Business Litigation

Jennings Strouss attorneys understand the realities of litigation in the 21st Century. When appropriate, they offer guidance with dispute resolution outside of the courtroom. Our attorneys have practical experience in the ADR process as both advocates and facilitators and serve as mediators, arbitrators, neutral fact finders, and court settlement officials.

Our attorneys take the time to understand a client’s goals and then works aggressively to achieve them. They also work as true facilitators to maximize the potential for a satisfactory outcome for all parties involved in the resolution process. They have experience assisting with the resolution of numerous types of disputes, including attorney fees, attorney partnerships, bankruptcy, civil, commercial, construction, employment, family law, legal malpractice, and professional responsibility.

ADR has gained significant acceptance as a flexible approach to resolving disputes, often confidentially and efficiently. Our attorneys possess the skill and experience that is essential in assisting parties with problem-solving. Whether acting as advocates or as neutrals, our energetic and knowledgeable attorneys stand ready to address even the most complex legal and factual issues innovatively and strategically.

Arbitration and Mediation

Arbitration allows a selected arbitrator or panel of arbitrators to make a decision that is binding on the parties. Arbitrators can be chosen with expertise in a particular area if desired. Our attorneys are experts in numerous fields of law and have served as arbitrators for a wide range of disputes.

Mediation allows parties to negotiate a mutually-acceptable resolution of the dispute in a confidential setting, with the assistance of a neutral mediator. If the parties are unable to settle, they may continue to use other dispute resolution techniques, such as arbitration, or may litigate their claims in court, if permitted. The presence of an experienced mediator can often help resolve the matter and provides both sides with a candid evaluation of the strengths and weaknesses of their case.

Neutral Fact Finding and Care Assessment

Neutral fact-finding and case assessment allow our attorneys to investigate a matter in an independent approach and advise clients (or parties, if desired) on the results of that inquiry. We assist clients in evaluating the merits and risks of the matter, which often leads to earlier case resolution, if appropriate.

Settlement Negotiations

Settlement negotiations allow parties to resolve disputes without the formal procedures or expense of a third party, such as an arbitrator or mediator.

Mini-Trials

Mini-trials allow parties that are expecting to proceed through litigation to test the strength of their case through an abbreviated, non-binding hearing.

Jennings Strouss attorneys have experience assisting clients in antitrust litigation. Our attorneys provide counsel to clients on a variety of issues involving umbrella pricing, price fixing, and exclusive distribution arrangements; issues regarding access to suppliers, denial of access to resources, antitrust assertions against professions and regulated industries, claims of monopolization and refusals to deal; and antitrust issues arising from mergers and acquisitions. Jennings Strouss provides advice and litigation services to businesses in a broad range of industries.

Our attorneys deal with a variety of antitrust issues, including:

• claims involving price fixing and exclusive dealing arrangements
• issues concerning access to suppliers and denial of access to resources or hospital staff privileges
• antitrust assertions against professions and regulated industries
• claims of monopolization and refusals to deal
• limits and guidelines for collaborative actions by competitors through alliances or industry associations
• antitrust issues arising from mergers and acquisitions, Hart-Scott-Rodino premerger notification requirements, price discrimination restrictions, intellectual property licensing, and joint venture activities

Representative Experience

• HSR filings for clients selling their businesses in the private security and fuel supply industries
• Defense of a hospital system in antitrust litigation arising out of the acquisition of assets of another system
• Advice to a hospital industry group on the exchange of cost and best practices information to improve healthcare delivery by all members
• Counsel to a major utility on a cooperative purchase and cost-sharing arrangements with a competing utility
• Advice to a construction industry association on the antitrust implications of joint action to address common problems relating to contracting with public agencies

Jennings Strouss attorneys have extensive experience at all levels of the Arizona and federal appellate courts. They handle appellate matters for firm clients and are also retained by other attorneys and law firms to assist with their complex appellate needs as well.

