Public Citizen, Inc. et al v. Louisiana Attorney Disciplinary Board et al

Filing 15

MOTION for Preliminary Injunction by Public Citizen, Inc., Morris Bart, Morris Bart L.L.C., William N Gee, III, William N. Gee, III, Ltd.. Motion Hearing set for 11/19/2008 10:00 AM before Judge Martin L.C. Feldman. (Attachments: # 1 Notice of Hearing, # 2 Memorandum in Support, # 3 Exhibit, # 4 Exhibit Bart Declaration, # 5 Exhibit Berwager Declaration, # 6 Exhibit Gee Declaration, # 7 Exhibit Wolfman Declaration, # 8 Exhibit Beck Declaration, # 9 Exhibit Beck Declaration Exs. 01-10, # 10 Exhibit Beck Declaration Exs. 11-20, # 11 Exhibit Beck Declaration Exs. 21-33, # 12 Exhibit Beck Declaration Ex. 24, # 13 Exhibit Beck Declaration Ex. 25, # 14 Exhibit Beck Declaration Exs. 26-27)(Ciolino, Dane) (Additional attachment(s) added on 10/28/2008: # 15 Exhibit Beck Declaration) (caa, ).

Exhibit 21

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE FLORIDA BAR BOARD OF GOVERNORS BY THE ADVERTISING TASK FORCE 2004

Respectfully submitted by the Advertising Task Force 2004 Mr. Manuel R. Morales, Jr., Chair, Miami Mr. Charles Chobee Ebbets, Vice-chair, Daytona Beach Mr. Basil L. Bain, Naples Mr. John C. Bales, Tampa Mr. Linzie F. Bogan, Tallahassee Mr. John R. J. Bullard, Live Oak Prof. Debra M. Curtis, Fort Lauderdale Mr. William F. "Casey" Ebsary, Jr., Tampa Mr. Michael R. Hammond, Orlando Mr. Kelly K. Huang, Fort Myers Mr. S. Curtis Kiser, Tallahassee Ms. Rozalyn Landisburg, Hollywood Mr. Theodore J. Leopold, Palm Beach Gardens Mr. Halley Bronson Lewis, III, Tallahassee Ms. Ann E. Meador, Pensacola Mr. Shane T. Munoz, Tampa Ms. Kelly A. O'Keefe, Tallahassee Mr. John L. Remsen, Jr., Fort Lauderdale Mr. Robert A. Rush, Gainesville Mr. David L. Sellers, Pensacola Mr. Bill Wagner, Tampa Mr. Matthew R. Willard, Tallahassee

Appendix D - Page 1

To better organize subdivision (b)(2) and delete confusing repetition, the task force recommends consolidating and deleting redundant information in the prohibition against misleading information; the proposed subdivision is numbered (c)(1). The task force recommends deleting the term "unfair" throughout the rules because it believes the term is unclear, overbroad, and unenforceable, deleting references to "unfair" advertising in subdivision (b)(2)(E) and the comment to rule 4-7.2. At the request of the board, the task force carefully examined subdivision (b)(1)(B), prohibiting statements that are "likely to create an unjustified expectation about results the lawyer can achieve." Bar staff reported to the task force that interpretation of this rule is one of the most difficult areas of the attorney advertising rules. The board disagrees with Standing Committee on Advertising interpretation of this rule provision more often than any other rule provision. The task force initially discussed defining "likely to create an unjustified expectation" in either the rule or the comment. The task force found the term to be unclear and incapable of adequate definition to provide guidance to Bar members. The task force ultimately determined to recommend that the rule provision be deleted and replaced with a prohibition against statements that "guarantee results" in proposed subdivision (c)(1)(H). To better organize this rule, the task force also recommends consolidating the prohibitions against misleading illustrations and misleading visual and verbal portrayals in proposed subdivision (c)(3) [existing subdivisions (b)(3) and (c)(1)]. The task force recommends deleting the prohibition against advertising for cases in an area of practice that the lawyer does not currently practice in subdivision (b)(5). A majority of the task force believes that, although the rationale behind the rule is to address the "brokering" of cases, the regulation is overbroad and not evident from the language of the rule itself.

