Manufacturing & Distribution

Advised Compu Dynamics Modular, which delivers turnkey, factory-fabricated modular data centers that arrive pre-engineered and ready for rapid deployment, on acquiring a majority ownership interest in a manufacturing company.

Part of a trial team that, after a five-week jury trial, obtained a complete defense verdict on behalf of an international automobile manufacturer alleged to have supplied asbestos-containing automotive brakes that caused plaintiff’s alleged mesothelioma. Convinced the jury that not only did the plaintiff not have mesothelioma, but that even if she did, the client’s products were not the cause of her disease. Harrison, et al. v. Volkswagen Corporation of America, et al., 22nd Judicial Circuit, City of St. Louis (2016). 

Obtained summary judgment on behalf of a manufacturer of swing-away trailer jack after successfully convincing the United States District Court for the District of Maryland that plaintiff’s expert was not qualified to offer expert testimony pursuant to Daubert and the Federal Rules of Evidence. McKerrow v. Buyers Products Co., 2016 WL 1110303 (USDC Maryland 2016).

Obtained summary judgment on behalf of company sued in an alleged vinyl chloride exposure case. Litton, et ux. v. APG, Inc. et al., Circuit Court of Baltimore City, (Case No. 24-C-02-005510 (2003))

Member of trial team in contribution CERCLA liability litigation against 14 companies alleged to have contributed to site contamination in connection with the Centredale Manor Superfund Site in North Providence, Rhode Island. After a six-week trial against four remaining defendants, the court entered a finding of CERCLA liability against all of them.

Represented a luxury yacht sales company in successfully resolving a False Claims Act investigation triggered by allegations of import duty underpayment. Following civil investigative demands from the Department of Justice and involvement of U.S. Customs and Border Protection, our strategic advocacy included educating government attorneys, including the associate chief counsel for U.S. Customs and Border Protection, on the proper application of complex import tax regulations and duty calculation methodologies. The comprehensive defense resulted in the government declining to intervene in the qui tam complaint and the relator voluntarily dismissing the underlying sealed lawsuit with minimal business disruption for the client.

Counsel to Fortune 500 tool manufacturer with regard to multiple divestitures of manufacturing and distribution businesses.

Sale of Base2, LLC, a company specializing in the design and development of cutting-edge cyber solutions across the domains of computer network operations (CNO), signals intelligence (SIGINT) and quick reaction capability, to BlueHalo, a portfolio company of Arlington Capital Partners.

Represented a Maryland machinery manufacturer following a catastrophic injury in New Jersey. Plaintiff first filed in New Jersey state court, and the case was removed to federal court. While a motion to dismiss based on New Jersey’s two year statute of limitations was pending in the New Jersey Federal District Court, plaintiff filed an identical case in Maryland, within Maryland’s three-year period of limitations. After obtaining a dismissal order in the New Jersey case, we obtained dismissal of the Maryland case on the basis that it was precluded under principles of res judicata. The Maryland court agreed that an order from the federal court sitting in diversity had the same impact as if a New Jersey state court had issued it, and, under New Jersey law, a dismissal for limitations was a final judgment on the merits, and therefore the Maryland case could not proceed.

Miles & Stockbridge represented a manufacturer in a wage and hour purported class action involving the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). Through motions, we were able to successfully reduce this to a single plaintiff case. 

Miles & Stockbridge represents a food manufacturer in a variety of employment issues, including a wage and hour class action case. The case was highly complex involving the Fair Labor Standards Act and motor carrier exemptions to that law. We also represented the company in a disability discrimination case at the EEOC. 

We represented a global manufacturer and defeated motion for conditional certification of a class of similarly situated employees. We ultimately were able to resolve individual claims. 

We defended a major manufacturer against claims of race discrimination where EEOC had issued notice of probable cause of discrimination. After extensive discovery, we were successful in obtaining summary judgment on all claims.

Miles & Stockbridge handled a claim of FMLA retaliation for a truck manufacturer and was ultimately successful in resolving after obtaining ruling significantly reducing available damages. 

Represented client who was sued by a former executive for defamation and invasion of privacy, although the complaint also contained extensive allegations of race discrimination, which were not brought in court, but were pending before the EEOC. The matter garnered significant press coverage locally and in the industry. We obtained dismissal of the state court complaint in its entirety, which required three motions to dismiss after two amended complaints were filed, and also defeated a motion for reconsideration. 

Represented a paper company in a matter involving recovery under general liability insurance policies for the cost of remediating PCB contamination to the Lower Fox River in Wisconsin. Following a five-week trial in 2008, obtained a unanimous jury verdict in favor of the insured, subsequently affirmed by the Wisconsin Court of Appeals.

Lead appellate counsel in a consent decree challenge. After extensive negotiations subsequent to a successful remedy challenge in the United States District Court for the District of Rhode Island, obtained the entry of a Consent Decree implementing the remedy at the Centredale Manor Restoration Project Superfund Site. Several PRPs opposed the entry of the Consent Decree on three primary grounds: implementation of a remedy that was arbitrary and capricious; failure of the District Court to conduct meaningful judicial review; and the basis and amount of the contribution of the United States DOD in relation to its alleged contribution to contamination at the site.  After coordinated briefing and argument with the US Department of Justice, the First Circuit affirmed the District Court’s entry of the Consent Decree in a reported opinion. Emhart Industries, Inc., et al. v. United States Department of the Air Force, et al.,988 F.3d 511 (1st Cir. 2021).

