Lathrop & Gage has one of the largest and most experienced business litigation departments in the region. The Business Litigation Department is the single largest department in the firm and represents clients’ interests nationally and regionally in all disciplines, including class action defense, multiparty litigation, intellectual property disputes, trade secret and covenant not to compete enforcement and defense, ERISA and insurance matters, policyholder coverage disputes, media, accounting professional liability, construction, architects and engineers professional liability, securities, loan enforcement, contract and real estate litigation.

The department has many recent successes noted on our litigation web site, www.beentherewonthat.com. Among these, the department highlights successful representation of: Payless ShoeSource in a proxy fight against a group of dissident shareholders; nationwide construction litigation for the leading film exhibition company in the United States; nationwide counsel for class action and commercial matters for a leading automotive manufacturer; provide nationwide counsel to numerous financial institutions; national defense of a top-10 public accounting firm; representation of both local and international media companies in a wide range of matters; national representation of the largest privately held insurance brokerage in the United States; and we serve as regional counsel to many national companies. To provide the highest level of specialization and expertise, the firm’s Business Litigation department focuses resources in the following areas:

• Antitrust
• Appellate
• Class Action & Multiparty Litigation 
• Collection 
• Construction
• Education
• General Business & Complex Commercial Litigation 
• Insurance Analysis & Recovery for Policyholders
• Insurance, Benefits & ERISA Defense 
• Media
• Professional Liability
• Real Estate
• Securities Litigation
• Trade Secrets/Covenants Not to Compete
• White Collar Criminal Defense

Our attorneys have extensive experience in all types of business litigation, including:

• Contracts
• Business torts
• Securities
• Financing and other corporate transactions
• Uniform Commercial Code claims
• Product liability claims
• Planning and zoning litigation and disputes with competitors
• Vendor disputes
• Defamation
• Intentional torts
• Covenants not to compete
• Protection of trade secrets and confidential information
• Insurance
• Employee benefits and related issues

In addition, we have an extensive white-collar criminal defense section, headed by a former United States Attorney for the Western District of Missouri.

REPRESENTATIVE LITIGATION EXPERIENCE

Antitrust Litigation

• Heartland Insurance v. Blue Cross Blue Shield of Kansas City et al. Counsel for CIGNA in a monopoly and conspiracy claim. District Court of Kansas (pending).
• Craftsmen Limousine v. General Motors Corporation et al. We served as nationwide discovery in this antitrust case in the United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri.   Suit against GM, Ford, and numerous other defendants alleging group boycott, restraint of trade, conspiracy, and various other antitrust violations in the limousine industry.  All claims against GM voluntarily dismissed before the close of discovery.  Eventual jury verdict against other defendants exceeding $2 million.
• Complex Litigation.  We litigated a year-long antitrust matter in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri involving six separate corporations and two government agencies. Lathrop & Gage also participated in multiple appeals to the Eighth Circuit and two Petitions for Certiorari to the United States Supreme Court.

Appellate

• Montoy v. State of Kansas.   Successfully defended the State of Kansas against constitutional Equal Protection claims made by plaintiffs in school finance litigation. Obtained appellate reversal of trial court findings that the State’s school funding formula violated the Kansas Equal Protection Clause and had "disparate impact" upon minority and low income students. [On appeal, the Kansas Supreme Court specifically held that the elements of the funding formula were "rationally related to a legitimate legislative purpose" and that "no discriminatory purpose was shown by plaintiffs."] 
• Harmon Industries, Inc. v. Browner, 191 F.3d 894 (8th Cir. 1999).  Won a precedent-setting ruling which invalidated EPA’s practice of "overfiling" civil penalty actions under the federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, despite the regulated party’s earlier settlement of identical claims with the State to which EPA had delegated RCRA enforcement authority. Successfully defeated by a 7-2 vote EPA’s Petition for Rehearing En Banc, which was supported by an amicus brief filed by five States.
• Dufrene v. Browning-Ferris, Inc., 207 F.3d 264 (5th Cir. 2000).  On an issue of first impression in the federal appellate courts, won a ruling that an employer’s method of calculating overtime compensation for "day-rate" employees complied with the requirements of the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Class Action or Multi-Party Litigation

We have significant experience representing major corporations in class action and multiple party litigation where the issues involved are complex and interdisciplinary. As the following examples indicate, our experience in this area is broad and established.