7
Appendix D - Page 7

MEMO TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT:

Board of Governors of the Florida Bar Bill Wagner, Member Advertising Task Force, 2004 January 26, 2005 DISSENT FROM FINAL REPORT OF TASK FORCE THE TASK FORCE PROPOSAL SHOULD BE ADOPTED

The members of the Task Force labored long and hard to bring to the Board well considered amendments to the current Rules Regulating the Florida Bar (Rules). Overwhelmingly the proposals improve the existing Rules. While individual members of the Task Force may have preferred different results as applied to any particular proposed change, and may have preferred more or less modification of the existing rules, the final consensus reached dramatically improves on what exists today. WHAT THIS DISSENT IS NOT The author has participated in debate and numerous votes on issues presented to the Task Force since its first meeting on March 9, 2004. For the most part these decisions had to do with revision to specific currently existing Rules or proposals for additional Rules. Some proposals were personally favored. Some were personally opposed. On some issues, I voted on the prevailing side. On some I voted on the losing side. By far the majority of decisions were made by consensus. This dissent is not for the purpose of seeking to reverse any of those decisions now encompassed in the final report by the Task Force to the Board of Governors. DISSENT FROM TASK FORCE POLICY FAVORING PIECEMEAL AMENDMENT OF EXISTING RULES RATHER THAN FULL REVIEW OF VIABILITY OF CURRENT RULES FORMAT AND BASIC GOVERNING POLICIES The first basis of this dissent is from the policy adopted by the Task Force, with apparent approval of the Board and leadership, to presume that the basic concept of the need for regulation of certain advertising, the method of providing such regulation, and the goals to be accomplished by such regulation are fundamentally the same as when the Special Commission on Advertising and Solicitation (on which I served) proposed the initial Rules regulating advertising and solicitation to the Florida Supreme Court. That Court adopted the original Rules by opinion on December 21, 1990. The Special Commission, in 1989 and 1990, took extensive testimony from many sources, gathered professional surveys and studies from many sources, and commissioned a survey of the public and a separate survey of the judiciary. The purpose was to determine to what extent advertising and solicitation should be prohibited or regulated in

G-1
Appendix D - Page 142

order to protect the public and the justice system. The findings were influential in the decisions made in writing those first Rules and were important in sustaining the constitutional validly of those Rules in later litigation. It would appear to a casual observer that "advertising" by lawyers is entirely different today than it was in 1990. Such was the broad conclusion of the ABA in its extensive survey of lawyer advertising. This has driven proposed amendments to the ABA Rules as late as the year 2000 and to the Florida Rules as late as last year. There has been an explosion of television and radio advertising since 1990. Yellow Page advertising has grown to the level that in many cities pages devoted to lawyers exceed one hundred. While there are vast differences of opinion about the impact of such advertising on the public and the public's perception of lawyers and the legal system, the Task Force made no effort to obtain empirical evidence either to support retention of our present system of the regulation of advertising or to support acceptance or rejection of any proposed changes. Instead the Task Force relied almost exclusively upon the unsupported opinions of the individual Task Force members. Those opinions, of necessity, were influenced to a great deal by preconceived opinions regarding advertising itself. Those favoring advertising tended to sense reasons to eliminate or reduce regulation. Those who opposed advertising tended to sense that the need existed for more regulation. This Task Force should have, once again, sought broader empirical input about the current status of lawyer advertising and should have obtained detailed information as to the effect of advertising in other states with no regulation or substantially less advertising. In my opinion, the Florida Bar is left with little to guide its decisions except, again, the individual Board members sense of what proposed regulation might accomplish. The Florida Supreme Court will therefore potentially be left with insufficient information to make informed decisions on the Boards recommendation if there is disagreement within the Court, and there may well be an insufficient record to defend the final Rules if they are challenged in litigation. DISSENT BASED ON FAILURE TO ESTABLISH GUIDELINES OR STANDARDS AGAINST WHICH LAWYER ADVERTISING CAN BE TESTED Although there were frequent references in debate about our obligation to "protect the public," a lawyers "right to commercial free speech," and the need to "avoid bringing disrespect upon the bar or the court system," these phrases were usually used in argument to support or reject a proposed regulation, or, with some frequency, as an excuse to support argument that a current regulation might be retained or rejected. While several members of the Task Force urged development of guidelines before a review of existing Rules, the Task Force instead broke into sub-committees, with each sub-committee studying assigned sections of the current Rules to suggest changes. The ultimate success or failure of a proposal was not dictated by actions taken at the sub-committees level. The practical result was that many proposals for change were heard in depth only by a subcommittee and were often not even mentioned at the full committee level. Each members of the sub-committee brought a different and often varied to sub-committee meetings. Later discussions of controversial sub-committee proposals at sub-committee and full

