Brown Rudnick is pleased to announce that its M&A and Private Equity Litigation practice has been ranked in the 2022 edition ofThe Legal 500 United Statesin the M&A Litigation category for both the plaintiff and defense side. Brown Rudnick is theonly firm across the nation to receive the dual recognition in this edition.The Legal 500noted that "the practice punches above its weight and frequently has a key role in high-stakes litigation in Delaware and in state and federal courts across the US."

Published annually,The Legal 500rankings highlight the teams and practitioners providing innovative advice and representation. The rankings are based on thousands of interviews with lawyers and clients, and provide a detailed qualitative assessment of various factors, including work conducted by law firms over the past 12 months and historically, experience and depth of teams, client service, commercial awareness, diligence, and commitment to the client.

"We are proud to be the only firm in the country to receive this dual ranking for both plaintiff and defense side M&A Litigation in this edition," said Dylan Kletter, co-leader of Brown Rudnick's M&A and Private Equity Litigation group. "We have a nationally recognized practice that is dedicated to resolving pre and post-closing M&A disputes." Brown Rudnick's group routinely handles significant fraud and indemnification claims, rep & warranty insurance claims, earnout and milestone disputes, and significant portfolio company litigation.

"We litigate across the country and in whatever forum the transactional parties select, whether that be in the courtroom, in front of independent accounting firms on an earnout dispute or pursuing large RWI claims in front of arbitration panels," added Mr. Kletter.

Co-practice leader Mark Baldwin commented, "It is a recognition of the great work we do to resolve disputes on behalf of both buyers and sellers in M&A transactions." Mr. Baldwin added, "it is why so many of our clients turn to us to resolve high-stakes disputes even if they've used other firms as their transaction counsel."

Who are we?

Brown Rudnick's M&A and Private Equity Litigation practice comprises lawyers who routinely represent private equity firms, strategic acquirers, family offices, activist investors, and entrepreneurs in various post-closing M&A disputes.

Our practice focuses on post-closing disputes involving the actual transactional parties, as opposed to many of our peer firms whose M&A litigation practices deal with a variety of shareholder class actions or similar disputes, or have general commercial litigators handling their post-closing M&A disputes.

As a result of our deep understanding of the M&A process, and our litigation of virtually every aspect of an M&A transaction on behalf of both buyers and sellers, we are routinely retained by our clients to replace transaction counsel or their general commercial litigators that were originally hired.

What is our value proposition?

The group's value proposition is driven by our experience and success in similar matters, which allows us to leverage our prior work to produce efficient results for our clients. There is simply no substitute for the type of experience gained by litigating these matters, which include hundreds of meetings, interviews, and depositions of dealmakers, investment bankers, management teams, financial due diligence consultants, and experts.

Simply put, we know where a case is likely to end up, which provides us with the critical skills to quickly identify key issues and to focus our efforts on activities that will drive a favorable settlement or trial victory.

What are our capabilities?

We have successfully litigated or resolved dozens of high-profile, high-stakes M&A disputes, including:

  • Indemnification claims concerning breaches of reps & warranties;
  • Fraud claims;
  • Earnout and milestone payment disputes;
  • Working capital and purchase price adjustment disputes;
  • Claims against reps & warranties insurance policies;
  • Pre-closing disputes, including asserting or defending against MAE/MAC claims; and
  • Significant portfolio company litigation.