• Wyandotte Nation v. General Motors Corporation et. al.  This case involves the defense of a multiparty (3,000 property owner defendants class) action involving the Wyandotte Nation Indian Tribe’s claim of original title to 1920 acres of land in Kansas City, Kansas, including the Fairfax Industrial District which is home to many facilities owned by Fortune 500 companies including General Motors Corporation.  Successfully investigated, conducted historical, factual and legal research, and obtained dismissal with prejudice in favor of GM and other defendants. In addition to successfully defending, successfully tendered fees to title companies which reimbursed GM in full.
• SG Metals v. New England Financial.   U.S. District Court for the District of Kansas.  Transferred by Multi-District Panel to U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts.  Defense of Insurance sales practice class action alleging fraud, RICO, negligent misrepresentation, churning and similar claims.  Motion to Dismiss granted for Defendant.  Motion to Dismiss was affirmed by the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the First Circuit 10/03.
• In Re Sprint Corporation ERISA Class Action.   U.S. District Court for the District of Kansas. Defending directed fiduciary in defense of class action claims for breach of fiduciary duty and other ERISA claims. Case settled on terms favorable to client.
• Successfully defended a bank in a class action wherein it was alleged that the bank participated with a known swindler in a scheme to induce more than 600 people to make a fraudulent investment.
• Name withheld by client request. Case pending. Defending insurer in single-state class action where it is alleged an insurer engaged in unauthorized practice of law. Class was not certified.
• Name withheld by client request. Case Pending. Defending insurer in a class action for breach of contract and fraud.
• Name withheld by client request. Defense of an insurer in a class action for the recovery of overpayment of recording fees.
• Lathrop & Gage L.C. is nationwide trial counsel for The Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway Company for class action cases involving the installation of fiber optic cable on the railroad rights-of-way.  We have successfully defeated class certification motions in two of the pending cases, successfully defeated nationwide discovery, all complaints seeking nationwide class actions have been amended to state-wide or multi-state class actions, and all cases are now stayed pending nationwide settlements negotiated by AT&T, Sprint, MCI, Williams Communications, Level 3 and Qwest.
• Defended a life insurance and annuity products company in a class action related to sales practices. The multi-district litigation was settled on terms favorable to the company.
• Zamora v. Shinn Fu Corporation.  District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas.  Defense of nationwide class action involving alleged defects in consumer “do-it-yourself” product sold primarily through mass merchandisers.  With jurisdiction motion pending, Plaintiff dismissed without prejudice, at its own cost.

Collection

Lathrop & Gage attorneys represent commercial and retail lending institutions, manufacturing companies, transportation companies, and material and service providers, in commercial collection matters, real property foreclosures, mechanic’s and materialman’s lien actions and personal property replevins in both state and federal court.  We handle commercial and collection litigation experience is extensive. Our lawyers are experienced in handling the following types of matters:

• Actions on Account, Quantum Meruit and for breach of contract or account stated
• Uniform Commercial Code enforcement including Article 9 sales, voluntary surrender of collateral transactions, and direct collection of accounts receivable
• Insurance subrogation matters
• Health and disability insurance benefit overpayment cases
• Premium collections for property, casualty, workers' compensation, life, health and disability insurers
• Real estate remedies including direct collection from tenants, receivership actions, trustees’ sales, and mortgage foreclosure actions
• Commercial and consumer debt collection activities, including litigation and related defense of lender liability claims including securities fraud, ECOA, RICO, and Anti-Tying claims
• Collection actions against guarantors
• Advice concerning issues arising under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and the Fair Credit Reporting Act

