 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
Our People: John A. Lucas |
|
 |
 |
||
Military Experience 1963-65 - Enlisted 1965-69 - 1969-74 - Commissioned service.
Legal Background and Experience 1974-77 - 1977 - 2008 - Hunton & Williams, LLP. 2008 - Present - Merchant & Gould P.C. After 31 years with Hunton & Williams, in 2008, John moved to Merchant & Gould's newly opened Tennessee office, where he is the resident litigation partner in that office, responsible for management and leadership of our litigation effort in Tennessee. In addition to intellectual property litigation, John's legal practice and background includes a wide range of complex commercial litigation, including the defense of class action lawsuits, antitrust and unfair competition suits, environmental claims, labor and employment disputes, lender liability claims, product liability suits, representation of bankruptcy trustees in protracted complex litigation arising out of the collapse of Ponzi schemes, and the like. John has successfully argued cases before the United States Supreme Court, the Courts of Appeal for the Fourth, Sixth, Ninth and Eleventh Circuits, as well as the Supreme Courts of the State of In 2006, John represented a multi-national company that had been sued for trademark violations and unfair competition. After a hung jury, the judge entered judgment as a matter of law for our client. In 2005, John represented a multi-state convenience store owner whose franchise had been terminated by a major international oil company. The case was tried before a jury in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. The jury returned a verdict in favor of his client on all 26 breach of contract claims made by the major oil company. It also awarded his client $500,000, plus attorneys' fees, on its counter-claim under the Petroleum Marketing Practices Act. In 2005, John represented a high-tech company against a class action claim, when it was sued in an effort to block a $1 billion merger between his client and a multi-national corporation. John was retained to spearhead the defense effort even though his client had been represented for a number of years by a prominent firm that would continue working on the case. To put together an effective team of potential competitors who would work smoothly together, subordinating their competitive instincts to the client's best interest, was a challenging leadership task. With the cooperation of everyone, John was able to put together a team that proved its worth by quickly and decisively defeating the plaintiffs and obtaining the dismissal of all claims against his client, allowing the merger to proceed. John has been lead counsel for the tobacco industry in a number of large, high-profile suits in John represented a major international construction company in complex litigation over a radiation monitoring system at a nuclear power plant. The case was resolved in favor of his client with a very favorable settlement after three days of trial. John represented a kayak manufacturing company in a suit for trademark infringement and inducement to breach contract in the United States District Court for the District of Idaho. Although a jury verdict was entered against the defendants, John was able to obtain a reversal in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which rendered a judgment in favor of his client on all claims without requiring a new trial. McClaran v. Plastic Industries, Inc., 97 F.3d 347 (9th Cir. 1995) From 1984 to 1989, John was lead trial counsel for the trustee of a failed industrial loan and thrift company. In this role John coordinated the filing, preparation and trial of over 1000 suits to recover fraudulent conveyances and preferential transfers. He tried scores of suits, and argued motions and appeals too numerous to count. See, e.g., In Re SIBC, 59 B.R. 978 (Bankr. E.D. Tenn. 1986); In Re SIBC, 66 B.R. 349 (Bankr. E.D. Tenn. 1986). On his practice: "The breadth of my practice means that I constantly have to learn about new legal and business matters, from the nuances of Delaware corporate merger law to the complexities of radiation monitoring systems for nuclear power plants and other cutting-edge technology. Although my practice is primarily devoted to intellectual property and other commercial litigation, it necessarily involves advising clients on legal, and sometimes business, matters. The ultimate qualification for this is good judgment. You can always learn new things, but by this stage of my career, good judgment and integrity have to be informed but instinctive and ingrained in one's character." Other representative reported decisions:
Other
|
||||
| ||||
|
