Attorneys
The attorneys of Susman Heffner & Hurst LLP have won hundreds of millions of dollars in damage awards and settlements for our clients. Most recently, SHH attorneys helped secure a record-setting $120 million securities fraud settlement in the 7th Circuit on behalf of First Chicago Corporation shareholders in litigation against Bank One Corporation, alleging violations of Section 11 and 12 of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 14 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Plaintiffs achieved this substantial result despite the absence of an SEC investigation or a financial restatement by Bank One.
SHH will fight a case to its finish, as well. Our attorneys have successfully appealed adverse judgments in several appellate courts across the country. In O'Malley v. Boris, 744 A.2d 845 (Del. Supr. 1999), for example, Mr. Susman successfully argued before the Delaware Supreme Court for the reversal of summary judgment. In so doing, Mr. Susman created a new and important precedent for the application of fiduciary duties to brokerage firms, which ultimately led to a multi-million dollar settlement. Likewise, in Smith v. Sprint Communications Co., L.P., 387 F.3d 612 (7th Cir. 2004), our attorneys convinced the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals to overturn a settlement valued in hundreds of millions of dollars that was unfair to certain class members.
Across the nation, courts have praised our lawyers for their excellent results, hard work, and conscientious regard for class members' rights. For example, in approving the settlement in In re Bank One Securities Litigation: First Chicago Shareholders Claims, Judge Wayne Andersen of the Northern District of Illinois stated:
"You know, it is a major day for all of you. I think you have really done an excellent job . . . it is, frankly, an honor for me to be able to deal with such outstanding lawyers."
Chief Judge of the Northern District of Illinois, Judge Charles P. Kocoras, commented on the work ethic of our attorneys in approving a $7 million settlement in an ERISA action:
"This case was, as I said, not a lay-down case and it did involve a great deal of work on the part of the attorneys . . . and whose papers support the proposition that a lot of work was put into this case."
And Judge Kyle of the District Court of Minnesota claimed that our lawyers had performed
"one heck of a job" for their clients, terming the $51 million settlement in an ERISA class action "extremely favorable" while noting that "the conduct of plaintiffs" lawyers in this case . . . [was] exemplary."
SHH also brings a unique perspective to class action litigation, one that combines trial experience with a practical knowledge of corporate bureaucracy. Our lawyers have tried several complex class actions to verdict involving multi-million dollar damage claims. We know what evidence needs to be uncovered, how to develop it, and how to present it at trial. And our lawyers, two of whom were trained in defense firms handling mass actions, are better able to gauge how corporations and their counsel view the merits of plaintiffs' claims.
Arthur T. Susman has more than 45 years of trial and appellate experience. Mr. Susman has been active in the Securities Committee of the Chicago Bar Association and was Chairman of the Rule 10b-5 Subcommittee. One of his early published articles appears in the ABA Selected Articles on Closely Held Enterprises collection, and he lectures and has had numerous articles published in the securities law field. He has participated in over 70 lawsuits involving derivative, corporate, and securities matters and Chapter X corporate reorganizations and has achieved a reputation as a specialist in the field of minority shareholder representation. Mr. Susman's extensive litigation career includes:
Securities Litigation
In re Bank One Secs. Litig., No. 00-2100 (N.D. Ill.) (Andersen, J.). Lead counsel for former shareholders of First Chicago NBD challenging Bank One Corporation’s1998 acquisition of First Chicago NBD under Sections 11 and 12 of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 14 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Class includes some 300 hundred million shares. After defeating motion to dismiss, obtaining class certification, see 2002 WL 989454, at *9, and concluding fact and expert discovery, defendants settled for $120 million, the second-largest securities settlement in the Seventh Circuit.
Endo v. Albertine, No. 88-1815 (N.D. Ill.). Lead counsel in securities class action settled for $8 million on eve of trial in January 1998.
