Complex Commercial Litigation

Strategic Approach

For decades, many of the leading companies and business owners in the United States and abroad have come to Miller & Chevalier with their most challenging and complex business disputes for one basic reason: we have an exceptional collection of trial lawyers in a firm with the size, experience, and resources to achieve successful, cost-effective solutions for clients who face significant financial and business risk. Our record of success is unprecedented for a firm our size.

Now, more than ever, winning is not enough. Winning smart is the requirement. It begins with knowing, when the dispute enters the door, that trial is a possibility and that devising a cost-effective strategy for achieving the best solution is essential. Winning smart is what Miller & Chevalier does best. We work cooperatively with clients to devise strategies that may prevent litigation or provide the best resolution possible for the client short of trial through negotiation, arbitration, and mediation. But if the matter is destined for trial, our opponents know we are prepared to take it there. Our litigators are trial lawyers. Collectively, we have tried over 300 jury cases and have appeared in virtually every federal trial forum in the United States. This experience gives our clients the leverage to try the case to a jury, if necessary -- and, if the case is tried, to win. Our appellate capacity enables us to preserve our victories on appeal.

Critical Combination of Experience

Roughly two-thirds of all the firm’s engagements are litigation related. A key strength of Miller & Chevalier’s litigation practice is its ability to combine extensive trial experience in civil and criminal cases, both jury and non-jury, with deep substantive experience in the firm’s core areas of practice, including tax; white collar crime and internal investigations; ERISA and fiduciary issues; employee benefits; False Claims Act and qui tam cases; and IP litigation before the International Trade Commission under Section 337. In addition, we have substantial experience litigating complex business disputes involving business acquisitions and divestitures, technology, employment, trade secrets, banking, securities, Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO), professional liability, shareholders’ actions, contracts, and business torts.

Miller & Chevalier has recognized experience in a number of core practice areas. Knowledgeable clients recognize that, in addition, the skill to conduct successful, cost-effective litigation is an area of particular focus all its own and every bit as important in obtaining a successful litigation result as the substantive nature of the dispute. We have the ability to bring an extraordinary depth of litigation experience to every matter. And our experience allows us to handle the matter efficiently. Through careful case management and budgeting, lean staffing, and frequent client communication, we are determined to keep litigation expenses as low as possible and to avoid surprises for the client. In working with in-house counsel, we understand that their ability to serve their client effectively depends on our ability to manage the litigation efficiently and communicate options frequently. In addition, with our Electronic Discovery team, we have the experience, the staff, and the vendor relationships to manage and control the increasing costs of electronic discovery in complex civil litigation; back up tapes, data mining, searches, and electronic productions are part of our daily routine.

Our lawyers have appeared before more than 25 different federal agencies, many state courts, the vast majority of the federal district courts in the country, the United States Court of Federal Claims, the United States Tax Court, every federal court of appeals, the International Trade Commission, and the United States Supreme Court. Through our Rocket Docket team, we are uniquely prepared to represent clients in the fast docket of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. Our litigators include former Assistant United States Attorneys, Justice Department trial lawyers, public defenders, and judicial clerks.

Representative Engagements|View All
  • General Motors Corporation and Allison Engine Company, Inc. v. Northrop Corporation, Northrop Aircraft Division, Cause No. 49D01-9109-CP-1029, filed in the Marion Superior Court Civil Division. Counsel to General Motors and Rolls-Royce Corporation against Northrop Corporation for breach of its duty to disclose superior knowledge and to provide adequate specifications for major components of the FY-23 prototype Advanced Fighter Jet, which resulted in a $68 million judgment in favor of General Motors Corporation/Allison Engine Company after an eight week jury trial.
     
  • Hughes Communications Galaxy, Inc. v. United States, 34 Fed. Cl. 623 (1995); 47 Fed. Cl. 236 (2000). Counsel to Hughes in lawsuit against government alleging that NASA breached its contract to launch 10 Hughes-built satellites on the Space Shuttle. After establishing liability on summary judgment, we won $102 million after a two-week trial -- one of the largest breach recoveries in the United States Court of Federal Claims. We successfully defended the full amount of the judgment against the government’s appeal to the Federal Circuit. 271 F.3d 1060 (Fed. Cir. 2001).
     
  • In Re: Protest of United Defense, L.P. and GM Canada/General Dynamics, Solicitation No. DAAE07-00-D-M051, GAO No. B-286925, filed before the United States Government Accounting Office. Counsel to GM/GDLS Defense Group, LLC in the successful defense at trial of the Army’s award to GM/GDLS of a $4 billion military defense contract. Facing a challenge to virtually every aspect of the procurement, we quickly assembled a highly skilled group of experienced government contract specialists and trial lawyers to address each aspect of the procurement under scrutiny. Working with an enormously complex and large factual record, we were able to focus the attention of the decision-maker on a narrower set of issues that ultimately proved dispositive. Key to the successful defense of the award was a talented group of industry experts who we identified, retained, and directed in the analysis and presentation of the technical elements of the defense.
     
  • United States ex rel. Fowler v. Unisys Corporation, Civ. No. 00-1615A (E.D. Va.). Counsel to Unisys Corporation in a qui tam case joined by the government alleging cost mischarging on a U.S. Postal Service contract. Following active litigation in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia (often called the “Rocket Docket”), the case was resolved favorably through a two-month binding private mediation.
Government Experience
  • Assistant to the Solicitor General, U.S. Department of Justice
  • Assistant Director, Torts Branch, Civil Division, U.S. Department of Justice
  • Assistant Chief, Admiralty and Shipping Section, U.S. Department of Justice
  • Senior Investigative Counsel, Special Committee on Investigations, U.S. Senate
  • Deputy Independent Counsel appointed to investigate Attorney General-designate Edwin Meese III
  • Chief, Special Litigation Division, Public Defender Service for the District of Columbia
  • Director of Training, and Trial Attorney, Public Defender Service for the District of Columbia
  • Assistant United States Attorney, District of Columbia
  • Trial Chief, Public Defender Service for the District of Columbia
  • Trial Attorney, Public Defender Service for the District of Columbia
  • Assistant Federal Public Defender, Maryland
  • Assistant Federal Public Defender, Las Vegas, Nevada
Rankings and Recognition
Clerkships