Commercial Litigation + Trial

Filter Results

We try cases. Our diverse team of 500 commercial litigators, whose members are located throughout the U.S., Europe, and Asia, has a successful trial record of handling fact-driven cases in complex commercial settings. We serve a diverse client base, handling large U.S. and multijurisdictional business disputes in the courts in all major commercial centers around the world and in arbitration proceedings.

Often, these cases involve contract disputes and claims of trade-secrets theft or commercial fraud, and include procurement, franchise, construction, real estate, and commercial lending disputes, along with business torts and bankruptcy adversary proceedings.

Unlike most large law firms, we regularly try and arbitrate cases, for both plaintiffs and defendants, in many industries, including:

  • Banking and financial services
  • Communications
  • Insurance
  • Life sciences
  • Real estate
  • Professional services
  • Technology
  • Transportation, including aviation
  • Distribution

Our commercial litigation clients include Uber, VMware, Echostar, Ernst & Young, Grant Thornton, The Hartford, Honeywell, Quixtar, Sega, Travelers, and UPS. MoFo’s Commercial Litigation + Trial Group is considered the go-to resource whenever major players in Silicon Valley or elsewhere in the global economy face challenging litigation.


  • Waymo LLC v. Uber Technologies, Inc. Represented Uber in the highly publicized federal court lawsuit involving claims of trade-secrets misappropriation and patent infringement. Waymo (the former business group that Google spun out as its own entity) claims that Uber stole trade secrets and infringed on Waymo patents related to the lasers used in self-driving cars. Our team negotiated a favorable settlement after one week of trial.
  • Trial Victory for Healthcare Company. Obtained defense verdict for the nation’s largest HMO in a case where the plaintiff alleged trade-secrets misappropriation, breach of contract, and other claims.
  • Hansen Medical, Inc. v. Luna Innovations Incorporated. Won a jury trial that will significantly impact the medical robotics industry; a jury awarded $36.3 million to Hansen Medical, Inc., in a breach-of-contract and trade-secrets dispute.
  • Gilead Sciences, Inc. v. F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd. Won an arbitration on behalf of Gilead Sciences, Inc., relating to Tamiflu, an antiviral for the treatment and prevention of influenza A and B; the victory included an $80.7 million payment to Gilead.
  • Marin Healthcare District v. Sutter Health. Secured a $32 million arbitration award for Marin Healthcare District in a dispute arising from a 2006 agreement to transfer control of Marin General Hospital. The arbitrator ruled that Sutter must pay the District $32 million as compensation for the profits Sutter received during the transition period and for attorneys’ fees.
  • Olympus Capital v. Lone Star Funds and Korea Exchange Bank. Won $64 million arbitration award from the ICC for Olympus Capital, a leading U.S. private equity firm specializing in the Asian market. A three-member tribunal found Lone Star Funds and Korea Exchange Bank (KEB) jointly liable for tortious conduct under Korean law in forcing Olympus Capital to sell its stake in KEB’s credit card subsidiary to Lone Star at an artificially low price.
  • Technology Integrated Group v. FusionStorm. Won $10.8 million verdict, including punitive damages, on behalf of Technology Integration Group. The jury found three former TIG employees, their new employer FusionStorm, and three of its executive officers liable for breach of fiduciary duty, breach of loyalty, and misappropriation of trade secrets.
  • Multijurisdictional dispute with former distributor and licensee. Won defense verdict, including appeals, for a global brand in giftware against its distributor who claimed several million euro in damages for alleged abuse of a dominant position; the dispute was litigated in two European countries in parallel.
  • Prem Sales, Ltd. v. Sanyo Electric Air Conditioning Co., Ltd., et al. Obtained stay of a distributorship dispute in Texas federal court in favor of a JCAA arbitration on behalf of Sanyo. Sanyo later obtained a very favorable award from the JCAA tribunal.
  • SP Syntax LLC v. Ernst & Young LLP. Won unanimous jury verdict on behalf of Ernst & Young, defeating claims that the accounting firm had made negligent representations in connection with financial statements issued by Syntax-Brillian, a manufacturer of flat-screen televisions.
  • The SCO Group, Inc. v. Novell, Inc. Won three-week jury trial in Salt Lake City when a jury determined that Novell owned the copyrights to the UNIX computer operating system. In an earlier trial, won multimillion-dollar award for Novell based on its right to royalty payments from UNIX software licenses granted by SCO.
  • Altera Corporation v. Clear Logic, Incorporated. Won two-week jury trial on behalf of Altera in a lawsuit against Clear Logic for violation of the federal Semiconductor Chip Protection Act and unfair competition. The case, which is the first tried under the federal act, resulted in a $35 million judgment and an injunction. The judgment was affirmed by the Ninth Circuit.
  • Trial Victory for Financial Services Firm. Won five-week trial and secured a judgment of more than $23 million, including attorneys’ fees, in a fraud and breach-of-contract action.
  • Outsourcing Dispute. Won a significant victory for a major financial services provider, worth in the region of £22 million ($33 million), plus future savings in a dispute concerning one of the UK’s largest outsourcing deals.
  • Notal Vision v. Carl Zeiss Meditec, Inc. Won an arbitration for Notal Vision in a breach-of-contract case where the licensee of Notal’s macular degeneration ‒ diagnosis technology did not purchase the minimum number of devices and refused to pay for the shortfall; Notal was awarded close to $10 million and attorneys’ fees.
  • Oakland Raiders v. Oakland-Alameda County Coliseum, 144 Cal.App.4th 1175 (2006). Won defense verdict, after appeal, in billion-dollar suit brought by Oakland Raiders against the City of Oakland alleging fraud and misrepresentation.
  • Transportation Factoring v. Grant Thornton. Won defense verdict for Grant Thornton in Oregon, in suit by lenders challenging the audit of a factoring company’s financial statements.
  • Frontier Insurance Group, Inc. v. Ernst & Young LLP. Won unanimous trial verdict in favor of Ernst & Young in an actuarial malpractice suit brought by Frontier Insurance Group Inc. After 12 days of trial, the jury took less than three hours to conclude that there was no negligence on behalf of Ernst & Young.
  • Trial Victory for Major Law Firm. Won defense verdict for a major law firm. Plaintiff was seeking to hold our client liable for the actions of one of its of counsel lawyers, who served as an escrow agent — without our client’s knowledge or consent — for a transaction that turned out to be a Ponzi scheme. The jury determined that the lawyer was not the cause of the plaintiff’s loss.
  • In re Residential Capital, LLC. Won an adversary proceeding against Residential Capital’s junior secured noteholders, defeating their claims of entitlement to hundreds of millions of dollars of post-petition interest.
  • Gramercy Investment Trust v. FDV Investment, LLC. Won a precedent-setting appellate decision, affirming a judgment for more than $35 million in favor of Gramercy Investment Trust in connection with a California real estate project that went into foreclosure.