In re W.R. Grace Sec. Litig., No. 95-9003 (S.D.N.Y.). Co-lead counsel in $28 million settlement of securities class action in January 1998.
In re Phar-Mor, Inc., Sec. Litig., No. MDL 959 (W.D. Pa.). Represented institutional investors, including the Northern Trust, Kemper Securities, and Sumitomo Bank, in multi- district case involving federal and state claims arising out of massive accounting fraud. Favorable settlement in 1996 under seal.
In re Triangle Indus., Inc., S’holder Litig., No. 10466 (Del. Ch. 1990). Co-lead counsel in shareholder litigation settled for $75 million.
Siegman v. Tri-Star Pictures, No. 9477 (Del. Ch. 1993). Co-lead counsel in class and derivative action challenging Coca-Cola’s sale of Columbia Pictures to Tri-Star. Judgment for defendants reversed on appeal to Delaware Supreme Court and remanded for trial. Settled eve of trial for $22.5 million.
ERISA Litigation
Kiefer v. Ceridian Corp., 976 F. Supp. 2d 829 (D. Minn.). Lead counsel in $51 million settlement of ERISA class action reached in October 1997, three weeks before trial.
In re Sears Retiree Group Life Ins. Litig., No. 97-7453 (N.D. Ill.). Co-lead counsel in ERISA class action on behalf of 80,000 Sears retirees. Settlement conferring up to $200 million in benefits approved March 5, 2002.
Carter v. Ret. Plan of Texaco, Inc., No. 99-0114 (S.D.N.Y.). Lead counsel in $10 million settlement of ERISA class action on behalf of 10,000 plan participants. Settled October 10, 2000.
Steiner v. Control Data Sys., Inc., No. 98-1489 (D. Minn). Lead counsel in $4.25 million ERISA class action settlement affecting some 700 plan members in July 1999.
Corporate Governance & Fiduciary Duty Litigation
O’Malley v. Boris, 742 A.2d 845 (Del. Supr. 1999). Lead counsel in class action involving breach of investment broker’s fiduciary duties to 269,000 clients. Case settled on day of trial following Delaware Supreme Court’s reversal of Chancery Court’s dismissal of suit and Chancery Court’s subsequent grant of summary judgment on liability in favor of plaintiffs. See 2002 WL 453928 (Del. Ch.) (granting summary judgment); 2001 WL 50204 (Del. Ch.) (granting class certification).
Canel v. Lincoln Nat’l Bank, 1998 WL 1760544 (N.D. Ill. 1998). Squeeze-out merger class action involving bank acquisition. Settled in 2000.
Schelly v. Mfrs. Nat’l Corp., No. 99-00820 (Cir. Ct. Cook County, Ch. Div.). Breach of fiduciary duty action on behalf of minority shareholders in bank. Settled in 2000.
Siegman v. Columbia Pictures, No. 11152 (Del. Ch. 1994). Co-lead counsel in class action challenging the sale of Columbia Pictures to Sony under Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporate Law. Settled for $3 million.
Malone v. Brincat, 722 A.2d 5 (Del. Supr. 1998). Co-lead counsel in landmark decision allowing class of non-purchaser stockholders of Mercury Finance Company to bring action for breach of fiduciary duty of disclosure.