G-2
Appendix D - Page 143

Exhibit 22

Environmental & Toxic Tort Practice Group

SOLUTIONS

Environmental & Toxic Tort Practice Group

SOLUTIONS
ur Environmental & Toxic Tort Practice Group understands that each day your operations are interrupted costs you money. Our approach is simple--to find a solution so you can get back to work. Whether representing a Fortune 500 company or a small business owner, we dedicate ourselves to finding a solution to your particular problem. No matter what you may be faced with-a difficult lawsuit, enforcement order or subpoena or seeking help with a facility expansion, acquisition or sale-- our approach is to solve your problem efficiently, effectively and economically. The following success stories describe Jones Walker's role in finding winning solutions for our clients facing difficult environmental issues.

At Jones Walker, our clients' problems are our problems...

O

The solution exists, look to Jones Walker to help you find it.

Environmental & Toxic Tort Practice Group

SOLUTIONS

Don't Get Taken to the Cleaners

G

roundbreaking on an exciting new project revealed a potentially devastating discovery for a national bank. After receiving a clean Phase I environmental site evaluation, the bank purchased prime commercial property from four siblings who had inherited the tract and proceeded with plans to build a flagship bank branch and office. Much to the surprise of the bank, when site preparation began the bank discovered extensive Perc contamination resulting from 30 years of dry cleaning operations on the site. The bank faced a potentially large dry cleaning bill on this project.

The bank called Jones Walker to help unravel the mess, including the bank's exposure to environmental response costs based on its ownership of contaminated property. Jones Walker's environmental attorneys reached an agreement with the bank's Phase I contractor to have it help clean up the property to the satisfaction of the State of Louisiana. Jones Walker helped the bank reach an agreement with the State under Louisiana's new Voluntary Remediation Program (Brownfield Program) that allowed, for the first time ever, a "partial" cleanup, with use restrictions. After completion of the approved remedial work, the State provided the bank, and its future owner, with a release of liability for the property. The bank was then able to sell the The story of the bank's near miss at being taken to the property at a favorable price. cleaners is just one example of Jones Walker's

multi-tiered approach to assisting clients with complex At the same time, Jones issues related to contaminated property. Walker initiated a CERCLA cost recovery action on behalf of the bank against the former property owners and dry cleaning operators. Because the former owners had inherited the property, the CERCLA action touched on novel issues of CERCLA estate liability. In the end, to the bank's satisfaction, all parties settled.

Environmental & Toxic Tort Practice Group

SOLUTIONS

Preserving Dreams and the Environment
ong-forgotten marshlands diked and impounded over thirty years ago became an issue when a developer arrived in St. Tammany Parish, Louisiana. Off Interstate-10 over 2,000 acres of land exist that were previously part of a lake bottom. Over decades these lands were converted from marshes to agricultural lands, pasturelands, and fastlands. Environmentalists fought development since the 1970s. A development company reentered the picture in the late 1990s and sought to develop large parcels of land, with some isolated wetlands scattered about, into a residential subdivision, with commercial and multifamily areas, a marina, a civic center and a school. Jones Walker was by its side from day one. Over objections from some environmentalists and agencies, the company won its permit from the Corps of Engineers. Not to be stopped, an environmental group sued the Corps of Engineers and the developer raising issues of coastal erosion and subsidence in Louisiana, mercury contamination and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) non-compliance. Jones Walker helped the client prevail. Upon questioning, environmental experts could not fairly relate the loss With Jones Walker's help, the of diked inland marginal wetlands with development got back on track. the loss of Louisiana's coastline many miles away. Chemical testing detected no presence of mercury in the locations of the proposed work. The project survived the judicial attack on compliance with the NEPA, as the wetlands involved were isolated and not part of the larger lake ecosystem. Balancing environmental preservation and the development's benefit to the community, the developer fulfilled its initial commitment to mitigate the loss of the wetlands involved in the project.

