Source: https://www.skofirm.com/practice/business-litigation/
Timestamp: 2019-04-22 14:50:25+00:00

Document:
SKO’s Business Litigation practice provides strategic advice to businesses and professionals faced with disputes, lawsuits, arbitration and other conflicts. We help manage disputes on the front end with guidance on sound business practices. For conflicts that could not be resolved early, we help clients through even the most complex, high-stakes disputes with a careful, focused and strategic approach.
We handle matters on a broad scale of sizes and situations. Our goal is to resolve matters efficiently with the client’s objectives foremost in our thinking. In matters where litigation is necessary, we have the experience, resources and toughness required. We never lose sight of the fact that while litigation may be necessary, the goal is to obtain the best possible result for our clients with careful consideration of their time and financial situation.
Our litigation practice and its attorneys are recognized as some of the best litigators in their respective fields by such sources as Chambers USA, Best Lawyers in America®, Super Lawyers and Martindale-Hubbell®.
We have been named “Kentucky Firm of the Year” by Benchmark: Litigation; Litigation Law Firm of the Year in Kentucky by Corporate America;“Go-To Law Firm” for Litigation, American Lawyer Media’s Corporate Counsel magazine; and Competition/Antitrust Law Firm of the Year in Kentucky by Corporate INTL Magazine. We also received a “First Tier” Ranking for Litigation from Chambers USA.
From the outset of a dispute, our litigators work to determine the best result that can be obtained. We develop a rapport with our clients that is focused on positive results and informed decisions. We leverage our wealth of skills and knowledge with each matter, emphasize strategic thinking, and carefully construct well-managed teams that execute tailored, constant consideration for the client.
The SKO team conducts arbitrations and mediations, tries cases and counsels clients tactically through matters spanning from investigations to preliminary negotiations to litigations and trial.
Successfully represented business against breach of contract suit by food and beverage contractor. Obtained summary judgment wherein the court applied Kentucky’s “first breach” rule, an issue of first impression within Kentucky federal court, to dismiss the contractor’s claims against the business.
Successfully represented closely-held business to enforce stock-transfer restrictions in business’s Shareholder Agreement against former shareholder and other parties claiming ownership of business. Obtained summary judgment in federal court upholding validity of Shareholder Agreement’s transfer restrictions.
In one of Louisville’s up and coming neighborhoods, a developer was left with a defective venue, resulting in SKO filing a lawsuit on behalf of the developer against several subcontractors and arbitration was initiated against the general contractor. Issues included improper design, failure to adhere to specifications and generally poor workmanship. After investigation and discovery, SKO successfully settled the matter on terms that resulted in the developer recovering nearly 20% of its purchase price back from the contractors.
After a construction remediation project left the homeowners with a terrible odor in their home, SKO filed a lawsuit on behalf of the homeowners against the general contractor and a subcontractor, among other defendants. SKO settled the lawsuit on extremely favorable terms to its client, recovering over $500,000 in their favor, which was actually greater than the appraised value of the home.
Mark was the lead lawyer in challenging the personal jurisdictional grounds for a lawsuit brought in federal court against a larger steel supplier. After complete briefing by multiple parties, the federal court dismissed SKO’s client from the lawsuit on personal jurisdiction grounds.
SKO successfully recovered a substantial amount of money on behalf of its client, an owner of senior care facility, in a construction defect case. SKO filed claims on behalf of its client against the general contractor, subcontractors and suppliers, ultimately settling on confidential terms that provided a net recovery close to SKO’s client’s demand for recovery.
SKO defended a general contractor in claims brought by the owner relating to a multi-billion dollar project in Canada involving the construction of a hydroelectric generating facility. Litigation took three years but after multiple settlement negotiations, SKO’s client successfully settled the case for a fraction of the amount demanded by the owner.
Counsel to Fields Medical Corporation in complex litigation matter adverse to former sales representative. The case settled favorably to client during closing arguments of a 10 day trial. Fields Medical Corporation, et al. v. Kirkland C. Stallings, et al., Commonwealth of Kentucky, Jefferson Circuit Court, No. 07-CI-6256.
Counsel to Owensboro Grain Co. in its successful efforts to recover on a multi-million dollar contract claim. Owensboro Grain Co., LLC v. AUI Contracting, LLC, 2009 WL 650456, 72 Fed.R.Serv.3d 1342 (W.D. Ky. 2009).