Construction Litigation

• Defended an engineering firm in a suit claiming improper design of the clips in thousands of canopies across the country. A lawsuit was brought by the manufacturer seeking to recover the cost of repairing the canopies. The engineering firm won the suit based upon statutes of limitations and repose.
• Represented Kansas State University regarding multi-million dollar delay and impact-related claims brought by contractors working on the renovation of the university library. We successfully defended the claim by settling for less than 5 percent of claimed liability and entering into a liquidation agreement with the plaintiffs, who then pursued relief directly against the architect. The liquidation agreement was upheld by the Kansas Supreme Court.
• Represented architect with respect to claims by Mel Tillis arising out of the design and construction of a 2,700-seat theater in Branson, Missouri, which included issues of cost overruns, design errors, fire protection, fast track project, and ADA. The suit was successfully settled through non-binding mediation.
• Represented an architectural firm with respect to claims by the owner of a major hotel for mold contamination, which required $4 million in repairs. The matter was favorably settled for our client.
• Represented Texas Tech University against a general contractor and architect in regards to defects in the United Spirit Arena. The client ultimately obtained a multi-million dollar settlement from the architect after discovery depositions.

Education

• Lathrop & Gage serves as general counsel for the following educational facilities:  AT Still University of Health Sciences; Basehor-Linwood, Kansas U.S.D. No. 458; Blue Valley, Kansas U.S.D. No. 229; Desoto, Kansas U.S.D. No. 232; Eudora, Kansas U.S.D. No. 491; Gardner-Edgerton, Kansas U.S.D. No. 231, Johnson County Community College; Shawnee Mission, Kansas U.S.D. No. 512; Spring Hill, Kansas U.S.D. No. 230; University of Missouri, Kansas City.
• Montoy v. State of Kansas.  Defended State of Kansas in most recent constitutional challenge of school finance formula.
• Martinez v. Shawnee Mission U.S.D. No. 512.   Successful arbitration defense of teacher dismissal.
• Eubanks v. Shawnee Mission U.S.D. No. 512.     Successful arbitration defense of teacher dismissal.
• Rodgers v. University of Missouri.   ADA; Rehabilitation Act.  (Dismissed with prejudice, upheld by Appellate Court)
• Lam v. Curators of the University of Missouri.   Sexual harassment of student alleged against faculty member. (Jury verdict for student reversed by Court of Appeals.)
• Demark v. University of Missouri.   ADA Claim.  (Dismissed without prejudice but with sanctions if refiled.)
• Bonner Springs U.S.D. No. 204 v. Blue Valley U.S.D. No. 229.   Successfully defended application for temporary injunction seeking to enjoin the distribution and receipt of sales tax proceeds.
• Anstine v. University of Missouri.   Breach of contract, violation of constitutional rights.  (Litigated through trial, judgment for defendant.)
• Kansas City Community College.   Favorably resolved a claim of sexual harassment, sex discrimination and retaliation brought by four individual plaintiffs.

General Business & Complex Commercial Litigation

• Represented a major insurance company on all aspects of a $16 million default by a prime contractor with more than 23 projects nationwide. Defended litigation in various federal and state courts initiated by owners, contractors and subcontractors; in subsequent litigation, recovered more than $3 million in claims on the company's behalf from various owners.
• Deere & Company.   The Firm has served as regional counsel (six-state area) for the company in connection with various litigation matters involving secured transactions, contracts and commercial dealer disputes throughout the Midwest. We coordinated Deere's bankruptcy and collection docket of more than 500 cases in seven Midwestern states during the agricultural recession in the mid 1980s.
• Yahoo!   Defended Yahoo!, the No. 1 global Internet brand and the most visited Internet destination worldwide, in a fraud and misrepresentation action by a former employee. Obtained a defense verdict in federal court.
• Serve as local counsel in nine states for two of the largest life, health and disability insurers in the country
• Non-competition agreements.   Obtained injunctive relief and/or damages on numerous occasions to enforce non-competition agreements. Most recently, we successfully represented (a) a regional accounting firm enforcing a non-compete against a departing partner and (b) an international telecommunications company by obtaining injunctive relief against that company’s former Chief Technology Officer who resigned and attempted to violate the non-compete by joining a direct competitor.
• Accounting professional liability.   Defended an accounting firm in four-week trial in federal court against professional negligence claims regarding audited financial statements allegedly relied upon by the plaintiff in its purchase of another company.
• American Underwriters Life Insurance.   We serve as national trial counsel defending the insurance company on life, disability and bad faith claims.
• Defended regional railroad in multi-million dollar dispute over performance of 15 year transportation contract. Settlement preserved remaining contract years at terms favorable to client.
• Represent a major manufacturer in nearly every state regarding labor and employment issues, class actions and complex litigation.
• Parmelee Industries, Inc. v. Fendall, Inc.   In a lengthy arbitration in Chicago, our litigators recovered more than $1.5 million in damages from a seller who had misrepresented the value of its business.
• Represented an entertainment company in connection with the prosecution of $45 million in damages related to defective work and breach of warranty claims concerning the failure of contractors to apply fireproofing in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions and specifications at 21 public facilities. Obtained settlements on favorable terms for our client in three state courts; additional litigation is pending in Missouri and other states.