L

Environmental & Toxic Tort Practice Group

SOLUTIONS

In My Back Yard, Please!
rogress can be painful and costly. Starting up a new industrial facility can be a frustrating experience, pitting differing political constituencies against one another in an emotional fight for the neighborhood. The need for new industrial capacity is a given, but "NIMBY," or not-in-my-back-yard, is the typical neighborhood battle cry. Attempting a seamless start-up of a totally reconstructed refinery, a refining company instead faced pressures from environmental regulators, neighborhood groups and environmental activists. It contacted Jones Walker to help it sort out its problems. The company acquired an old moth-balled refinery and rebuilt it into a modern integrated refinery. In 1999 and 2000, it attempted the first new refinery start-up in the United States in decades. From the beginning, there were problems, and, with no real life experience to draw upon, creativity and American ingenuity had to prevail. Ultimately, the company, with Jones Walkers' Progress: Jones Walker was there assistance, successfully worked out its problems, with federal and state each step of the way. regulatory agencies and its neighbors. Jones Walker and the company worked tirelessly to meet and exceed the regulatory agencies' demands for operation of the new refinery. Jones Walker assisted in negotiating a complex settlement of federal New Source Review issues, with the company committing to spend millions of dollars to install newer and better pollution control equipment while reducing emissions over the next decade. Additionally, Jones Walker helped negotiate settlement of a series of issues raised by state multi-media inspections. The company also faced a federal citizen suit brought by certain members of the neighboring community and supported by sophisticated environmental activist organizations. The start-up's success depended on satisfying the neighborhood that the company was "doing right." This went beyond a lawsuit. Rather than destroy the neighborhood by simply buying-out the neighbors, Jones Walker and the company negotiated a unique program of investing in the neighborhood so that it could flourish. At the same time, the company sought and created a working relationship with its neighbors to keep them advised of progress, and any problems, in the operations of the refinery.

P

Environmental & Toxic Tort Practice Group

SOLUTIONS

Liberty and Justice for All?
an nature and man live in harmony? This question arose when a development off of Bayou Liberty in Southeast Louisiana began. Residents were concerned about the development of a new shopping mall located partially in a wetland area serving as storm water storage. Fearful that further development along Bayou Liberty would cause additional flooding, residents claimed the developer was "paving paradise to put in a parking lot." For the developer, securing a permit from the federal agencies was easy, but the fight in court to keep the permit was not. One of the many issues raised was whether the permitted project would increase flooding in Bayou Liberty. Obviously, a wooded area would retain water longer than a large concrete parking lot. In court, Jones Walker demonstrated, through the project engineers, that properly sized retention ponds, which would substitute for the storm storage functions of a natural wooded area, would retain and slow the discharge of storm water equivalent to or better than the natural storm water storage. The developer From permitting to appeal, Jones won both at the district court and Walker was by their side. appellate levels. The developer's experience demonstrates that, despite bureaucratic red tape and opposition tactics, development projects can proceed to the benefit of the entire community, and without harm to the environment.

