Meghan Kelly

Uber can get $30,000 from an opposing attorney as "partial reimbursement" for the ride-hailing company's attorney fees in multidistrict litigation over sexual assault liability, a California federal judge ruled Tuesday, ordering the payment as a sanction against the attorney for disclosing confidential Uber information in other lawsuits. U.S. Magistrate Judge Lisa J. Cisneros said that sanctions were warranted against Bret Stanley of Johnson Law Group because he violated a December 2023 protective order and a subsequent order from August. Judge Cisneros said that Stanley's violation was also "not substantially justified." "The court is not persuaded that there was any reasonable basis to dispute the application of the protective order to the disclosures at issue," she wrote in an order. "The violation was instead 'pretty straightforward.'" The $30,000 that Judge Cisneros ordered Stanley to pay, however, was substantially less than Uber's requested amount of more than $168,500. Judge Cisneros said that Uber "has not shown any significant actual or likely harm from the disclosure of the material at issue, and its request for attorneys' fees is excessive under the circumstances presented." She said that an award of $30,000 is "necessary and sufficient to deter future violations and appropriate to partially compensate Uber for its costs." Stanley is among several plaintiff attorneys in the sprawling MDL, which was filed in 2023. Uber was hit with an $8.5 million verdict earlier this month in the first bellwether trial when a federal jury in Arizona found that Uber was not negligent with respect to rider safety but was liable for the actions of a driver who allegedly assaulted a passenger in 2023. The plaintiff in the test case had alleged that she relied on Uber's representations regarding its security and safety measures when she booked a ride through the app after an evening of drinking — and then was raped by her Uber driver. The award came in well below the $144 million in compensatory and punitive damages sought. Judge Cisneros' order comes after she warned Stanley in January that he was on "thin ice" after Uber argued he should be sanctioned for using discovery in the MDL to litigate other cases against the ride-hailing company. According to Tuesday's order, the court had previously determined that Stanley violated a December 2023 protective order and that Uber moved for monetary sanctions after the court ordered remedial steps, including notice to counsel and courts in the other cases where improper disclosures occurred. Uber specifically asked the court to award it $168,572.97 in attorney fees. Judge Cisneros said Tuesday that the court's previous determination that Stanley violated the protective order "is itself a basis for sanctions." She said that there was also "no dispute" that Stanley did not notify the courts or counsel in other litigation of an August order that found Stanley violated the protective order by using and disclosing 587 rows of information on a spreadsheet of internal policies that Uber had designated as confidential under the protective order. Stanley's disclosure "unilaterally rendered Uber's designations meaningless, disregarding the protective order's process for challenging a designation if parties reasonably disagree over whether information should be protected," Judge Cisneros wrote in her order. Judge Cisneros said that there, however, were considerations that supported a "significant reduction from the full sum that Uber seeks." Uber, for instance, "appears to have sandbagged its request for sanctions for violation of the protective order," Judge Cisneros wrote. "Nothing in Uber's motion to enforce the protective order indicated that more than $150,000 in attorneys' fees would remain like a sword hanging by a slender thread, ready to drop if Stanley was late or otherwise delinquent in meeting his obligations," Judge Cisneros wrote. "Nor did that motion indicate that Uber would seek its attorneys' fees regardless of whether Stanley complied with any subsequent order enforcing the protective order, which Uber represented at the December 9 hearing was always its intent." Judge Cisneros said that Stanley's violation also "was not egregious." Comparing Stanley's disclosure to that of counsel in another lawsuit, Judge Cisneros said that Stanley "did not simply hand over protected documents to anyone, much less to the press." She said that the court was also satisfied that Stanley, more likely than not, "genuinely — though unreasonably" — believed that he did not violate the protective order. "The court has serious concerns about Stanley's lax approach to the protective order, but Uber has not shown bad faith," Judge Cisneros wrote. Stanley told Law360 that it is "unfortunate that Uber has continually fought to avoid court-ordered production of important and relevant documents in multiple cases filed against them around the country — similar to their previous attempts to conceal evidence in the MDL, which the court recognized 'wasted the court's and plaintiffs' time' through incomplete and misleading disclosures." "Uber's tactics only delays the ability of victims to have their day in court and I am sorry that the current situation, in which I intended only to streamline discovery in other cases against Uber, has nevertheless resulted in further, unnecessary delays," Stanley said. Stanley said that he also looks forward to "continuing to vigorously represent my clients in their fight against Uber, not only in the MDL court but also in courts around the country," and hopes to "be able to work with opposing counsel to amicably resolve any further discovery disputes." Counsel for Uber did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Tuesday evening. Stanley represented himself in the sanctions dispute. Uber is represented by Laura Vartain Horn, Allison M. Brown and Jessica Davidson of Kirkland & Ellis LLP, Sabrina H. Strong and Jonathan Schneller of O'Melveny and Myers LLP and Alycia A. Degen, Michael B. Shortnacy, Patrick L. Oot Jr. and Christopher V. Cotton of Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP. The case is In re: Uber Technologies Inc., Passenger Sexual Assault Litigation, case number 3:23-md-03084, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.