Following a two week jury trial, obtained defense verdict in lawsuit filed against manufacturer of asbestos containing product alleging exposure to asbestos at various construction sites in Maryland and the District of Columbia.

Mike secured summary judgment on behalf of a multinational manufacturing client in a case alleging that the client’s product caused the plaintiff to develop a fatal form of cancer. Although a statutory repose defense would not have been available to the client under D.C. law, Mike successfully argued that the Court should apply Maryland law and, further, that the Maryland statute of repose provided an absolute defense to the plaintiff’s claims based on the facts and evidence developed during discovery.

Mike has obtained summary judgment on behalf of multiple defense contractors in federal court cases alleging mesothelioma caused by exposure to asbestos. In some cases, Mike successfully argued that the client’s liability could not extend to replacement or auxiliary components or equipment manufactured and supplied by others, but used in relation to the client’s product. In other cases, Mike executed discovery strategies that revealed missing links in the plaintiffs’ product identification evidence that led directly to summary judgment.

Represented Colgate-Palmolive Company in a case alleging the plaintiff developed mesothelioma from using a talcum powder product manufactured by Colgate.  After several years of litigation, we obtained an Order from the Court excluding plaintiff’s proffered expert on product testing/contamination, human tissue fiber burden and specific causation on Daubert grounds.

Routinely advise and represent manufacturers, suppliers and franchisors in variety of industries in the context of franchise and dealer termination disputes under applicable state and federal laws.

Defended an international manufacturer in FMLA employment litigation in the United States District Court of the Western District of Virginia. Obtained a favorable settlement for the client.

Represented an international designer, manufacturer and supplier of jewelry in a dispute with the former exclusive franchisee and distributor of our client’s products in certain South American countries.  Matter involved international arbitration proceedings before the Danish Institute of Arbitration (“DIA”), and related civil litigation in the state and federal courts of Florida.

Represented an international supplier of farm equipment against a former employee accused of misappropriating trade secrets and other confidential information in violation of federal and state law, and for violations of the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act.

Represented a global manufacturer of power tools against a major United States retailer for breach of a trademark license agreement relating to one of our client’s most important brands.

As national coordinating counsel for a publicly traded manufacturing client, Angi collaborates with a national network of counsel to best defend clients through the changing nature of mass tort litigation against claims brought by organized, interconnected, sophisticated plaintiff firms. This work includes coordinating discovery, company witnesses, documents, trial preparation, and conducting forensic product-line investigations to develop product defenses.  She also spends a significant amount of time developing and working with experts, ensuring that they are inherently familiar with the client, its products, and its strategies.

Angi acts as national coordinating counsel for a publicly traded manufacturing client facing multiple claims in multiple jurisdictions, all asserting claims of exposure to a variety of allegedly hazardous materials.  She provides strategic litigation management, developing and implementing coordinated litigation strategies to control or eliminate the significant exposure posed by such claims and keeps the client in a favorable low visibility posture, securing dismissals or nuisance value resolutions in the high visibility, high stakes mass torts litigation.

Assisted client prepare and submit proof to support multi-million dollar environmental insurance claim involving numerous contaminated sites.

Prosecuted a cost recovery/allocation action against several potentially responsible parties related to the Providence, Rhode Island Superfund site on behalf of a large power tools manufacturer in the District of Rhode Island.

We represented Encapsys LLC in its $208 million acquisition of the Encapsys microencapsulation division of Appvion, Inc.  The Encapsys business had 2014 revenues of over $61 million and employs approximately 90 people at offices and research labs in Appleton, Wisconsin and at a manufacturing plant in Portage, Wisconsin. Terms of the sale included a long-term supply agreement whereby Encapsys LLC will continue to produce and sell microcapsules to Appvion for use in its carbonless paper products. The newly formed acquirer was sponsored by Sherman Capital Holdings LLC, a private investment firm based in Baltimore.

We represented Cypress Performance Group in its $700 million acquisition of IPS Corporation from funds sponsored by Nautic Partners, LLC. Cypress Performance Group is affiliated with Sherman Capital Holdings, LLC, a private investment firm based in Baltimore. IPS is a global manufacturer of specialized, highly engineered industrial products serving diverse industrial, commercial, and residential end markets.  IPS will operate in conjunction with Cypress Performance Group’s portfolio company, Encapsys, LLC, a manufacturer of microencapsulation materials based in Appleton, Wisconsin.

A non-controlling equity investment in a strategic materials manufacturer with US government-funded development  and supply contracts in a $5+ million investment by a Fortune 500 manufacturing and distribution company, including technology development, supply, and marketing/distribution agreements, followed ultimately by a complete buy-out.