Insurance Analysis & Recovery for Policyholders

We have performed insurance coverage work recently for the following categories of companies:

• Building Owners (property damage and bodily injury claims for oil spills, toxic chemicals, asbestos and mold exposure; employee theft)
• Entertainment Industry (employment, product liability and directors and officers claims)
• Food Processors (product liability claims)
• Gas Utilities (claims for former manufactured gas plants and mercury)
• Health Care Providers (professional liability; directors and officers coverage)
• Hotel Operators (mold, theft and fiduciary liability claims)
• Insurance Brokers (professional liability and various coverage issues)
• Landfill Operators (claims for landfill operations)
• Real Estate Companies (directors and officers coverage; premises liability; first-party property claims)
• School Districts (employment and Board claims)
• Trucking Companies (trucking and employment claims)
• Various Manufacturers (product and premises liability claims, inland and ocean marine, employment, auto liability, workers compensation)
• Waste Haulers (claims for landfill disposal)
• Wood Treaters (claims for on-site disposal and off-site migration).

Insurance, Benefits and ERISA Defense

• James v. Kansas City Chiefs.   Defended Assurant Employee Benefits (fka Fortis Employee Benefit Insurance Company), a top-five disability insurer, in an ERISA regulated claim for long-term disability benefits brought by a former NFL running back and Kansas City Chiefs assistant coach. Trial judge granted Summary Judgment to Assurant, affirmed its claim handling procedures and found that the termination of benefits was supported by substantial benefits.
• Musgrave v. Fortis Insurance Company. Summary judgment for Defendant in suit for health benefits. Insurer denied claims for benefits and rescinded coverage upon discovering that Plaintiff had misrepresented his history of high blood pressure, history of tobacco use, and his weight in his application for coverage. The court granted summary judgment on insurer’s affirmative defense of material misrepresentation, affirmed decision to rescind and found that Plaintiff’s misrepresentations regarding risk factors for heart disease were material as a matter of law. (E.D. Mo.)
• McLaughlin, et al. v. Fortis Insurance Company. Obtained dismissal with prejudice of intentional infliction of emotional distress claim, which sought punitive damages in connection with Fortis’ denial of medical benefits. The court found that Plaintiff failed to allege tortious conduct sufficiently separate from the benefit denial and, therefore, the court held the common law claim was preempted by Section 155 of the Illinois Insurance Code. (S.D. Ill.)
• Reeves v. Fortis Benefits Insurance Company. Summary judgment for defendant on ERISA claim for disability benefits. Obtained deferential, arbitrary and capricious standard of review and successfully defended Fortis’ reasonable denial of benefits. (W.D. Mo.)
• Kramer v. Life Insurance Company of North America.  Summary judgment for Defendant on ERISA claim for long term disability benefits. Successfully defended plan’s denial of benefits based on commencement of disability. Disability commenced after plaintiff was terminated for other reasons. Plaintiff had been released to work and had returned to work prior to termination. (D. Neb. Riley J., 8th Cir. Sitting by designation.)
• Binder v. Life Insurance Company of North America. Summary judgment for defendant on ERISA claim for accidental death benefits. Successfully defended benefit denial where administrative record contained substantial evidence that disease contributed to cause of death. (D. Neb.)
• In re Sprint Corporation ERISA Litigation.  Part of defense team for directed trustee that was co defendant with Sprint Corporation and its officers and directors in ERISA price drop case.  Settled on terms favorable to our client. (D. Kan.)

