Search Menu

Trial and Class Action Print PDF

Overview

PIB Law's litigation team represents a wide variety of clients – including Fortune 500 companies – in all aspects of litigation across the country.  We handle trials and appeals in state and federal courts, as well as arbitration and mediation.  We also act as business counselors, providing advice on the prevention of claims and avoidance of litigation.  We provide critical guidance at all stages of a business dispute, allowing us to place our clients in the best possible position to obtain a favorable result.

The Firm stresses a team approach to resolve our clients' litigation issues.  Our team has the judgment, experience, and resources to make candid assessments of our clients' circumstances and needs, to recommend the best course of action consistent with our clients' goals, and to maximize every opportunity for successful results. 

While we are always prepared to go to trial when necessary, we recognize that our clients' primary goal is usually dispute resolution.  We are dedicated to resolving our clients' business disputes in the most effective and efficient way possible.

Noteworthy

Experience Highlights:

  • Retained by a global insurer after it was hit with a $59M punitive damages verdict to re-try the punitive damages phase.  Successfully avoided punitive damages in the re-trial.
  • Defended the world’s largest seller of heavy construction equipment in a consumer class action, in which we successfully defeated class certification under the Song Beverly Credit Card Act of 1971 and B&P Code 17200 in a published decision establishing that the SBCCA did not apply to business credit cards and narrowing the standing requirements for asserting B&P Code 17200 claims.
  • Successfully defended the second largest cable company in the nation in a highly watched multi-million dollar fraud suit, which challenged the auction process utilized for television advertising industry wide.
  • Obtained a defense verdict for a large insurance brokerage firm alleging disability discrimination, failure to engage in the interactive process, and failure to accommodate under the ADA, after a seven week trial that included testimony from 12 expert witnesses.

News & Insights