Spotswood Sansom & Sansbury LLC

Significant Cases

Spotswood Sansom & Sansbury LLC has litigated a wide range of complex commercial disputes in federal and state trial courts throughout the nation, including class actions, contract claims, business torts, employment matters, and intellectual property disputes. In addition, Spotswood Sansom & Sansbury LLC regularly represents clients in appellate courts and has submitted briefs amicus curiae on behalf of industry groups, including to the United States Supreme Court. Recently, Spotswood Sansom & Sansbury LLC has litigated the following significant matters:

593 F. Supp. 2d 341, U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts (2009).

Spotswood Sansom & Sansbury LLC, as national counsel, obtained pre-certification dismissal of a putative nationwide ERISA class action and putative New England state law class action alleging that a motor carrier jointly employed certain drivers who worked for independent transportation services contractors. In its decision, the district court ruled that the Plaintiffs had failed to exhaust administrative remedies as contemplated by ERISA and had not complied with federal pleading requirements as clarified by the United States Supreme Court in Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 127 S. Ct. 1955 (2007). Following dismissal of the federal ERISA claims, the district court declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the pendent state-law claims. See 593 F. Supp. 2d 341.

Mercedes-Benz U.S. Int’l, Inc. v. Cobasys, LLC, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama (2009).

Spotswood Sansom & Sansbury LLC helped to defeat the imposition of a preliminary injunction in a case involving the manufacture of hybrid batteries. The injunction was sought by an automobile manufacturer who alleged that it had a production contract with the hybrid battery manufacturer and sought specific performance. The district court, following a two-day hearing, concluded that the automobile manufacturer did not meet the injunction standards regarding likelihood of success on the merits, irreparable harm, and public interest. The district court’s opinion can be found at 2009 WL 8282266.

Hope for Families & Community Services, Inc. v. Warren, U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Alabama (2009).

In this commercial dispute, Spotswood Sansom & Sansbury LLC filed constitutional, Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”), and tort claims against the sheriff of Macon County, Alabama, and the sole operator of an electronic bingo facility in that county. The complaint alleged that the sheriff and the operator had conspired, with others, to obtain a monopoly on the operation of electronic bingo in Macon County through a bribery scheme. The district court denied the defendants’ motion to dismiss in its entirety (2008 WL 630469) and, in an eighty-page opinion, forced the defendants to turn over significant discovery that they had withheld, in part, on the grounds of attorney-client privilege (2009 WL 174970).

2007 WL 5162454 & 301 Fed. App’x 716, U.S. District Court for the Central District of California (2007); U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (2008).

Spotswood Sansom & Sansbury LLC, as national counsel, obtained pre-certification dismissal of a putative California class action alleging that a motor carrier jointly employed certain California drivers who worked for independent transportation services contractors. In its decision, the district court ruled that the named Plaintiff was not a joint employee of the motor carrier. See 2007 WL 5162454. The Ninth Circuit affirmed. See 301 Fed App’x 716.

Federal Express Corp. v. Holowecki, United States Supreme Court (2008).

Spotswood Sansom & Sansbury LLC, as co-lead counsel with attorneys at FedEx Express, successfully petitioned the United States Supreme Court for review of the Second Circuit’s decision regarding what constitutes the “charge” that must be submitted by an employee before he or she can sue under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act. See 127 S. Ct. 2914 (granting certiorari). Spotswood Sansom & Sansbury, as co-lead counsel, briefed the case on the merits in the Supreme Court and helped prepare FedEx Express’s in-house counsel for oral argument. Although the Supreme Court ultimately affirmed the Second Circuit’s decision, Justices Thomas and Scalia wrote a dissent in favor of the position advocated by Spotswood Sansom & Sansbury. See 128 S. Ct. 1147.

Rowe v. New Hampshire Motor Transport Ass’n, U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit (2006); United States Supreme Court (2008).