Brad has been a part of several SKO teams involved in performing complex due diligence and preparing transaction documents related to oil and natural gas properties. These include the acquisition of 1.46 million oil and gas acres in eastern United States (primarily Pennsylvania and West Virginia) with more than 9,000 producing wells; a joint venture for a major oil and natural gas producer’s Marcellus shale acreage with the producer to receive aggregate payments of $3.4 billion; a joint venture for a major oil and natural gas producer’s Utica shale acreage with the producer to receive aggregate payments of $594 million; and an IPO for midstream gathering services for production from the Marcellus Shale.
Brad successfully defended a life insurance company against claims that it violated a structured settlement agreement and annuity agreement related to the settlement of a prior personal injury action to which it was not a party after it terminated payments as provided for in the contracts. The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky dismissed all claims against the client, and the decision was affirmed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit.
Kelley v. Westfield Ins. Co., Civil Action No. 15-12-HRW, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 143627 (E.D. Ky. Oct. 22, 2015); aff’d by Kelley v. Westfield Ins. Co., 654 Fed. Appx. 778, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 12191 (6th Cir. Jun. 30, 2016).
Brad successfully defended a national mortgage servicer against claims that it violated the Fair Debt Collections Practices Act and the Kentucky Consumer Protection Act, in addition to claims of breach of contract and negligence. The Jefferson Circuit Court granted summary judgment in favor of the client on all claims alleged against it after several years of litigation.
U.S. Bank Trust, N.A., as Trustee for Volt Asset Holdings Trust XVI, by Caliber Home Loans, Inc., as its Attorney in Fact v. Cahoon, et al., Case No. 14-CI-400462 (Circuit Court for Jefferson County, Kentucky).
Brad successfully prosecuted an appeal to the Kentucky Supreme Court on behalf of a residential homeowners association after an adverse ruling at the trial court. It its decision reversing the Kentucky Court of Appeals, the Kentucky Supreme Court recognized for the first time that the principle of a defeasible easement exists in Kentucky, thereby stripping the subdivision’s developer of an easement it purportedly retained after the subdivision was completed.
Majestic Oaks Homeowners Association v. Majestic Oaks Farms, Inc., 530 S.W.3d 435 (Ky. 2017).
Bessie Berry v. Cyprus, 989 F.2d 498, U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit, and Weddington v. Cyprus, Kentucky Court of Appeals. Successfully defended a series of cases involving claims that coal companies trespassed and wrongfully removed coal from 24,000 acres of property in eastern Kentucky. Successfully defended cases on appeal.
Greif, Inc. v. MacDonald, et al., U.S. District Court for the Western District of Kentucky, Case No. 3:06-CV-312-H. Co-lead trial counsel for the plaintiff in this case against a competitor, alleging common law unfair competition, misappropriation of trade secrets, among other claims. After obtaining a temporary injunction for the plaintiff and successfully defending the defendants’ motion to dismiss, the parties reached a settlement.
Rare Breed Distilling v. Jim Beam Brands Co., U.S. District Court for the Western District of Kentucky, Case No. 3:11-CV-292-H. Lead trial counsel for the defendant in this case in which the plaintiff alleged trademark infringement and unfair competition under the Lanham Act. In response, the defense filed counterclaims and sought injunctive relief.
Hilda L. Solis, Secretary of the Department of Labor, v. Mattingly, et al., U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky, Case No. 09-CV-00207 WOB. Lead trial counsel for five of the six main defendants in this high-profile, high-stakes litigation. The Department of Labor claimed that the defendants breached numerous fiduciary duties under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) in connection with 7 ESOP (Employee Stock Ownership Plan) stock transactions totaling over $80 Million over a 4 year period. After nearly two years of aggressive litigation, Doug successfully guided our clients to an agreed resolution of the claims.
AGC Flat Glass North America, Inc. v. Pilkington Group Limited and Saint Gobain Ceramics and Plastics, Inc., Madison (County, Kentucky) Circuit Court, Case No. 05-CI-656. Lead trial counsel for the plaintiff. AGC took a license to certain patented technology that promised to dramatically reduce NOx emissions from gas-fired float glass furnaces. AGC used the technology in its Richmond, Kentucky plant and, within a short period of time, began to experience catastrophic failure of the internal ceramic material in its furnace. AGC successfully overcame a motion to compel arbitration that would have effectively ended AGC’s chances of recovery and successfully defended that result on appeal to the Kentucky Court of Appeals and Supreme Court. After several more years of hard-fought litigation in the U.S. and Europe, and on the eve of trial, we helped our client negotiate a favorable settlement.
