Appellate
Advocacy.
What we do.
We are lawyers who handle appeals. That focus shapes everything we do. From advising at the earliest stages of litigation to presenting argument before Florida’s appellate courts, we bring clarity, discipline and persuasive force to difficult legal issues.
Trial Support
& IssuE Preservation.
Class Action &
High-Stakes Litigation.
We advise clients on risk assessment, settlement positioning and long-term strategy. Our appellate experience gives us a broad view of how cases evolve and how decisions may be scrutinized on review.
CASE STUDIES
In theory, class action litigation is designed to make disputes more efficient. By consolidating similar claims into a single proceeding, both plaintiffs and defendants should be able to resolve significant disputes more quickly and with fewer resources.
​
The emphasis, however, is on should.
In practice, class actions often become lengthy, procedural battles that consume time and expense before the underlying issues are ever addressed.
​
We approach class action litigation differently. Regardless of which side we represent, our goal is to ensure the process works as it was intended to. For defendants, that means controlling cost and focusing the issues. For plaintiffs, it means moving cases forward efficiently and securing meaningful results without unnecessary delay.
​
Our appellate background brings discipline, clarity and strategic focus to class action matters from the outset.
Our client, a California-based tech company in the medical records space, was—like the other members of its industry—sued in Florida state court over its copy-charge practices, which the plaintiffs contended violated Florida regulatory caps on the amount a medical records custodian could charge for copying. The other Industry defendants generally lost or settled. We proposed a different path.
​
Rather than run up fees and expenses litigating class certification, we reached a stipulation with the other side: we would agree to class certification (without prejudice to seek decertification); in exchange, we would not be required to post a bond to have a stay pending appeal if we lost the case. That decision saved the client considerable money, but we were not done. After the class was certified, we were able to avoid any formal discovery by reaching a second stipulation—this one as to the material facts in the case. With that second stipulation in hand, both sides moved for summary judgment. We won. After that, we were able to resolve the remainder of the case without any appeal.
​
Short circuiting the class action process paid off for our medical records client. They were able to resolve the action much more quickly and more cost effectively than they otherwise would have if they had hired a defense firm that employed the standard defense playbook.
01
case study 1
Outside-the-box strategy lowers defense costs.
Our creative mindset toward class action litigation recently paid off for one of our clients that we were representing in a Florida state court action.
Outside-the-box strategy lowers defense costs.
Our creative mindset toward class action litigation recently paid off for one of our clients that we were representing in a Florida state court action.
case study 1
Planning a plaintiff-side class action for efficiency.
Our unique approach to class actions also works on the plaintiff side. We learned that Uber was paying their drivers less than they were contractually required to pay them on their minimum-fare rides.
case study 2
Our client, a California-based tech company in the medical records space, was—like the other members of its industry—sued in Florida state court over its copy-charge practices, which the plaintiffs contended violated Florida regulatory caps on the amount a medical records custodian could charge for copying. The other Industry defendants generally lost or settled. We proposed a different path.
​
Rather than run up fees and expenses litigating class certification, we reached a stipulation with the other side: we would agree to class certification (without prejudice to seek decertification); in exchange, we would not be required to post a bond to have a stay pending appeal if we lost the case. That decision saved the client considerable money, but we were not done. After the class was certified, we were able to avoid any formal discovery by reaching a second stipulation—this one as to the material facts in the case. With that second stipulation in hand, both sides moved for summary judgment. We won. After that, we were able to resolve the remainder of the case without any appeal.
​
Short circuiting the class action process paid off for our medical records client. They were able to resolve the action much more quickly and more cost effectively than they otherwise would have if they had hired a defense firm that employed the standard defense playbook.
Instead of employing the typical plaintiff-side strategy–conducting months of discovery, running up costs, and wasting everyone’s time, all while hoping to cause the defendant enough pain to coerce a settlement–we designed our case so that it could be resolved, on the merits, as efficiently as possible. By limiting our claim to a strict breach-of-contract action, we were able to avoid what bogs down most nationwide class actions for years: unnecessary fights over facts. Those discovery fights only benefit people who plan their day in six-minute increments. Those people were not our clients. Discarding the typical playbook, we moved for class certification and for summary judgment on our breach of contract claim as soon as we could. That was risky.
​
The standard playbook employed by class counsel is the standard because it allows for back up plans and fact-based settlement discussions. But we believed in our case and our clients deserved to be made whole as soon as possible. Uber was not new to litigation. It has faced dozens of national class actions. It was won many, and it has settled some. But it has only lost once. We were lead counsel in that case. By designing our plaintiff-side class action to be as lean as possible from the outset, we were able to get our clients 100% of their damages as quickly and efficiently as possible. That is how class actions were meant to be litigated. We bring that efficiency to every class action we litigate.
Our client, a California-based tech company in the medical records space, was—like the other members of its industry—sued in Florida state court over its copy-charge practices, which the plaintiffs contended violated Florida regulatory caps on the amount a medical records custodian could charge for copying. The other Industry defendants generally lost or settled. We proposed a different path.
​
Rather than run up fees and expenses litigating class certification, we reached a stipulation with the other side: we would agree to class certification (without prejudice to seek decertification); in exchange, we would not be required to post a bond to have a stay pending appeal if we lost the case. That decision saved the client considerable money, but we were not done. After the class was certified, we were able to avoid any formal discovery by reaching a second stipulation—this one as to the material facts in the case. With that second stipulation in hand, both sides moved for summary judgment. We won. After that, we were able to resolve the remainder of the case without any appeal.
​
Short circuiting the class action process paid off for our medical records client. They were able to resolve the action much more quickly and more cost effectively than they otherwise would have if they had hired a defense firm that employed the standard defense playbook.
01
case study 1
Outside-the-box strategy lowers defense costs.
Our creative mindset toward class action litigation recently paid off for one of our clients that we were representing in a Florida state court action.
Instead of employing the typical plaintiff-side strategy–conducting months of discovery, running up costs, and wasting everyone’s time, all while hoping to cause the defendant enough pain to coerce a settlement–we designed our case so that it could be resolved, on the merits, as efficiently as possible. By limiting our claim to a strict breach-of-contract action, we were able to avoid what bogs down most nationwide class actions for years: unnecessary fights over facts. Those discovery fights only benefit people who plan their day in six-minute increments. Those people were not our clients. Discarding the typical playbook, we moved for class certification and for summary judgment on our breach of contract claim as soon as we could. That was risky.
​
The standard playbook employed by class counsel is the standard because it allows for back up plans and fact-based settlement discussions. But we believed in our case and our clients deserved to be made whole as soon as possible. Uber was not new to litigation. It has faced dozens of national class actions. It was won many, and it has settled some. But it has only lost once. We were lead counsel in that case. By designing our plaintiff-side class action to be as lean as possible from the outset, we were able to get our clients 100% of their damages as quickly and efficiently as possible. That is how class actions were meant to be litigated. We bring that efficiency to every class action we litigate.
02
case study 2
Planning a plaintiff-side class action for efficiency.
Our unique approach to class actions also works on the plaintiff side. We learned that Uber was paying their drivers less than they were contractually required to pay them on their minimum-fare rides.