• Successfully represented respondent in the Supreme Court of the United States in a closely-watched ERISA case, addressing conflict of interest issues.  The Court unanimously agreed with respondent’s position on the first issue presented and a majority of the Court sided with respondent on the second issue presented.  (MetLife v. Glenn)
• Served as lead attorney in two trials representing the Court Appointed Special Advocate.  The first trial settled part way through trial.  The negotiated resolution, obtained after a full day of settlement negotiations, included every term desired by the client.  The second trial again achieved the result sought by our client (termination of parental rights) after a two day trial.  The court announced judgment from the bench shortly after the close of the evidence.  (Bowman-Benton Dependency and Termination)
• Represented aluminum manufacturer in claim for insurance coverage against its insurer in federal court.  Case responsibility included arguing dispositive motions, deposing key parties, managing offensive discovery, and preparing company witnesses for testimony.  Obtained a favorable settlement for the client days before trial after winning a series of critical evidentiary rulings that would have permitted our client to present its case to full effect to the jury.  (Northwest Aluminum Co. v. Factory Mutual Ins. Co., D. Or.)
• Represented State Farm Insurance Companies in a purported class action by insureds who alleged that they were not compensated under the Underinsured Motorist coverage for the diminution of value associated with the stigma of their cars having been in accidents.  After successfully removing the case to federal court under the Class Action Fairness Act, obtained dismissal of class allegations, which prompted a settlement of the case based only on the individual claims.  (Heaphy v. State Farm Ins. Co.)
• Represented coalition of businesses in their challenge to the Pierce County smoking ban on the basis that the ban was unconstitutional because it was preempted by state law.  Obtained a preliminary injunction at the trial court level, and cemented victory for clients when the Washington Supreme Court unanimously affirmed, holding that the local ban was unconstitutional and adopting the reasoning of our brief.  (Entertainment Industry Coalition v. Tacoma-Pierce County Health Dep’t)
• Represented Microsoft Corporation in antitrust class action lawsuits brought by indirect purchasers in state courts, with particular focus on expert and evidentiary issues raised in two trials.  (Comes v. Microsoft, Iowa; Gordon v. Microsoft, Minn.)  Currently represent Microsoft in consumer class action based on allegations relating to the provision of MSN service.  (Odom v. Microsoft)
• Appointed by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to represent on a pro bono basis an immigration petitioner seeking to overturn a deportation order by the Board of Immigration Appeals.  The Ninth’s Circuit’s opinion adopted the reasoning of my brief, and rejected the respondent’s jurisdictional arguments and request for supplemental briefing.  (Miranda-Rosales v. Gonzales)
• Assisted in preparation of amicus curiae brief for the United States Supreme Court in the first round of the Guantanamo cases.  (Al Odah v. United States, Rasul v. Bush)
• Represented biometric security technology company in a putative nationwide product liability class action.  The case was dismissed at the summary judgment stage.  (Espinoza v. Identix, Inc.)
• Successfully defended international timber company against CERCLA cost recovery claims brought by United States EPA.  (United States v. Rayonier, Inc.)
• Currently represent client on death row challenging his wrongful conviction, involving both guilt and penalty phase issues, in state post-conviction review.  Case responsibility includes team management and all aspects of strategic case decision making, appearing at hearings and arguing motions, and preparing briefing on all dispositive motions.  (Johnson v. State)
• Currently represent local companies in a lawsuit against the United States pending in the Court of Federal Claims based on the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment.  (Land Recovery, Inc. & Resource Investments, Inc. v. United States)

Publications

• Mootness in the Class Action Context: Court-Created Exceptions to the ‘Case or Controversy’ Requirement of Article III  The Review of Litigation, Volume 26, Number 1. Co-authored with Malaika M. Eaton, Leonard J. Feldman, Daniel A. Zariski, and Darin M. Sands.  Winter.2007
• Limitation of Suit: A Call For Equitable Tolling  Insurance Law Section  Winter.2006
• "Litigating in the New Class Action World: An Update on the Evolving Case Law Under the Class Action Fairness Act"  Analysis & Perspective Vol. 06, Number 18,  9.25.2005
• The Equitable Tolling Doctrine in First Party Insurance Coverage Matters: Analysis, Benefits and an Illustrative Case Study  Tort Trial & Insurance Practice Law Journal  Fall.2005
• “The Role of Municipalities in Regulating the Land Application of Sewage Sludges and Septage.” Co-authored with Ellen Z. Harrison.  41 Nat. Res. J. 77  2001
• “Note, Of Salmon, Salamander, and Lizards: Can State and Local Conservation Plans “Preempt” the Endangered Species Act,”  Cornell Law Review, Volume 185, Number 87.  2001

Speaking Engagements

•  “State and Federal Death Penalty Habeas Review,” Law & Diversity Program, Fairhaven College, Western Washington University, May 2004.  Guest Lecturer.
• “State and Federal Death Penalty Habeas Review,” Course: The Death Penalty in Historical and Legal Perspective, Law & Diversity Program, Fairhaven College, Western Washington University, May 2006.  Guest Lecturer.
• “Immigration Law and Appellate Practice,” Course:  Legal Writing, Law & Diversity Program, Fairhaven College, Western Washington University, February 2008.  Guest Lecturer.