JBS United, Inc. v. Thorn BioScience, LLC, et al., U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, Case No. 07-CV-1241. Lead trial counsel in the successful defense of this hotly contested, patent inventorship and trade secret litigation in which a competitor sued our clients for, among other things, failing to name the competitor as a co-inventor on a patent covering revolutionary and potentially lucrative biotechnology. The result of the litigation allowed our client to protect its patent rights and to continue to pursue products based upon the patent.
Obtained Plaintiff’s summary judgment for buyer’s breach of nearly $700,000 commercial sales contract for the purchase of large industrial tires.
Rogers et al v. O’Donnell et al, No. 10-00373 (E.D. Ky. 2011), aff'd 737 F.3d 1026 (6th Cir 2013). Represented state prosecutors in a case arising from a criminal prosecution of local police officers for assault, intimidating a participant in a legal process, and tampering with a witness. After the police officers were acquitted of all charges, they filed a lawsuit against the state prosecutors pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The district court granted summary judgment based on grounds of qualified immunity. The case was affirmed by the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals.
SKO represented five families in the wrongful death litigation arising from the crash of an airliner. SKO’s team handled this litigation and was appointed by the United States District Court, Eastern District of Kentucky as Plaintiff’s Liaison Counsel. In this role, SKO coordinated the efforts of more than 40 plaintiffs and their counsel in pursuing wrongful death claims.
Successfully represented a company and one of its executives against claims by plaintiff for alleged disability discrimination, retaliation and intentional infliction of emotional distress. SKO represented the company during investigations by the Kentucky Commission on Human Rights and Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. After the EEOC found no wrongdoing, the plaintiff filed claims in the Pulaski Circuit Court. After three years of litigation, we obtained summary judgment dismissing all claims. SKO then successfully represented the company on appeal. The Kentucky Court of Appeals affirmed the Pulaski Circuit Court's order dismissing all claims and denied the Plaintiff's petition for a rehearing.
Fire King v. Tidel Engineering, U.S. District Court for Northern District of Texas 2009. Lead trial counsel for the plaintiff in patent infringement case.
Krowtoh II v. ExCelsius Int'l Ltd., U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit, May 19, 2009. Lead trial counsel for a German company, against whom a default judgment had been entered. Successfully obtained a reversal of the default judgment on appeal to the 6th Circuit and later negotiated a successful settlement for our client.
Langley v. Prudential Mortgage Capital, U.S. District Court for Eastern District of Kentucky, 2007, U.S. Dist. LEXIS 27710. Lead trial counsel for the plaintiff in business dispute involving alleged breach of contract in financing agreement.
Michael W. Dickinson v. Keeneland Association, U.S. District Court, District of Maryland 2005, and Martin Collins Surfaces and Footings v. Michael W. Dickinson, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Kentucky. Lead trial counsel for the defendants in this case involving claims of patent infringement in connection with construction of artificial surface for Thoroughbred horse racing. Successfully defended our clients and successfully negotiated settlement/license between the parties.
MCSF v. Equestrian Surfaces, U.S. District Court for Middle District of California. Lead trial counsel for the plaintiff in this case involving claims of patent infringement in connection with artificial track surface at several California Thoroughbred horse racing tracks. We successfully obtained settlement involving license arrangements.
FieldTurf, Inc. v. Turf USA, U.S. District Court for the Western District of Kentucky, Case No. 04-CV-505. Lead trial counsel for the defendant. Our client was sued for patent infringement and unfair competition under the Lanham Act by a highly aggressive competitor. After filing counterclaims against the plaintiff and engaging in intense discovery and motion practice, SKO successfully negotiated a settlement for our client.
FieldTurf v. Southwest Recreational Industries, Inc., 235 F.Supp.2d 708 (E.D. Ky. 2002), and FieldTurf v. Southwest Recreational Industries, Inc., 357 F.3d 1266 (Fed. Cir. 2004) U.S. Dist. LEXIS 92224. Lead trial counsel for the defendant in this complex business dispute between two competing manufacturers of artificial turf. The plaintiff claimed patent infringement, unlawful monopolization and attempted monopolization under federal antitrust laws, Lanham Act (false advertising) violations, and other business torts. The District Court granted summary judgment to the defendant on all claims and, further, awarded the defendants $4.3 Million in attorney fees and costs for its defense. On appeal, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit went further, holding that the plaintiff lacked standing to assert its patent infringement claims in the first place and remanded to the District Court with instructions to dismiss for that reason. While further appeals were pending, the parties reached a settlement favorable to the defendant.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 § 1983
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.