Insurance Industry Representative Experience

• Defended insurance carrier of attorneys sued in excess of limits for damages flowing from the failure of a savings and loan association.
• Provide general litigation services for the nation’s largest privately held insurance and employee benefit brokerage.
• Defended third party plan administrator accused of negligence in claim handling of multi-employer trust health insurance plan and fraud in alleged sale of block of group health insurance associated with multi employer trust plan.
• Defended managing general agent/broker accused of negligence in creation of top hat profit sharing/pension plan.
• Prosecuted indemnity and negligence claims against broker/agent who negligently sold group insurance, failing to properly enroll group plan participants.
• Defended insurance company and agents in alleged churning cases.
• Defended managing general underwriter in claim of fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, breach of contract and negligence in procuring stop loss insurance.
• Defended claim for contribution and indemnity by stop loss carrier against MGA (arbitration settled on terms favorable to client).
• Defended MGA in claim by stop loss carrier for negligence, fraud, conversion. Prosecuted counter claims (N.D. Ill. settled on terms favorable to client).
• Defendant TPA in claim alleging negligence in preparation of stop loss application (claim pending).
• Defended claims brought by plan participant against self insured plan where defense was tendered by stop loss carrier (W.D. Mo. case pending).
• Defended securities clearing entity against claims of fraud, conversion and breach of contract in failing to establish separate account for jointly traded account.
• Canady v. American Family Insurance et al. Insurance "redlining" class action suit under Federal Civil Rights laws including Fair Housing Act. U.S. District Court, Western District of Missouri. 
• Client Name Withheld by Request. Defended ESOP owned employer in putative class action where allegations of ERISA violations and prudent man violations were alleged. (Case settled prior to class certification).
• Eskridge v. Wisconsin Physician Services, et. al. Prosecuted claims for employer plan sponsor against TPA, MGA and stop loss carrier for negligence in health care plan administration. (Settled on terms favorable to client). 
• Freeman v. Kansas City Life Insurance Company. Insurance fraud litigation. Class of insureds alleged client’s sales representatives fraudulently induced the purchase of certain types of policies by misrepresenting the returns and benefits of the policies. (Case dismissed without prejudice by plaintiff after they received defendant’s opening discovery in Circuit Court of Jackson County, Missouri).
• In Re Sprint Corporation ERISA Class Action. U.S. District Court for the District of Kansas. Defending directed fiduciary in defense of class action claims for breach of fiduciary duty and other ERISA claims. Case settled on terms favorable to client.
• McGraw v. Great Southern Life Insurance Company. MDL in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas. One of three firms defending GSL in sales practices class action. Involved in class certification issues, general litigation issues and settlement administration. (Settled on terms favorable to the company).
• New Century v. AFS. Defended MGA in stop loss claim by employer. (Settled on terms favorable to client). 
• Notzon v. College Life Insurance Company. District Court of Webb County Texas. One of two firms defending College Life in claims concerning sales practices. (Case settled on terms favorable to the company).
• SG Metals v. New England Financial. U.S. District Court for the District of Kansas. Transferred by Multi-District Panel to U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts. Defense of Insurance sales practice class action alleging fraud, RICO, negligent misrepresentation, churning and similar claims. (Motion to Dismiss granted for Defendant. Motion to Dismiss was affirmed by the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the First Circuit 10/03).
• Musgrave v. Fortis Insurance Company. Summary judgment for Defendant in suit for health benefits. Insurer denied claims for benefits and rescinded coverage upon discovering that Plaintiff had misrepresented his history of high blood pressure, history of tobacco use, and his weight in his application for coverage. The court granted summary judgment on insurer’s affirmative defense of material misrepresentation, affirmed decision to rescind and found that Plaintiff’s misrepresentations regarding risk factors for heart disease were material as a matter of law. (E.D. Mo.) 
