following a win on pre-trial rulings two days prior to the start of the trial in Oregon. Johnson has had a long-history of representing Baltimore City and other government entities. He recently successfully resolved a matter on behalf of Montgomery County, defending it against a religious organization challenging the County’s regulations of public sewer and land use in connection to restrictions on land development for religious purposes around Patuxtent River watershed. The issue, concerning the powers of local government in their efforts to protection watershed versus rights of property owners to religious land use pursuant to the First Amendment’s Free Exercise of Religion Clause and the Federal Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, nearly made it to the Supreme Court after Montgomery county won a judgment in its favor at trial court and succeeded again at the Fourth Circuit.