Acquisition and related financing by a private equity owned designer and manufacturer of rugged computer and information assurance systems of a premiere provider of high-end training, instrumentation and surveillance solutions for military and commercial customers.

Acquisition of The Bechdon Company, a provider of precision machining services, CAD/CAM part programming and welding and fabrication services for the aerospace, defense, commercial and industrial manufacturing communities, by Breidon Inc., an affiliate of Ridge Engineering, Inc.

Aided a consortium of major consumer brand companies prepare and file a joint Amici Curiae brief in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit supporting the Clean Power Plan pursuant to the Clean Air Act (CAA).

Routinely draft antitrust compliance policies and provide antitrust guidance on pricing and distribution practices in accordance with federal and state antitrust laws.

Assisted a textile industry client evaluate and address environmental regulatory and compliance issues concerning a facility’s repurposing and a strategy for property reuse, including procurement of environmental insurance and participation in the state’s Brownfields Program.

Advised a major electric utility company regarding New Source Review (NSR) program requirements under the Clean Air Act (CAA), including a six-month audit of internal procedures and suggested compliance improvements.

CSR, Ltd v. Taylor, 411 Md. 457, 983 A.2d 492 (2009). Court of Appeals affirmed grant of motion to dismiss based on lack of personal jurisdiction, holding that actions of foreign distributor did not constitute purposeful availment under Maryland law. 

Defended a global manufacturing company against numerous claims in a two week arbitration in Washington, D.C., securing a final award millions of dollars lower than sought by the claimant.

Lead trial counsel in a federal securities claim arising out of a failure to disclose fees due to financial advisers in connection with the purchase of a publicly traded healthcare information management company. The purchaser was required to reimburse undisclosed financial advisors millions of dollars in fees due as a result of the acquisition. Coordinated claims and parties to access predecessor D&O coverage for officers and a director for failure to disclose financial advisors in representations and warranties for transaction. Favorable settlement reached after successful opposition to motions to dismiss and extensive negotiation involving complex D&O coverage issues. (Stanley Black & Decker v. Gulian, et al., USDC, District of Delaware (1:12-cv-01342))

Georgia-Pacific Corp. v. Benjamin, 394 Md. 59, 904 A.2d 511 (2006). Court of Appeals affirmed grant of summary judgment in favor of manufacturer of asbestos-containing products holding that express knowledge of exposure to asbestos products and diagnosis of mesothelioma constituted inquiry notice for purposes of discovery rule and commencement of limitations period for beneficiaries' survival action.

Lead national counsel defending manufacturer of multi-purpose power tools through three waves of mass tort litigation asserting claims for exposure to dust containing a variety of allegedly hazardous materials (asbestos, silica, wood and metal dusts) contained in work pieces and materials manufactured by other companies. Developed comprehensive, coordinated assertion of “no legal duty to warn” defense as a variation of evolving “component parts” and “bare metals’ defenses in state and federal claims asserted in multiple jurisdictions over nearly a decade. This strategy resulted in dozens of dismissals without payment in cases across the country and successful summary judgment decision eliminating litigation in certain jurisdictions and providing a basis for subsequent dismissals without payment in other jurisdictions. (Summary Judgment Decision – Abate v. Advanced Auto Parts, et al., Connecticut Superior Court, Bridgeport (FBT-CV10-6005674)

Lead national counsel defended a plumbing fixture manufacturer in connection with asbestos claims brought in multiple jurisdictions around the country. Conducted a forensic product-line investigation that established product defenses for the client on the merits, pursued indemnity claim against a corporate predecessor based on transaction documentation and successfully established an asset purchases defense to future cases (demonstrating direct liability of corporate predecessor). Obtained dismissals without payment on early asbestos claims on the merits. After unsuccessful indemnity litigation in California State Court with the predecessor, successfully asserted successor liability defense in future cases and obtained summary judgment (opposed by the predecessor) for the client establishing no liability for the client for product line, and direct liability of the predecessor for such claims. (Whelan v. A.O. Smith, et al., Superior Court of New Jersey, Middlesex County (L-7161-12AS))

Provided regulatory guidance and representation before the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to a potentially responsible party at site where dioxin and PCBs are contaminants of concern, including preparation of public comments at various stages of the administrative process addressing the Proposed Remedial Action Plan, Remedial Investigation, Feasibility Study, and answering Unilateral Administrative Orders.

Represented a contract pharmaceutical manufacturer in dispute with contracting party. After conducting investigation into the facts and circumstances and confronting the other party with our analysis, the disputing party abandoned their claims against our client.

Represented automotive client in two Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) litigation actions in the U.S. District Court for Eastern District of New York alleging contribution to site contamination and a $35+ million cleanup remedy.

Represented consumer product manufacturing clients in a Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) litigation action in the U.S. District Court for Rhode Island, including challenging liability, the Record of Decision, and a $100+ million cleanup remedy.

Represented a producer and distributor of chemicals in prosecution of trade secret action in the United States District Court for the District of Maryland against a former sales employee who copied several hundred sensitive documents to a portable hard drive before departing the company. We obtained a temporary restraining order and ultimately consent permanent injunction barring former employee from retaining and using client’s information.