• McLaughlin, et al. v. Fortis Insurance Company. Obtained dismissal with prejudice of intentional infliction of emotional distress claim, which sought punitive damages in connection with Fortis’ denial of medical benefits. The court found that Plaintiff failed to allege tortious conduct sufficiently separate from the benefit denial and, therefore, the court held the common law claim was preempted by Section 155 of the Illinois Insurance Code. (S.D. Ill.) 
• Reeves v. Fortis Benefits Insurance Company. Summary judgment for Defendant on ERISA claim for long term disability benefits. Obtained deferential, arbitrary and capricious standard of review and successfully defended Fortis’ reasonable denial of benefits. (W.D. Mo.) 
• Maisch v. Fortis Benefits Insurance Company. Summary judgment for Defendant on ERISA claim for long term disability benefits. Successfully argued for deferential review based on plan amendment made subsequent to alleged onset of disability. Successfully defended determination that claimant’s medical evaluations and daily activities were inconsistent with the plan’s definition of disability. (W.D. Mo.) 
• Scott v. Fortis Insurance Company. Motion to dismiss granted in part, enforcing time limit on temporary health insurance policy. Thereafter, case settled on terms favorable to client. (District Court of Douglas County, Kansas) 
• Kramer v. Life Insurance Company of North America. Summary judgment for Defendant on ERISA claim for long term disability benefits. Successfully defended plan’s denial of benefits based on commencement of disability. Disability commenced after plaintiff was terminated for other reasons. Plaintiff had been released to work and had returned to work prior to termination. (D. Neb. (Riley J., 8th Cir. Sitting by designation.))
• Peterson v. Fortis Benefits Insurance Company. Summary judgment for Defendant on ERISA claim for long term disability benefits.  Despite plaintiff’s argument for a less deferential review based on alleged procedural irregularities and conflict of interest, the court applied the arbitrary and capricious standard of review, limited the evidence to the administrative record at the time of the final benefit determination and upheld Fortis’ "any occupation" benefit determination.  The court concluded that substantial evidence from Plaintiff’s treating physicians, Fortis’ medical reviews and an independent vocational assessment supported the determination that plaintiff was at least capable of light work. The court also dismissed Plaintiff’s ERISA-preempted state law claims for bad faith, vexatious refusal to pay and breach of contract. (D. Neb.) 
• Herrera v. General Motors Corporation. Proposed class action involved allegations under Labor Management Relations Act, ERISA, and Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act. (We defeated class certification and obtained summary judgment, all of which was affirmed by the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals.)
• Lewis v. Life Insurance Company of North America. Summary judgment for defendant on ERISA claim for long term disability benefits. Successfully defended plan’s denial of continued benefits pursuant to mental illness provision of plan and group policy. (W.D. Mo.) 
• Merritt, et. al. v. Life Insurance Company of North America. Summary judgment for defendant on ERISA claim for accidental death benefits. Successfully defended benefit denial where administrative record failed to establish decedent insured was insane at the time of suicide. Defendant’s motion in limine granted limiting scope of evidence to administrative record at the time of the final benefit determination. (W.D. Mo.) 
• Binder v. Life Insurance Company of North America. Summary judgment for defendant on ERISA claim for accidental death benefits. Successfully defended benefit denial where administrative record contained substantial evidence that disease contributed to cause of death. (D. Neb.) 
• Work v. Connecticut General Life Insurance Company, et al. Summary judgment for defendant on ERISA claim for long term disability benefits. Successfully defended "any occupation" benefit denial under arbitrary and capricious standard of review. (S.D. Iowa)
• Ruhlman v. MIC Life Insurance Company. Summary judgment for defendant MIC Life Insurance Company on plaintiff’s claim for accidental death benefits. Successfully defended against plaintiff’s claim for benefits asserting drug and felony exclusions under the policy. (W.D. Mo.)