In addition to the cases noted above and unreported litigation, Mr. Susman has participated in the following reported cases: DiLeo v. Ernst & Young, 901 F.2d 624 (7th Cir. 1990); Lister v. Stark, 890 F.2d 941 (7th Cir. 1989); Alexander v. Centrafarm Group, N.V., 124 F.R.D. 178 (N.D. Ill. 1988); Colan v. Cutler-Hammer, Inc., 812 F.2d 357 (7th Cir. 1987); Panter v. Marshall Field & Co., 646 F.2d 271 (7th Cir. 1981); In re Republic Nat’l Life Ins. Co., 73 F.R.D. 658 (S.D.N.Y. 1977); Winokur v. Bell Federal Sav. & Loan Assoc., 560 F.2d 271, reh’g denied, 562 F.2d 1034 (7th Cir. 1977); Adams v. Jewel, 63 Ill.2d 336 (Ill. 1976); Mathews Fund, Inc. v. Colwell Co., 564 F.2d 780 (7th Cir. 1977); In re TransOcean Tender Offer Sec. Litig., 427 F. Supp. 1208 (N.D. Ill. 1977), 427 F. Supp. 1211 (N.D. Ill. 1977), 455. F. Supp. 999 (N.D. Ill. 1978), 415 F. Supp. 382 (J.P.M.L. 1976), and 78 F.R.D. 682 (N.D. Ill. 1978); King v. Kansas City Southern Indus., Inc., 519 F.2d 20 (7th Cir. 1975), aff’g 56 F.R.D. 96 (N.D. Ill. 1976); Girsh v. Jepson, 521 F.2d 153 (3d Cir. 1975), rev’g 64 F.R.D. 86 (E.D. Pa. 1974); Swanson v. Am. Consumers Indus., Inc., 415 F.2d 1326 (7th Cir. 1969), 475 F.2d 516 (7th Cir. 1973), and 517 F.2d 555 (7th Cir. 1975).
Among Mr. Susman’s unreported cases are Brody v. Occidental Petroleum Corp., No. 1-823 (Del. Ch. 1990) (challenging corporate donation to art museum); Windsor Indus. Sec. Litig., No. 85-4196 (N.D. Ill. 1990) (reaching $2.5 million settlement as lead counsel); Atlanta West Hosp. Bondholders Litig., No. 76-388 (S.D. Ohio 1983) (winning $19.3 million jury award as co-lead counsel).
Mr. Susman is a 1958 graduate of Northwestern Law School, where he was a member of the Law Review and a member of the Order of the Coif.
Matthew Heffner - mheffner@shhllp.com
Matthew Heffner's focus is on complex and class action litigation. Prior to becoming a partner with Susman Heffner & Hurst LLP, Mr. Heffner served as the senior associate for Susman, Watkins & Wylie, LLP. Mr. Heffner has litigated a wide array of class actions, including:
In re: Bank One Securities Litigation/First Chicago Shareholders Claims, N.D. Ill., No. 00 C 767 (J. Andersen). To date, this is the largest known securities fraud settlement ($120 million) in the Seventh Circuit that did not involve a financial restatement or SEC investigation. Mr. Heffner deposed dozens of witnesses and corporate officers across the nation, and briefed and argued unique and novel issues regarding loss causation and the nature of damages under the federal securities laws. In addition, Mr. Heffner was designated Plaintiffs' Liaison Counsel by the Court for the three separate class actions in that matter.
Nelson v. UBS Global Asset Management, N.D. Ill.,No.03 CV 6446 (J. Kocoras). Mr. Heffner was a member of the trial team that settled this ERISA class action for $7 million. Plaintiffs alleged breaches of fiduciary duty in investment practices by one of the world's largest institutional investment managers. The case settled on the first day of trial.
In re: PNB Holding Co. Shareholder Litigation, Del. Ch., No. 028-N (V.C. Strine). Mr. Heffner recently served as lead trial counsel in a shareholder action challenging the S-Corporation conversion of a community bank in downstate Illinois. Plaintiffs won the case, convincing the Court that an S-Corporation conversion that effectively squeezes out minority shareholders is a conflict of interest when the directors will still remain as shareholders of the corporation. The Delaware Chancery Court awarded $1.22 million to the Plaintiffs as a result of the conflict of interest and court-determined fair value of the stock at issue.
Mr. Heffner currently serves as the co-chair of the Rule 23 Subcommittee for the ABA's Class Action and Derivative Suit division. He has also been admitted to the Federal Trial Bar and is a member of the Chicago Bar Association.