C

Environmental & Toxic Tort Practice Group

SOLUTIONS

Taming the Fear Factor
corporate officer's worst fears were realized when a 6 a.m. call from his main facility's site manager woke him up--the facility on the Mississippi River near Baton Rouge was being swarmed via land and water by federal and state criminal agents. The company was the target of a major environmental criminal investigation. The agents rounded up employees for questioning, isolating them from site managers. The officer's first call was to Jones Walker. Within hours of the agents' arrival, a team of experienced Jones Walker criminal defense lawyers and environmental enforcement counselors was on the scene to provide legal counseling to the company, its officers, and its employees and to respond to the criminal agents and prosecutors. Jones Walker retained consultants to repeat samples taken by the government and began to reconstruct the documents seized by the agents. In short, the criminal defense began within hours of the search. Ultimately, this prompt action enabled Jones Walker to effectively defend the client against the charges and reach a result favorable to the client and its employees. The government contended the client had illegally dumped drums of waste into the Mississippi River and ordered the client to initiate and finance the retrieval of the drums. Jones Walker recovered for the client the costs incurred by the client to comply with the order from the Federal Superfund.

A

The fear was reasonable. So, too, was the company's first response-- Jones Walker.

Finally, Jones Walker stepped in and defended the client in a neighborhood mass tort suit that alleged contamination of the neighborhood and personal injury to the neighbors, to a successful result.

Environmental & Toxic Tort Practice Group

SOLUTIONS

Calming Troubled Waters
The EPA, DEQ and other criminal enforcement agents took control of the facility, its employees and company documents for two days enforcing a federal search warrant. The agents confiscated tens of thousands of records and sequestered employees during much of the search. Days later, in the dark of night with sirens blaring, the plant manager was arrested at home in front of his wife, children and neighbors. The federal Jones Walker recognized the problem authorities tried to detain the and identified the best solution. plant manager, refusing bail, claiming that he was a flight risk. The company and numerous employees were the targets of a federal criminal investigation for RCRA and Clean Water Act violations and a parallel state criminal investigation. Jones Walker moved quickly to protect the client from the state and federal prosecutors and state regulatory agencies. Beside assisting individual employees in finding counsel, Jones Walker worked out a Joint Defense Agreement to assure that all parties had uniform knowledge about the facts and law. It also provided regulatory advice on compliance issues during the investigations to avoid additional criminal charges or civil entanglements. Jones Walker helped the company convince both state and federal agencies and prosecutors that RCRA hazardous waste was not involved and negotiated plea agreements, acceptable to the client, finally resolving the allegations.

A

manufacturing facility was taken quite off-guard when uninvited guests arrived on its doorstep.

Environmental & Toxic Tort Practice Group

SOLUTIONS

How Large is Your Class?
f a vapor cloud covers only a portion of a community, does the whole community get to sue? A manufacturing facility experienced an explosion releasing a vapor cloud over portions of a nearby community. The facility immediately took action notifying the emergency response center. The response center instructed nearby residents to take shelter while the cloud passed and the emergency was assessed. As a result of the release, community residents filed a class action lawsuit. The facility called Jones Walker to defend the claims. The evidence was clear--the wind was blowing in one direction, potentially affecting only a small portion of the community. After locating eyewitnesses and retaining science and engineering experts, Jones Walker showed the court that only a very small geographic area could possibly have been exposed, thus limiting the size of the class.

I

Jones Walker helped to substantially reduce the potential class size-- and the client's exposure.

The hearing was highly technical in nature, with the majority of the testimony involving air modeling, chemistry, toxicology and physics to show that the calculations made by plaintiffs' experts were faulty. Jones Walker solved the immediate problem by eliminating a large number of the claims and saving the client untold costs in defending numerous dubious actions.

Environmental & Toxic Tort Practice Group

SOLUTIONS

In Aid of the American Red Cross

O

ver thirty years after the fact, the American Red Cross is still entrenched in the Vietnam War. When the American Red Cross received notice of three lawsuits alleging damages relating to exposure to Agent Orange during the Vietnam War, it called Jones Walker. Countless men and women served as Red Cross workers during the Vietnam War, some providing service to military hospitals, others to military installations and others providing supplemental recreational activities to the troops. In the three suits, all claimants were employees of the American Red Cross assigned to duties in Korea or Vietnam during the Vietnam War. They alleged damages emanating from the spraying of Agent Orange and other herbicides during the war. With Jones Walker's assistance, all of the lawsuits were resolved in favor of the Red Cross. In one of the three matters, a worker alleged his prostate cancer was related to exposure to Agent Orange and other herbicides. He relied on a Veterans Administration ruling that service in Vietnam in a military capacity and subsequent prostate cancer results in a presumption that the cancer relates to exposure to Agent Orange. To overcome the presumption, Jones Walker graphically recreated the spraying of Agent Orange in Vietnam during the claimant's service and elicited the testimony of two pilots, one an instructor for the pilots who sprayed the Agent