Feb 17

5 min

Kirkland & Ellis announced today that leading trial lawyers Meghan Kelly and Bill Oxley will join the Firm as partners in the Litigation Practice Group. They bring significant experience leading complex product liability, mass tort and commercial litigation matters. “Meghan and Bill are exceptional trial lawyers with a track record of successfully representing clients in their most high-profile litigation matters,” said Jon A. Ballis, Chairman of Kirkland’s Executive Committee. “They’re joining in a period of significant growth for our litigation practice, and we’re thrilled to have them on board.” A fellow of the prestigious American College of Trial Lawyers, Mr. Oxley has a tremendous record trying cases to verdict in jurisdictions across the U.S. He has represented brand-name clients in matters across products liability, breach of contract, trademark, intellectual property and business tort cases. Mr. Oxley has been recognized as a leading trial lawyer and litigator across publications such as Chambers USA, The Legal 500 U.S., Benchmark Litigation and Lawdragon. “Kirkland is home to many outstanding trial lawyers and an incredibly deep bench of litigation talent, many of whom I know well,” said Mr. Oxley. “I’m excited to join the team and contribute to its ongoing success.” Ms. Kelly has notched first-chair trial wins in courtrooms across the country for companies across a range of industries including chemical, pharmaceutical, automotive, biotechnology, manufacturing and food. She is known in the marketplace for her results-focused trial skills, tireless advocacy and commitment to mentorship. “Kirkland is a perennial top brand for complex litigation, but I was most impressed with the Firm’s clear commitment to continued growth in this area,” said Ms. Kelly. “It’s really exciting to join this world-class team, which includes many of the top women trial lawyers in the country, as we work together to serve our shared client base.” Prior to joining Kirkland, Mr. Oxley and Ms. Kelly co-led Orrick’s complex litigation and dispute resolution practice. They are the latest in a series of prominent litigation hires for Kirkland, building on the more than 150 lateral attorneys and 100 new associates who have joined the Firm in litigation this year. “Meghan and Bill are incredibly impressive and successful trial lawyers,” said Andrew Kassof, a member of Kirkland’s Executive Committee. “We couldn’t be more excited to welcome them to our team as we continue to scale the litigation group with the very best talent in the country.”