This case involved important issues of federal preemption under the Federal Aviation Authorization Administration Act (FAAAA). In the First Circuit, Spotswood Sansom & Sansbury LLC filed a brief on behalf of amicus curiae FedEx Express in support of the appellant, the New Hampshire Motor Transport Association. In its published decision, the First Circuit ruled in favor of the appellant, holding that Maine’s Tobacco Delivery Law, which sought to impose restrictions on the way motor carriers operated their businesses, was preempted by the FAAAA. See 448 F.3d 66. In the Supreme Court, Spotswood Sansom & Sansbury filed a brief on behalf of amici curiae FedEx Express and the Air Transport Association, the principal airline trade association in the United States, in support of the respondent New Hampshire Motor Transport Association. The Supreme Court affirmed the First Circuit’s decision in favor of the New Hampshire Motor Transport Association, confirming that Maine’s law was preempted by the FAAAA. See 128 S. Ct. 989. This important decision protects the ability of motor and air carriers to operate their businesses free from a patchwork of state regulations, as Congress intended.

Ex parte Haynes, Downard, Andra & Jones, LLP, Supreme Court of Alabama (2005).

As counsel for one of the defendants in a multi-party action in the Bessemer Division of the Circuit Court of Jefferson County, Alabama, Spotswood Sansom & Sansbury LLC successfully petitioned the Alabama Supreme Court for a writ of mandamus instructing the trial court to sever the claims against Spotswood Sansom & Sansbury LLC’s client and transfer them to the Birmingham Division of the Jefferson County Circuit Court. The Supreme Court’s published decision is significant because it clarifies venue and jurisdiction requirements for those Alabama counties having more than one court division, requiring the claims against each defendant in a suit to have arisen in the division where the suit is filed. See 924 So. 2d 687.

A.I.B. Express, Inc. v. FedEx Corp., U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (2004).

In a limited retention, Spotswood Sansom & Sansbury LLC successfully disposed of business tort claims under New York law using federal preemption defenses in a motion for judgment on the pleadings. The court’s opinion includes the landmark holding that claims for misappropriation of trade secrets are preempted by the Airline Deregulation Act of 1978. See 358 F. Supp. 2d 239.

American Ass’n of Professional Athletes, Inc. v. Federal Express Corp., Circuit Court of Davidson County, Tennessee (2004).

Spotswood Sansom & Sansbury LLC, as co-lead counsel with attorneys at FedEx, obtained summary judgment from the trial court in a putative class action. The plaintiff filed a class action against FedEx alleging that FedEx breached its service guide by charging putative class members premium shipping charges for delayed service. After several named plaintiffs had their individual actions dismissed, Spotswood Sansom & Sansbury LLC, and a team of FedEx lawyers, obtained a ruling from the court that the plaintiffs’ theory of liability was inconsistent with FedEx’s service guide. The plaintiffs abandoned their appeal.

Miller v. Capital One Services, Inc., U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama (2004).

Spotswood Sansom & Sansbury LLC, as co-counsel, obtained dismissal of a putative class action using bankruptcy preemption. In this case, the plaintiff charged Capital One with employing unfair debt collection practices against bankrupt debtors. The district court, in a matter of first impression in the Eleventh Circuit, adopted the conclusion of the Ninth Circuit that such actions are preempted by the bankruptcy code. The district court’s decision was appealed, but the appeal was dismissed.

Norfolk Southern Railway Co. v. James N. Kirby, Pty. Ltd., United States Supreme Court (2004).

Spotswood Sansom & Sansbury LLC filed a brief on behalf of amicus curiae Air Transport Association, Inc., the principal airline trade association in the United States, in support of the Petitioner, Norfolk Southern. The case raised important issues of transportation law under the Carriage of Goods at Sea Act. The Court’s decision in Norfolk Southern’s favor has impacted the means by which freight forwarders contract with customers for the transportation of their goods.

Oden v. Federal Express Corp., District Court of Harrison County, Texas (2004).

Spotswood Sansom & Sansbury LLC, as co-lead counsel, disposed of a putative class action on summary judgment using federal preemption defenses. The plaintiffs filed an action under the Texas Insurance Code and Texas common law challenging FedEx’s implementation of the transportation-industry practice of contracting with shippers for varying levels of maximum shipment-mishap liability in exchange for varying transportation charges. The action alleged that the practice constituted the unlawful sale of insurance. The court granted summary judgment in FedEx’s favor before any class certification proceedings, and the summary judgment decision was not appealed.