Our attorneys are intimately familiar with procedures and can provide the highest quality representation, no matter how complex or novel the issues. Their experience covers a broad range of substantive areas of the law, including general torts and personal injury, medical malpractice defense, commercial and contracts litigation, professional liability and malpractice defense, constitutional, labor and employment, administrative, real estate, healthcare, bankruptcy, trusts and estates, and tax law.

Representative Experience

State Courts

• RUCO v. ACC, ____ Ariz. ____, ____P.3d ___ (2016) (amicus)
• Arellano v. Primerica Life Insurance Company, 235 Ariz. 371, 332 P.3d 597 (App. 2014)
• Para v. Anderson, 231 Ariz. 91, 290 P.3d 1214 (App. App. 2012)
• Caruthers v. Underhill, 230 Ariz. 513, 287 P.3d 807 (App. 2012)
• Walsh v. Advanced Cardiac Specialists, 229 Ariz. 193, 273 P.3d 645 (2012)
• Southwest Gas Corp. v. Grubb, 229 Ariz. 198, 273 P.3d 650 (App. 2012)
• Benkendorf v. Advanced Cardiac Specialists, 228 Ariz. 528, 269 P.3d 704 (App. 2012)
• Seisinger v. Siebel, 220 Ariz. 85, 203 P.3d 483 (2009)
• Arizona Dept. of Revenue v. Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement and Power District, 212 Ariz. 35, 126 P.3d 1063 (App. 2006)
• Phelps v. Firebird Raceway, Inc., 207 Ariz. 149 (2004)
• Ry-Tan Const., Inc. v. Washington Elementary School Dist. No. 6, 210 Ariz. 419, 111 P.3d 1019 (2005)
• Romley v. Arpaio, 202 Ariz. 47, 40 P.3d 831 (App. 2002)
• Hallmark Industries, L.L.C. v. First System International, Inc., 203 Ariz. 243, 52 P.3d 812 (App. 2002)
• Williams v. Lakeview Co., 199 Ariz. 1, 13 P.3d 280 (2000)
• A Tumbling-T Ranches v. Paloma Inv. Ltd. Partnership, 197 Ariz. 545, 5 P.3d 259 (App. 2000)
• In re Estate of Shumway, 198 Ariz. 323, 9 P.3d 1062 (2000)

Federal Courts

• Haeger v. The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company, 793 F.3d 1122 (9th Cir. 2015)
• Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement and Power District v. Lee, 672 F.3d 1176 (9th Cir. 2012)
• Transwestern Pipeline Co. v. Agua Fria Investments, 627 F.3d 1268 (9th Cir. 2010)
• Navajo Nation v. U.S. Forest Service, 535 F.3d 1058 (9th Cir. 2008)
• Shaver v. Operating Engineers Local 428 Pension Trust Fund, 332 F.3d 1198 (9th Cir. 2003)
• Dawavendewa v. Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement and Power District, 276 F.3d 1150 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 537 U.S. 820 (2002)
• Bailey v. Southwest Gas Corp., 275 F.3d 1181 (9th Cir. 2002)

The automotive dealership industry is exceedingly competitive and unpredictable. Jennings Strouss understands that dealerships and owners have more on their plate to worry about than just selling vehicles. They are presented with unique daily challenges related to the ownership and operation of a motor vehicle dealership, such as the collaboration of its various departments, relationships with manufacturers and vendors, consumer disputes, economic pressures, recalls, and ever-increasing federal and state regulation.