Orange. The instructor testified regarding the method, procedure and areas of spraying, thus showing that the claimant was not in direct contact with Agent Orange. To further refute the claimant's exposure allegation, a toxicologist and an epidemiologist reviewed and testified as to the studies relied on by plaintiff's experts. In the end, the Red Cross prevailed, and the claim was dismissed.

Jones Walker came to the aid of the American Red Cross to help find a solution to its problems. At the end of the day, the problems were solved.

Environmental & Toxic Tort Practice Group

SOLUTIONS

Don't Let Opportunity Pass You By
An oilfield tank battery in Louisiana released oil into a ditch flowing into a nonnavigable drainage canal and other waterways, requiring a governmental cleanup under the Oil Pollution Act. This case emerged following a 2001 Supreme Court case limiting the scope of the government's jurisdiction under a sister statute, the Clean Water Act. The government lost the case and appealed. Jones Walker joined in as friend of the Court and convinced the Court that the government's assertion of jurisdiction over an often dry drainage ditch amounted to unconstitutional land use control. The Court's decision stifled the government's attempt to expand regulatory jurisdiction to remote tributaries and isolated ditches. Had the government prevailed, virtually all of Southeast Louisiana would be subject to the government's regulatory reach. Jones Walker used this Jones Walker identified a potential problem victory to help another client defeat a criminal for our clients and seized the opportunity to indictment. The attack unfair regulatory controls. indictment against an exploration company and several individuals who were alleged to have knowingly discharged oil and pollutants from a battery tank into a small beaver pond with intermittent connections to a Louisiana river was dismissed based on lack of jurisdiction.

A

seemingly minor case created an opportunity for Jones Walker to attack unfair regulatory controls.

Environmental & Toxic Tort Practice Group

SOLUTIONS

O

ur clients rely on us to lend a hand in times of uncertainty. When confronted with environmental problems, look to Jones Walker...

...our solutions get our clients back to work.

Environmental & Toxic Tort Practice Group

SOLUTIONS

Jones Walker's Environmental & Toxic Tort Practice Group handles a full range of environmental and toxic tort matters--from asbestos to zoning. For more information about Jones Walker and our Environmental & Toxic Tort practice, please visit our website at: www.joneswalker.com or contact Jones Walker's Environmental Toxic Tort Practice Group chair for additional information. Michael A. Chernekoff Chair - Environmental & Toxic Tort Practice Group 201 St. Charles Avenue, 50th Floor New Orleans, LA 70170-5100 Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone] Email: [e-mail]

Environmental & Toxic Tort Practice Group Boyd A. Bryan Michael A. Chernekoff Amy C. Cowley Michele Whitesell Crosby Emily Elizabeth Eagan Madeleine Fischer Warren A. Fleet Leon Gary, Jr. John G. Gomila, Jr. Alida C. Hainkel Pauline F. Hardin Harry Simms Hardin, III Marc C. Hebert Grady S. Hurley William J. Joyce Luis A. Leitzelar Robert T. Lemon, II Stan A. Millan Thomas M. Nosewicz James C. Percy Aimee Quirk Olivia S. Regard Robert D. Rivers Don A. Rouzan Robert W. Scheffy, Jr. Richard M. Schroeder William L. Schuette Robert Louis Walsh Judith V. Windhorst James E. Wright, III

Applicable State Bar or attorney regulations may require that this be labeled as "advertising."