Mr. Heffner is admitted in the following jurisdictions:
Young v. Verizon’s Bell Atlantic Cash Balance Plan, No. 05-7314 (N.D. Ill.) (Denlow, Mag. J.). Mr. Hurst is currently litigating this ERISA class action alleging that Bell Atlantic made a multi-billion dollar error in calculating plan participants’ opening balances when it converted from a traditional pension plan to a cash balance plan.
Schumacher v. AK Steel, No. 09-794 (S.D. Ohio) (Beckwith, J.). Mr. Hurst is currently litigating this ERISA class action stemming from AK Steel's failure to perform a "whipsaw calculation" when converting employees' benefits. The case raises novel issues of whether a release obtained from class members, purporting to release "all claims," can validly waive the right to ERISA benefits when the fiduciary failed to inform participants of pending litigation.
Conducted litigation against Arthur Anderson, during liquidation, to preserve retirement benefits of retired partners. Despite the threat of impending bankruptcy and absence of ERISA protections, litigation allowed clients to recover a portion of their benefits.
Glenn Hara - ghara@shhllp.com
Glenn Hara focuses on ERISA, securities, and constitutional class actions. Mr. Hara is currently the Chair of the Chicago Bar Association Class Litigation Committee. His litigation experience includes the following:
William Gotfryd - wgotfryd@shhllp.com
William Gotfryd has served as plaintiffs' counsel and class counsel in a multitude of complex litigation settings. His primary field of concentration has been federal and state antitrust law, both as a business counselor and representing businesses and consumers in litigation. His typical clients have ranged in size from small family franchises to the Unilever family of companies.
Mr. Gotfryd's antitrust litigation expertise has included civil antitrust damage class actions in industries as diverse as the Phonograph Records and Tapes, Industrial Gases, Glass Containers for commercial bottling, Brand Name Prescription Drugs, Citric Acid, High Fructose Corn Syrup, and other industries. In active litigation, Mr. Gotfryd has helped recover well over a billion dollars from price fixers.
In addition to an active private practice, Mr. Gotfryd has been an Adjunct Professor and Lecturer in antitrust law at Loyola University Chicago School of Law Health Care Institute (L.L.M. program) and he still regularly guest lectures in complex litigation procedure in law school civil procedure classes and class action seminars. He is a past Director of Special Projects to Loyola University Chicago Law School, Institute for Consumer Antitrust Studies, and he remains a member of its Advisory Board. Mr. Gotfryd is also a current member of the Drug and Health Industry Sub-Committee of the American Antitrust Institute.
Mr. Gotfryd is the author of Consumer Guide To Antitrust, Institute for Consumer Antitrust Studies website [www.luc.edu]; (with James B. Sloan) Eliminating The 100 Mile Limit for Civil Trial Witnesses: A Proposal To Modernize Civil Trial Practice, 140 F.R.D. 33 (1992) also in Vol. 38 No. 2 Trial Lawyers Guide 83 (1994); and Hunt v. Blasius: A Gap In The Application Of The Illinois Strict Products Liability Theory, 11 Loy.U.L.J. 147 (1979). He is also the author of published opinions in attorney discipline cases as a former Panel Chair, Hearing Board of Illinois Supreme Court Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission.
Mr. Gotfryd is admitted to the bars of the following courts:
• Illinois
• United States Supreme Court
• U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
• U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
• U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
• U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
• U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
• U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
• United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois
• United States District Court Eastern District of Wisconsin
• United States District Court Northern District of Oklahoma
In 1977, Mr. Gotfryd obtained his Bachelor of Science degree from Loyola University Chicago (honors program) with a double major of anthropology and psychology. He obtained his Juris Doctor degree in 1980 from the Loyola University Chicago School of Law, where he was a member of its law review.
©2008 Susman Heffner & Hurst LLP * 20 S. Clark Street, Chicago, Illinois 60603 * 312-346-3466