Our attorneys have developed a sophisticated understanding of all aspects of automotive dealership operations and recognize that the legal representation of the industry requires a multi-disciplinary approach. They have substantial experience with advising clients from a legal and practical business perspective regarding the multitude of issues encountered by motor vehicle dealerships and their owners, including:

• Advertising Compliance
• Acquisitions, Expansions, and Sales
• Attorney General/State Investigations
• Automobile Trade Associations
• Consumer Complaints
• Consumer and Commercial Litigation
• Employment
• Factory Audits
• Financing
• Licensing
• Manufacturer and Vendor Relations
• Real Estate
• Recalls
• Regulatory Compliance
• Structure and Succession Planning

Automobile dealerships are among the most highly regulated industries in the United States. To assist its clients with their continually growing obligations, Jennings Strouss conducts compliance audits, form reviews, and training sessions for personnel to ensure dealerships are compliant with the complex, and often times confusing, federal and state regulations, such as the Red Flags Rule, Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Privacy Rule, Safeguards Rule, Truth-In-Lending Act, Fair Credit Reporting Act, and the impact of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank) on the lending aspect of the dealership’s operations.

Our goal is to provide preventative counseling to help dealership clients avoid disputes; however, in the event a dealership or owner faces consumer or class action complaints, manufacturer or vendor disputes, real estate, employment, or other litigation matters, our attorneys have the experience to assist either through alternative dispute resolution or by providing an aggressive litigation strategy.

In addition to representing dealerships and owners, Jennings Strouss attorneys often serve as general counsel to dealership groups and trade associations. They are also actively involved in the National Association of Dealer Counsel, an organization designed to educate its membership on the legal issues affecting motor vehicle dealers while facilitating a forum for dealer attorneys to share best practices from across the country.

Jennings Strouss handles litigation arising out of bankruptcies, including the prosecution of complaints to prevent discharge of debtors, creditors’ claims litigation involving preferential and fraudulent transfers, exemption litigation (pension plans and IRAs), and representation of bankruptcy attorneys in malpractice actions.

We also represent clients in debt collection litigation and other enforcement of creditors’ rights and remedies and provide defense representation to debtors, including guarantors, bonding companies, and other sureties. Our experience includes receivership and judicial mortgage and nonjudicial deed of trust foreclosure work, and the collection of deficiency claims against both principals and guarantors. It also includes the preparation, filing, and processing, as well as the defense of, mechanic’s lien claims and foreclosure actions, as well as claims against various performance bonds.

Construction defect claims can cripple a company or tie things up for so long that it limits a company’s ability to take on new projects. Our attorneys have successfully defended clients in patent and latent defect issues related to mold, water, soil and landscaping, foundation, structural failure, and electrical systems. They have experience representing construction clients in state and federal courts, at the district, appellate, and Supreme Court levels. Our attorneys negotiate and litigate claims and disputes involving private owners, the federal government, and a number of state government procurement agencies. They handle a wide variety of construction litigation, including matters involving unworkmanlike performance, Registrar of Contractors issues, AIA contracts, Arizona Contractor Recovery Fund claims, engineering issues, surety, bond claims, defective plans and specifications, construction insurance issues, code violations, and actions for indemnity. Also, our attorneys have extensive experience in defending clients against job site personal injury claims.

The firm’s attorneys are experts on the full spectrum of surety matters, including performance and payment bonds, Miller Act bonds, Little Miller Act bonds, etc. They handle matters for numerous surety insurance companies and assist with a wide range of lawsuits and claims against construction sureties, including bad faith litigation.

Jennings Strouss is preeminently qualified to represent government agencies in eminent domain and condemnation actions relating to public projects. Our attorneys represent government agencies in related matters every day and have the experience and resources to provide effective and efficient representation, from design review through trial.

Our goal is to help keep public projects on time and on budget. We work collaboratively with agencies and their design teams, including right-of-way professionals and appraisers, to help minimize project impacts and costs and avoid litigation while optimizing preparation for any unavoidable condemnation suits. Our extensive experience in the public arena affords us an understanding of and appreciation for the political and economic sensitivity that often surrounds a public project.

Our opponents know that our experienced team of attorneys cannot be bullied or bluffed. They know we take cases to trial when necessary. They respect our knowledge of the many intricacies of condemnation law that may not be apparent even to experienced attorneys who dabble in condemnation. They know we can and will spot flaws in appraisals that others might miss because we read appraisals every day with an eye to cross-examining that appraiser.