Baton Rouge Four United Plaza 8555 United Plaza Boulevard Baton Rouge, LA 70809 225.248.2000 Tel [phone] Fax Washington, D.C., Capitol Hill 499 S. Capitol Street, S.W. Suite 600 Washington, D.C. 20003 202.203.1000 Tel [phone] Fax Washington, D.C., Downtown The Watergate 2600 Virginia Avenue, N.W. Suite 1113 Washington, D.C. 20037 202.944.1100 Tel [phone] Fax Houston JPMorgan Chase Tower 600 Travis Street Suite 6601 Houston, TX 77002 713.437.1800 Tel [phone] Fax Lafayette 500 Dover Boulevard Suite 120 Lafayette, LA 70503 337.406.5610 Tel [phone] Fax Miami Courvoisier Centre II 601 Brickell Key Drive Suite 500 Miami, FL 33131 305.679.5700 Tel [phone] Fax New Orleans 201 St. Charles Ave New Orleans, LA 70170 504.582.8000 Tel [phone] Fax The Woodlands Waterway Plaza Two 10001 Woodloch Forest Drive Suite 350 The Woodlands, TX 77380 281.296.4400 Tel [phone] Fax

Exhibit 23

As Seen In Forbes Magazine

Businesses Rely on Stone Pigman When Venturing South
The New Orleans law firm of Stone Pigman Walther Wittmann L.L.C. is an important resource for national corporations doing business in the Gulf South. Seventy-four years of practicing law gives Stone Pigman the experience on which corporate counsel can rely when they need representation in a region famed for its hospitality to visitors, but stigmatized in recent years by a legal climate hostile to business. Stone Pigman's senior litigator and name partner, Phil Wittmann, played a leading role in thwarting the largest class action ever attempted in federal court when he represented R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company in the Castano nicotine addiction case before the United States Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals (encompassing Texas, Louisiana and Mississippi). Stone Pigman won for R.J. Reynolds a reversal of the trial court's order certifying a nationwide class of alleged nicotine-addicted plaintiffs. Similarly, when nationwide pizza restaurant chain Papa John's was enjoined by a Texas trial court

We Earned Our Reputation

Under the leadership of lawyers such as Joe Caverly, Jay Gulotta and Scott Whittaker, the firm continues to earn its reputation as trusted legal advisors delivering superior client service.

from continuing a national television advertising campaign based on alleged deceptive advertising complaints from a rival pizza competitor, Papa John's turned to Stone Pigman to handle the appeal and won reversal in the appellate court. "We have been able to help our clients in industries such as chemical refining, transportation, pharmaceuticals, banking, insurance and technology respond to litigation challenges with precedent-setting court decisions involving class actions and federal removal jurisdiction," says Jay Gulotta, Stone Pigman's Litigation Section Chair. Stone Pigman lawyers have compiled an equally impressive record of success in handling business transactions for their clients. All of the high-tech startups formed in what locals refer to as the "Silicon Bayou" seeking counsel from Scott Whittaker's Corporate and Securities Practice Group are still open for business despite the dot-com crash. Stone Pigman also closed the first major Leading the Way Professionally hotel financing in the region after In June 2003, Wayne Lee will be installed as September 11, 2001, despite the President of the Louisiana State Bar Association. devastation to the travel business Judy Barrasso was recently awarded the LSBA nationwide. "Our experience in serving President's Award for Outstanding Service to the as counsel for developers, lenders and Louisiana bar. Phil Wittmann will assume the role of large tenants in the field of commerPresident of the New Orleans Bar Association in cial real estate developments is November 2003. unrivaled in our region," says Joe

Caverly, Business Section Chair. The firm's business representation also includes mergers, acquisitions, reorganizations, corporate finance, tax, trusts and estates. "Whether it's business or litigation, we offer our clients large-firm, large-market expertise with a personal approach to service. We like being known for this," says partner Judy Barrasso. The Stone Pigman reputation starts with recruiting top graduates from leading law schools and progresses through focused training and professional development. The results are leaders of the legal profession who never lose sight of why they became lawyers ­ to serve their clients. Businesses venturing south, particularly into the exotic jurisdiction of Louisiana with its foreign legal tradition, can rely on Stone Pigman's 74 years of experience to enhance their success.

546 Carondelet Street New Orleans, Louisiana www.stonepigman.com 504-581-3200

Special Advertising Section © 2003 EMI Network Inc. · 800-999-1950 · www.eminetwork.com