U.S. News – Best Lawyers® Best Law Firms 2018
National: Commercial Litigation (Tier 1)
Los Angeles: Commercial Litigation (Tier 1)
New York: Commercial Litigation (Tier 1)
San Diego: Commercial Litigation (Tier 1)
San Francisco: Commercial Litigation (Tier 1) 

Chambers Asia-Pacific 2018
Japan: Dispute Resolution - International

Chambers USA 2018
California: Litigation: General Commercial
New York: Litigation: General Commercial: Highly Regarded

Legal 500 Asia-Pacific 2018
Japan: Dispute Resolution International Firms and Joint Ventures (Tier 1)

Filter Results

MoFo Diversity: Trial Lawyers
MoFo Diversity:
Trial Lawyers

“They have an outstanding track record in litigation; they achieve success on some of the most complex litigation there is. They are thoughtful counselors and seek creative, cost-effective solutions for their clients."
(Chambers USA 2018)

"They combine intellectual firepower with a tremendous investigative and analytical ability, and they are brilliant on the tactical and strategic level."
(Chambers USA 2017)

“Their best qualities are a high degree of skill and they're excellent litigators that know their audience.”
(Chambers USA 2016)

Email Disclaimer

Unsolicited e-mails and information sent to Morrison & Foerster will not be considered confidential, may be disclosed to others pursuant to our Privacy Policy, may not receive a response, and do not create an attorney-client relationship with Morrison & Foerster. If you are not already a client of Morrison & Foerster, do not include any confidential information in this message. Also, please note that our attorneys do not seek to practice law in any jurisdiction in which they are not properly authorized to do so.

©1996-2019 Morrison & Foerster LLP. All rights reserved.