Wayne v. DHL Express (USA), Inc., California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District (2004).

Spotswood Sansom & Sansbury LLC filed a brief on behalf of amicus curiae Cargo Airline Association, the principal association of cargo airlines in the United States. The plaintiff filed an action under California’s unfair competition law (commonly known as the “UCL”) challenging a cargo air carrier’s implementation of the transportation-industry practice of contracting with shippers for varying levels of maximum shipment-mishap liability in exchange for varying transportation charges. The action alleged that the practice constituted the unlawful sale of insurance, a proposition that the amicus brief challenged through a detailed presentation of the history and implementation of federal transportation-law principles at issue. The action has now been returned to the trial court on procedural grounds for further litigation.

Dugan v. FedEx Corp., Superior Court of Los Angeles County; U.S. District Court for the Central District of California; and U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (2003).

Spotswood Sansom & Sansbury LLC, as co-lead counsel with attorneys at FedEx, disposed of a putative class action on the pleadings using federal preemption defenses. The plaintiffs filed an action under California’s UCL challenging FedEx’s implementation of the transportation-industry practice of contracting with shippers for varying levels of maximum shipment-mishap liability in exchange for varying transportation charges. The action alleged that the practice constituted the unlawful sale of insurance. Spotswood Sansom & Sansbury LLC removed the case to federal court, and the court entered judgment on the pleadings in FedEx’s favor, holding that the Airline Deregulation Act of 1978 preempted all of the plaintiffs’ claims. The plaintiffs filed an appeal in the Ninth Circuit, but, after Spotswood Sansom & Sansbury LLC filed its response, the plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed their appeal.

Good v. Broyhill Furniture, Inc., Superior Court of Nevada County; California Court of Appeal, Third Appellate District (2003).

Spotswood Sansom & Sansbury LLC, as lead counsel, successfully defended unfair competition and false advertising claims against Broyhill, a major furniture manufacturer. The plaintiff brought its claims in a representative action under California’s unfair competition law. After a bench trial, Spotswood Sansom & Sansbury LLC received rulings in Broyhill’s favor on every claim but one. This unfavorable ruling was overturned on appeal, and the remaining rulings were affirmed. This case is one of the only UCL cases applying California’s false advertising standards in the context of internet advertising.

On the House Syndication, Inc. v. Federal Express Corp., U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California; U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (2003).

Spotswood Sansom & Sansbury LLC, as co-lead counsel with attorneys at FedEx, successfully defended a class action against FedEx. This class action arose out of delayed deliveries resulting from a 1997 strike by one of FedEx’s competitors. The district court certified a class and entered a judgment in excess of $70 million. Spotswood Sansom & Sansbury LLC was co-counsel on the appeal that ultimately overturned this judgment.

Shaw v. Federal Express Corp., U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia (2002).

Spotswood Sansom & Sansbury LLC, as co-counsel with attorneys at FedEx, defeated class certification in this employment class action. The plaintiff, a deaf employee, sued FedEx under the Americans with Disabilities Act, alleging that FedEx failed to provide reasonable accommodations for her deafness. After a motion for class certification was filed, Spotswood Sansom & Sansbury LLC was hired to respond to the motion on an expedited basis, and the motion was denied. In a similar action filed by deaf employees of one of FedEx’s major competitors, a class was certified, and, after six weeks of trial, the case was settled for accommodations and damages in excess of $5.8 million.

Counseling

Spotswood Sansom & Sansbury LLC has also applied its complex litigation experience to counsel clients regarding their contractual relationships. This advice has included editing contract documents used in large numbers of consumer and business transactions to better address the realities of the litigation environment and counseling business entities regarding commercial insurance coverage issues, another area in which Spotswood Sansom & Sansbury LLC has significant expertise.

Firm Profile Attorneys Appellate Practice Complex Litigation Significant Cases Publications Contact Us

site design by denning e-solutions, LLC