Media

• Successfully defended numerous defamation claims and lawsuits for The Kansas City Star, KCTV-5, the Kansas City Business Journal, the Kansas City Kansan, and various radio stations, newspapers and other insureds of Media/Professional Insurance.
• Successfully obtained access to numerous court proceedings and court records on behalf of The Kansas City Star and other media by “negotiating” with judges or by filing motions to intervene to enforce the public's right of access.
• Successfully litigated, often through appeal, various lawsuits to enforce the Missouri Sunshine Law, the Kansas Open Meetings Act, and the Kansas Open Records Act; defendants have included the City of Kansas City, Missouri (on more than one occasion); the Kansas City, Missouri School District and its Board of Directors (on more than one occasion); Wyandotte County, Kansas; the City of Kansas City, Kansas; the Kansas City, Missouri City Council and its Finance Committee; and, currently, the City of Overland Park, Kansas.
• Represented print and broadcast media clients, their editors and reporters in connection with the pre-publication or pre-broadcast review of all types of news stories, including those involving threats or demands from the story subjects.
• Represented media clients in connection with the publication or use of art or other images, including copyright, trademark and licensing issues.

Professional Liability

Lathrop & Gage has a well-balanced litigation and business law practice that includes extensive work in the area of professional liability. We dedicate a substantial amount of time and resources to this practice area, with a team of attorneys and support staff designated for cases involving the professional liability of accountants, architects and engineers, attorneys, doctors and hospitals, and the insurance industry.

Accountants

• Defended a major accounting firm in four-week trial in federal court against professional negligence claims regarding audited financial statements allegedly relied upon by the plaintiff in its purchase of a manufacturing company.
• Defended major accounting firm in claims regarding an opinion rendered with respect to audited financial statements allegedly relied upon by the plaintiff in its purchase of a company.
• Defended major accounting firm in claims alleging improper activity in a complex accounting/engineering/legal matter relating to the reserves in underground recesses of natural gas.
• Defended a certified public accountant and chief financial officer against alleged violations of the Federal Elections laws with respect to contributions to a major campaigns.

Architects/Engineers

• Successfully represented major geotechnical firm in a lawsuit arising from the wrongful death of a construction worker. At issue was the safety immunity statute in Kansas, which provides some protection for design professionals, and whether it should apply to a geotechnical firm performing Special Inspections under the International Building Code. After vigorously defending the suit, the claim was settled in mediation for a nominal amount.
• Representing architect in connection with claims arising from bleacher seating. Both the architect and Owner assert that the bleacher seating was defectively designed by the manufacturer and should be replaced under theories of express and implied warranty and product liability. This arbitration is presently pending in Iowa.
• Represented architectural firm with respect to claims by owner of a major hotel for mold contamination, which necessitated repairs to the building in excess of $4 million. The matter was negotiated by our firm and favorably settled without expense of litigation.

Attorneys

• Handled the largest attorney malpractice case in the Midwest. Case was dismissed after argument in the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the decision.
• Defended two directors of a public company who composed the audit committee of the board of directors. Our client was sued for breach of their duties as directors and members of the audit committee. Cross claims were filed against a law firm for legal malpractice.
• Defended attorney appointed as conservator in claim resulting from loss of estate property. Summary judgment granted in favor of defendant.

Doctors and Hospitals

• Successfully represented a doctor against a claim of failure to diagnose an atypical presentation of angina.  The patient was seen twice by our client in one week for epigastric pain and heartburn.  He was treated with Axcid then Prilosec for gastritis. An upper GI and gallbladder ultrasound were ordered after the second visit.  The patient then had an MI procedure three days later and died in the ER.  The case was tried for six days in Greene County Circuit Court to a jury.  We successfully argued that the symptoms were gastric and not angina and that our doctor did a proper work up and assessment during both office visits.
• Obtained jury verdict in favor of large hospital in a suit brought by family members of a decedent where the family claimed that a cardiologist failed to diagnose a dissected aorta with a pseudo aneurysm.  Lathrop & Gage was able to demonstrate to the jury that diagnostic aortograms taken by the cardiologist did not reveal active bleeding at the time the films were made and that the patient’s presentation during his hospital course indicated that the patient was recovering as opposed to suffering ongoing bleeding.

Insurance Industry

• Defended insurance carrier of attorneys sued in excess of limits for damages flowing from the failure of a savings and loan association.
• Defended third party plan administrator accused of negligence in claim handling of multi-employer trust health insurance plan and fraud in alleged sale of block of group health insurance associated with multi-employer trust plan.
• Defended managing general agent/broker accused of negligence in creation of top hat profit sharing/pension plan.
• Prosecuted indemnity and negligence claims against broker/agent who negligently sold group insurance, failing to properly enroll group plan participants.
• Defended managing general underwriter in claim of fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, breach of contract and negligence in procuring stop loss insurance.

