Adept handling of complex commercial litigation requires a strategic mindset, subject matter mastery and well-honed judgment—qualities that can be learned only through extensive trial experience. Because we know the end game, we leverage these skills to achieve a decisive victory for our clients.
Our focus on winning at trial guides our case management. Everything we do is geared toward achieving success in the courtroom. Whether we are handling a breach of contract issue, antitrust action or franchise dispute, we focus on trial strategy right out of the gate, with our highly accomplished partners directly involved from the beginning.
Bet-the-company litigation can drain resources and distract employees, negatively impacting a client’s bottom line. Our innovative fee arrangements add a measure of financial predictability to a seemingly unpredictable process. Our management style minimizes the complexity of these matters and brings them to a speedy and favorable resolution so our clients can return to their day-to-day business activities as quickly as possible.
In addition to our renowned defense of pharmaceutical companies, we have litigated in federal, state, and appellate courts on behalf of Fortune Global 500 corporations, as well as public and closely held companies, on a variety of issues. Whatever the company, whatever the problem, our collective and individual mastery of the case and its subject matter enables us to craft comprehensive legal and business strategies, develop effective case theories to achieve our clients’ commercial and legal objectives.
In re Prescription Drug Co-Pay Subsidy Litigation
Goldman Ismail represented Merck & Co. Inc. as trial counsel in a putative class action brought by health benefit providers in New Jersey federal court relating to alleged co-pay subsidy programs. In its rulings on two motions to dismiss, the Court dismissed the bulk of plaintiffs’ claims against Merck, including all of the antitrust and civil RICO claims. On the only remaining claims, which alleged tortious interference with contract under state law, Goldman Ismail uncovered new evidence which directly contradicted plaintiffs' allegations in the complaint. Prior to the first pretrial conference, Merck filed a dispositive motion based on the newly discovered evidence and plaintiffs agreed to voluntarily dismiss all claims in the action with prejudice.
Goldman Ismail served as lead trial counsel for a Fortune 15 company in 50 separate arbitrations relating to the timing of payment and the processing of claims under the Texas Prompt Pay Act. At issue in the arbitrations was the meaning of the statute and whether the pharmacy plans fall within a statutory exception relating to states’ regulation of ERISA plans. Claimants were seeking tens of millions of dollars in penalties and fees. Goldman Ismail achieved a complete defense victory when, prior to any final hearings and just prior to the filing of dispositive motions, all claimants dismissed all pending claims. Goldman Ismail then pursued, and was granted, substantial fee awards on behalf of its client.
Magic Nova v. Major League Baseball Properties, Inc.
Goldman Ismail represented MLB in an international trademark and contract arbitration dispute relating to the licensing of MLB trademarks in China. The dispute involved allegations of unlawful breach, trademark infringement, and counterfeiting merchandise. After discovery began, Goldman Ismail negotiated an extremely favorable settlement for MLB.
In re K-Dur Antitrust Litigation
Tarek Ismail is lead trial counsel in this long running antitrust case involving an alleged “reverse payment” to a generic drug manufacturer by Schering-Plough Corporation.
Servcor International, Inc. v. Bayer MaterialScience LLC et al.
Goldman Ismail was retained to defend Bayer MaterialScience LLC and to serve as trial counsel in a multi-party commercial dispute pending in state court in Florida. Plaintiff sought damages in excess of $100,000,000 following dissolution of the parties' business relationship in the commercial roofing market. Among other tort and contract claims, the Complaint alleged breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, negligence, fraud, and conspiracy claims. After Bayer prevailed on two motions to dismiss, the plaintiff voluntarily dismissed all claims with prejudice.