Dec 4

2 min

Lyft Inc. must hand over sexual misconduct records it has on four men who allegedly assaulted and raped passengers while driving for Uber, a California federal judge has ruled, saying such documents could show that Uber, the defendant in multidistrict litigation, knew of the drivers' past conduct. U.S. Magistrate Judge Lisa J. Cisneros ordered Lyft on Wednesday to largely comply with a subpoena brought by four women, all of whom are plaintiffs in upcoming bellwether trials accusing Uber Technologies Inc. of failing to protect its customers, resulting in each of them being sexually assaulted. Lyft, which is not a defendant in this case, must produce certain documents it might have about the four men who drove for both ride-hailing companies, the order said. The documents include background checks, reports of sexual misconduct, and records it shared with the Industry Sharing Safety Program, a database run by a separate entity that collects passenger grievances about drivers that Uber and Lyft voluntarily submit. The four passengers have a "legitimate interest" in what these documents could show as it relates to what Uber could or should have discovered about the four drivers who allegedly assaulted the plaintiffs, Judge Cisneros said. "Those documents generally could be relevant to show what information Uber could have learned if it had conducted more thorough background checks before allowing drivers to use its platform, or if Uber (in conjunction with Lyft) had structured or implemented their [Industry Sharing Safety Program] data sharing partnership differently, or perhaps also if Uber had conducted more thorough investigations in response to riders' complaints," the judge said. "Such information, if found, would likely be admissible and relevant at trial." Judge Cisneros did narrow the request to only documents that dated before the alleged assaults occurred and concerned sexual assault. Lyft has just three weeks to produce documents for one of the passengers, as her bellwether trial against Uber is set to start in April. The company has two months to fulfill the other three subpoenas. The MDL, centralized in the Northern District of California, consolidates hundreds of federal lawsuits against Uber brought by passengers who allege they were sexually assaulted or harassed by drivers. The plaintiffs claim Uber was negligent in its screening and hiring practices, failing to conduct adequate background checks that would have revealed red flags about the drivers. They also say Uber failed to properly investigate grievances about drivers and share safety information with Lyft. Uber was hit with an $8.5 million verdict earlier this month in the first bellwether trial when a federal jury in Arizona found that it was not negligent with respect to rider safety, but was liable for the actions of a driver who allegedly assaulted a passenger in 2023. Three of the four upcoming bellwether plaintiffs — identified as C.L., A.R. and WHB 823 — claim "they were sexually assaulted, battered, harassed, or otherwise attacked by" their Uber drivers, according to their short form complaints. One of the passengers, identified as B.L., claims her driver raped her outside her apartment complex while she was intoxicated in 2022, according to her amended complaint. Lyft had "refused to search for any of the requested documents" the four plaintiffs sought, according to the court record. The company argued it shouldn't have to abide by the subpoena because they allowed their request to languish, only renewing it after the close of discovery. But Judge Cisneros noted that the company had no problem partially fulfilling a similar request Uber made ahead of another the first bellwether trial, despite its subpoena coming in late. "Lyft has not justified why one party may be permitted to serve a subpoena after the cut-off while another party should be disallowed from renewing a request for discovery pursuant to a timely served subpoena," Judge Cisneros said. "In other words, Lyft has not persuaded the court that different standards for diligence should apply to different parties in the same action, at least so long as any such delay does not require Lyft to produce documents on an unreasonable timeline." Lyft, Uber and counsel for the plaintiffs steering committee didn't respond to requests for comment on Thursday. Uber is represented by Laura Vartain Horn, Allison M. Brown and Jessica Davidson of Kirkland & Ellis LLP, Sabrina H. Strong and Jonathan Schneller of O'Melveny and Myers LLP, and Alycia A. Degen, Michael B. Shortnacy, Patrick L. Oot Jr. and Christopher V. Cotton of Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP. B.L. is represented by Sommer D. Luther of Wagstaff Law Firm. C.L. is represented by Tracey B. Cowan, Zarrina Ozari and Ryan J. Clarkson of Clarkson Law Firm PC. A.R. is represented by Rachel B. Abrams, Adam B. Wolf and Tiffany R. Ellis of Peiffer Wolf Carr Kane Conway & Wise LLP. WHB 823 is represented by John Eddie Williams Jr., Brian Abramson, Margret Lecocke, Walt Cubberly, Batami Baskin and Myles Shaw of William Hart & Boundas LLP. The case is In re: Uber Technologies Inc., Passenger Sexual Assault Litigation, case number 3:23-md-03084, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.

Feb 19

4 min

Continuing to build on its litigation and mass torts hiring streak, Kirkland & Ellis has added two litigation group leaders from Orrick. The firm announced Thursday the addition of Meghan Kelly and Bill Oxley, who co-led Orrick’s complex litigation and dispute resolution group, and who have significant experience counseling tech, chemical and life sciences companies in product liability, mass torts and commercial litigation. Kelly will be based in Philadelphia and Oxley in Los Angeles. The additions come on the heels of major moves by Kirkland in litigation this year. The firm brought on a team from Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom led by Ali Brown and announced a Philadelphia office in January and added partners Kristen Fournier and Kim Bueno from King & Spalding in May. Each of those two teams came over with roughly 30 lawyers total . According to Kirkland, the latest additions bring the firm’s litigation lateral total this year to more than 150 attorneys. “Meghan and Bill are incredibly impressive and successful trial lawyers,” said Andrew Kassof, a litigation partner and member of Kirkland’s executive committee, in a statement. “We couldn’t be more excited to welcome them to our team as we continue to scale the litigation group with the very best talent in the country.” Kelly and Oxley had been with Orrick since 2022, after joining from Baker & Hostetler. The pair previously worked together at Dechert. Kirkland said Oxley has represented clients in liability, breach of contract, trademark, intellectual property and business tort cases. He has previously represented companies like Dow Chemical and Union Carbide, as well as Sony Pictures and the Walt Disney Co. He said in a statement that he was excited to join the firm’s “many outstanding trial lawyers” and “incredibly deep bench of litigation talent, many of whom I know well.” The firm noted Kelly has represented clients across chemical, pharmaceutical, automotive, biotechnology, manufacturing and food industries, and notched first-chair trial wins in courtrooms around the U.S.. She said in her own statement that she was “most impressed with the [f]irm’s clear commitment to continued growth in this area”; that she was excited to join “many of the top women trial lawyers in the country” and serve a “shared client base.” Mark Parris and Julie Totten, leaders of Orrick’s global litigation business unit, said in a statement: "We are grateful to Bill and Meghan for their contributions to our firm and wish them well.” Kirkland this year also promoted a record number of litigators to equity or nonequity partner, as part of a record class of more than 224 partner promotions across the firm. During the summer, it announced the hire of its first-ever chief operating officer as well. Kassof told The American Lawyer in October that billable hours in litigation had remained steady at the firm, even with all the additional hires, suggesting that demand had continued to rise. He also said he expected the firm to remain “quite busy” in litigation “for sure through 2026.” He also said the firm would remain aggressive in growing the practice. “We do not anticipate that slowing down at this stage. It's been a very successful run with an incredible accumulation of a lot of very talented people, and we're going to continue on that path.”