Real Estate Litigation

• Kansas City Area Transportation Authority (KCATA). We have represented the KCATA in several lawsuits against adjoining landowners who claimed ownership interests in KCATA’s Country Club Right-of-Way properties. Complex questions of real estate deed construction, easement versus fee determinations, adverse possession and other real estate issues have been involved in these cases.
• Marillac Center. Our firm was successful in our representation of the Marillac Center before the City of Overland Park, Kan. and in the District Court of Johnson County, Kan., in matters surrounding the highly publicized relocation of the Marillac to a new location in the City of Overland Park.  Marillac had filed an application for a new Special Use Permit for an indefinite period of time to operate a Psychiatric Hospital/Residential Treatment Center.  The application was hotly contested on multiple levels. 
• Our firm represented a developer of an apartment condominium and "villas" development (separate freestanding houses, but part of an overall association with no owner obligation to maintain exterior), in a controversy with various unit purchasers. Avoided litigation by negotiating an extensive settlement and collecting over a hundred signatures on an amendment to a homeowners' association declaration (functional equivalent in this case of a condo declaration) as part of the workout.

Securities Litigation

• Successfully defended broker-dealer in several "tech wreck" arbitration cases brought in Missouri and Kansas by customers who sustained heavy losses when the NASDAQ stock market bubble burst.
• Defended broker dealer against a regulatory action brought by State Securities Commissioner for alleged failure to supervise former registered representative.  Negotiated favorable settlement with Commissioner that avoided any sanctions or fines, and obtained full releases from thirty customers in exchange for partial restitution payments.
• Defended broker dealer in several suitability arbitration cases brought by multiple customers of its former registered representative who had been terminated for cause.  All claims were settled for a fraction of the total out-of-pocket losses sustained.
• Defended broker dealer against three lawsuits brought in Kansas state court by customers of former registered representative who had been convicted and incarcerated for embezzling customer funds.  Negotiated favorable settlement.
• Represented a group of over 70 plaintiffs in a major securities fraud lawsuit involving a failed industrial revenue bond issue in which an extremely favorable settlement was obtained for the plaintiffs.
• Successfully represented a bank in a multi-million dollar class-action lawsuit against the bank and certain directors of a public corporation alleging 10b-5 violations based on conspiracy and aiding and abetting claims.
• Obtained court dismissal in favor of lead underwriter in securities litigation involving ‘33 and ‘34 Act claims based on public offering.
• Represented a regional accounting firm in a multi-million dollar 10b-5 suit alleging fraudulent financial statements used in connection with the acquisition of a public company, in which a favorable settlement was obtained after partial summary judgment was entered in favor of our client.
• Counsel for a broker-dealer in several NASD arbitration proceedings involving one of its former brokers in which customers alleged various state and federal securities fraud claims arising from their investments in certain stocks, options and mutual funds.
• Obtained defense verdict at trial in customer action against broker-dealer alleging 10b-5, common law fraud, state Blue sky, breach of fiduciary duty, unsuitability and churning claims.
• Obtained summary judgment for broker-dealer, which was affirmed on appeal by Eighth Circuit, in lawsuit alleging unauthorized trading and churning of customer’s commodities accounts.
• Represented broker-dealer in federal court action by profit sharing plan alleging various federal and state law securities claims arising from the sale and purchase by the plan of certain real estate limited partnerships.  Successfully settled for nuisance value.

Trade Secrets/Covenants Not to Compete

• Successfully enforced a commercial radius restriction on behalf of a leading real estate company against a leading retailer.
• Enforced non-competition covenant against a former employee on behalf of a national telecommunications company against former executives in courts in Missouri and Georgia.
• Procured injunctions on behalf of major accounting firms against former employees who violated trade secret and non-competition covenants in Colorado and Kansas.
• Successfully enforced cases under the Uniform Trade Secrets Act on behalf of a major manufacturing client against infringing former employees and competitors in Kansas, Missouri, and Tennessee.
• Successfully defended construction industry client from claims of tortious interference and violation of state trade secret laws in Kansas.
• Successfully enforced non-competition agreements against former employees for numerous clients in Missouri, Kansas, Illinois, Nebraska and other states.

White Collar Criminal Defense

Our attorneys are experienced in the representation of individuals and companies in federal criminal and regulatory investigations and prosecutions. We have participated in investigations involving alleged antitrust, environmental, health care, fraud and other federal criminal investigations. We regularly assist companies in drafting and reviewing corporate compliance programs to ensure agreement with the Federal Sentencing Guidelines. In all investigative matters, we are sensitive to the need to maintain the company's control over the confidentiality of all matters.