Jennings Strouss has the expertise to advise and thoroughly educate our clients as to eminent domain and condemnation law and procedure, realistic schedules for acquisition or possession, risks and costs of a project or individual acquisition, advisability of settlement or trial, and litigation budgets.  Our attorneys assist with an agency’s coordination with stakeholders, compliance with federal and state laws and regulations, and preparation of project documentation, including procurement by alternative delivery methods. They also assist with relocation appeals when a person or business is displaced by a project files for administrative review in court.

Our attorneys defend employers in a wide range of employment litigation, including sexual harassment, race discrimination, and other Title VII claims, wrongful discharge claims, and issues such as employee discipline, drug testing, and searches and seizures. They also assist clients in administrative proceedings at all levels of government, and in lawsuits brought before state, federal, and appellate courts.

Our attorneys represent financial institutions in litigation involving Articles 3 and 4 of the Uniform Commercial Code. Their experience also includes lender liability matters, claims of fraud and embezzlement involving bank employees, and credit card fraud.

Our attorneys represent clients in patent, trademark, copyright, and trade secret enforcement and infringement matters, including litigation in the state and federal courts.

Jennings Strouss attorneys represent developers, shopping centers, office complexes, and other commercial clients in virtually all types of commercial lease disputes, from simple, forcible detainers to complex lease interpretation issues, such as rental adjustment provisions and continuous operations provisions. They assist developers in disputes with homeowners associations (and vice versa) over CC&Rs. Also, they litigate adverse possession and easement claims, and virtually all other title issues. Jennings Strouss has extensive experience litigating escrow and title insurance claims, and our attorneys also defend real estate brokers and trustees in professional liability claims.

Jennings Strouss has a reputation for excellence in serving the business needs of private and public sector clients doing business in an increasingly technical, highly-regulated, and competitive environment.

The firm routinely represents clients in trials and arbitrations, regulatory inquiries and responses, investigations, Wells’ responses, and enforcement actions throughout the country and before the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC), Comptroller of the Currency, Department of Labor, Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), and numerous other state and federal regulators. Our clients include:

• broker-dealers
• registered investment advisers
• banks and their officers
• registered representatives
• investment adviser representatives
• agents

In addition, our attorneys provide advice on licensing and registration; compliance with industry laws, including but not limited to the Securities Act of 1933, the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, the Investment Company Act of 1940, the Dodd-Frank Act, and the Employee Retirement Income Security Act; and preparation or consultation on the filing or amendment of disclosure documents, such as Form ADV, Form U4, and Form U5. They also represent clients in actions involving employee forgivable loans or notes, as well as enforcement or defense of disputes arising out of non-solicitation or non-compete agreements.

Representative Engagements

• Secured total defense verdict with co-counsel for registered investment adviser and investment adviser representative in a lengthy jury trial before Arizona District Court and involving claims of securities fraud
• Defended officers of commercial real estate lender in a class action alleging damages in controversy of approximately $900 million, and  represented officers in mass action, additional state court action, and regulatory investigation
• Represented CFO of a public company in securities fraud class action, derivative suit, civil litigation, SEC investigation, and enforcement action
• Defended businesses in investigation and enforcement action brought by the Securities Division of the Arizona Corporation Commission
• Represent numerous broker-dealers, registered investment advisers, and licensed individuals with licensing and registration requirements, as well as disclosure or reporting requirements—including consultation on Form ADV, Form U4, and Form U5 filings and amendments
• Represent clients with regulatory inquiries, investigations, On the Record Interviews, productions, Wells’ responses and, where necessary, defense of enforcement actions
• Defended broker-dealers, registered investment advisers, and licensed individuals in customer arbitrations involving claims of unsuitable investment recommendations, negligent supervision, negligent hiring, selling away, impermissible annuity or mutual fund switches, and churning
• Represent clients in intra-industry disputes and employment matters, including actions involving employee forgivable loans or notes, enforcement or defense of non-solicitation or confidential and proprietary agreements, and the like