Dec 4

2 min

A little more than a year after entering Philadelphia, Kirkland & Ellis is now planting a flag in Nashville. The largest firm in the world by revenue said Tuesday that it's opening in the Tennessee capital with a handful of litigation partners. The firm also said it has "a number of partners” in deal work, too, who are ready to launch a full-service office. The city of Nashville, observers say, has gained “outsize investment” over the last few years because of its talent base and its status as a health care hub. Kirkland, in a release Tuesday, said Nashville is “an ideal environment” for continued, “aggressive” growth, calling the office launch "part of its strategy to attract top legal talent and meet growing client demand." The firm is opening in Music City with current Kirkland litigation partners Tara Blake, Matt Smith, Paul Rosenblatt and Travis Swearingen—currently based in Houston, the Bay Area and Washington, D.C., according to a statement Tuesday. It also said the firm will add “a number of additional partners and associates” with extensive experience in trial, complex commercial disputes and mass torts, among other areas. All told, the firm has about 10 litigators who have joined recently or will join the office soon. The firm also will add “a number of additional partners and associates across its transactional practices," Kirkland said. "Nashville offers an ideal environment for our continued growth by enhancing our ability to attract exceptional legal talent in a vibrant and growing city with talented lawyers and a strong law school community,” said Jon Ballis, Kirkland’s chairman, in a statement. “We’re excited to open our doors in the Music City with a terrific group of lawyers across our litigation and transactional practice areas.” The move comes off a year where Kirkland invested heavily in litigation, adding Ali Brown and a team from Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom to open in the City of Brotherly Love in January, as well as partners Kristen Fournier, Kim Bueno and a team from King & Spalding in May . The firm also capped the year by adding former co-leaders in Orrick’s complex litigation and dispute resolution group, Meghan Kelly and Bill Oxley, saying in December that those additions brought its litigation lateral total last year to more than 150 attorneys. Nashville is one of several secondary markets observers say is particularly hot at the moment, along with cities such as Austin, Atlanta, Denver and Miami. Factors such as corporate client movement, a more mobile and remote workforce and more business-friendly policies make those places that were not traditional legal strongholds more appealing. Kirkland opened in Salt Lake City back in 2021, helping set off a chain of Big Law entrants into Utah, as well as Miami in 2022, before adding Philadelphia to its map. “Law firms ultimately follow the money, and in recent years outsize investment has flowed to places like Miami and Nashville,” Kent Zimmermann, of Zeughauser Group, told The American Lawyer . “At the same time, many high-performing firms are increasingly aligning their geographic growth strategies with their priority practices and industry sectors.” As Big Law grows in the area, the city is also home to more legal talent, both in the senior ranks and the associate ranks, which attracts even more firms. Last year, Foley & Lardner and McDermott Will & Emery moved into the market. Andy Calder, a corporate partner and member of Kirkland’s executive committee, said in the statement that the firm is looking forward to building a “full-service office engaged on high-profile and complex transactional matters alongside lawyers across our national platform. Andrew Kassof, a litigation partner and member of the firm’s executive committee, said the firm’s litigation department has “never been stronger” and that litigators in Nashville will add skill and depth to their group. “Our launch in Nashville is part of our aggressive nationwide growth strategy in litigation, which we intend to continue in 2026,” Kassof added in the statement.

Feb 10

3 min