19 McCandlish Holton  Attorneys Named 'Legal Elite' in Virginia Business 23rd Edition

McCandlish Holton is pleased to announce that nineteen of our attorneys are named in the 23rd Edition 'Legal Elite' by Virginia Business Magazine. Each year Virginia Business Magazine asks attorneys throughout the Commonwealth to nominate their peers for distinction in 20 categories. The full list of 19 McCandlish Holton attorneys on this year’s Legal Elite list, recognized in 8 categories: 

Read More

25 McCandlish Holton  Attorneys Named 2020 Virginia 'Legal Elite'

25 McCandlish Holton attorneys are recognized in the 21st Edition of Virginia Business Magazine Legal Elite in 11 practice categories. Launched in cooperation with the Virginia Bar Association, the Legal Elite polls lawyers licensed to practice in Virginia each year, asking them to identify which of their peers are the top attorneys in a variety of legal specialties. Below, find the full list of McCandlish Holton attorneys named on this list Legal Elite list: 

ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION:

James M. Snyder

BANKRUPTCY/CREDITORS' RIGHTS:

C. Walker Terry

BusinesS law:

Samuel C. Haisley

Civil Litigation:

D. Cameron Beck, Jr.

Lawrence A. (Lex) Dunn

Michael H. Gladstone

J. Matthew Haynes, Jr.

Lauren E. Hutcheson [Read Lauren’s Profile]

Joseph M. Moore

Brennan C. Morrissett

Read More

21 McCandlish Holton  Attorneys Named 2019 Virginia 'Legal Elite'

McCandlish Holton is pleased to announce that twenty-one of our attorneys are named  in the 20th Edition 'Legal Elite' by Virginia Business Magazine. Each year Virginia Business Magazine asks attorneys throughout the Commonwealth to nominate their peers for distinction in 20 categories. The full list of 21 McCandlish Holton attorneys on this year’s Legal Elite list, recognized in 11 categories: 

ADMINISTRATIVE/GOVERNMENT:

Michael R. Ward

ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION:

Michael H. Gladstone

Joseph M. Moore

Brennan C. Morrissett

BANKRUPTCY/CREDITORS' RIGHTS:

Read More

General Data Protection Regulation in U.S. Litigation through Mid-Summer 2019

Originally published by International Association of Defense Counsel (IADC), Defense Counsel Journal Volume 86, No. 4

IN JANUARY 2012, the European Commission set out plans for data protection reform across the European Union. One of the key components of the reforms was the introduction of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).1

The GDPR is a comprehensive set of rules designed to give European Union citizens more control over their personal data. The GDPR applies, generally, to any organization operating within the European Union, as well as organizations outside of the European Union which offer goods or services to customers or businesses in the European Union among others. Almost every major corporation in the world is affected by this legislation. This legislation came into force across the European Union in May 2018.

There has been considerable uncertainty how GDPR will be addressed in litigation commenced in the United States. However, as a year has passed, motions relating to GDPR are beginning to be adjudicated, and trends are starting to occur. This article provides a detailed summary of courts’ treatment of GDPR-related arguments and summarizes the potential impact of GDPR on United States litigation.

I. Impact of GDPR currently

As of July 19, 2019, eleven federal cases reference “GDPR” or the “General Data Protection Regulation.” No state court cases appear. Of the cases returned, four are from the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York,2 and two are from California,3 one  from the Central District of California and the Northern District of California. The remaining five cases originate from District Courts in Washington, Maryland, Alabama, Utah, and Florida.4

These eleven cases generally involve discovery disputes, often in intellectual property matters. In these scenarios, the responding party has raised GDPR as a bar or impediment to

Read More

When Arbitrators Exceed their Authority Under the FAA

By: Brennan C. Morrissett

Arbitration awards are often described as ironclad, with arbitrators’ findings generally not susceptible to challenge.  Historically, and as a matter of public policy, arbitral power is intentionally limited to only those matters the parties have specifically contracted to subject to arbitration.  This means an arbitrator has no power to rule on issues except for those expressly assigned to them by contract by the parties.  Challenges to arbitrators’ failure to observe this fundamental limitation led to several recent United States Supreme Court “exceeded authority” cases – one of four limited bases on which an arbitrator’s finding can be challenged.  These rulings give some much needed

Read More

GDPR Issues in U.S. and International Litigation and Arbitration

On November 30, 2018, I had the privilege of serving as a panel member on an International Association of Defense Counsel (IADC) presentation addressing GDPR in International Dispute Resolution.   The other panel members were: Robert Bond, of Bristows, in London, England; Alexandra Simotta, of Six-Group, in Vienna, Austria; and Janis Block, of CMS in Cologne, Germany.  The panel’s objective was to explore the issues arising under the GDPR in international dispute resolution, whether in arbitration or court litigation.   My responsibility was to offer a U.S. trial counsel’s response to the subject.   This article shares a few of the ideas raised during the panel, and a few which have occurred to the author in response to hearing from my fellow panel members. 

Read More