PRACTICAL, SOLUTIONS-ORIENTED REPRESENTATION AIMED AT SWIFT RESOLUTIONS
Butler Snow’s governmental litigation team has a reputation for success in cases involving government entities at the federal, state and local levels. Our litigation team includes attorneys from various practice areas, including commercial and general litigation groups and, when needed, from our business department, which includes attorneys who have handled all types of government-related matters. We have represented numerous counties, municipalities and public officials, and we have worked closely with county sheriffs, private prison facilities and private insurers in governmental liability cases.
IN-DEPTH KNOWLEDGE LEADS TO FASTER SUCCESS
Many of these cases require specialized knowledge regarding protocol or the unique statutory requirements that must be met before pursuing a government agency. Because of our deep experience and broad government backgrounds, we can offer our clients a variety of ways to move forward along with an intelligent assessment of the risks for each choice.
Several members of our firm have direct experience working in government or with governmental agencies. These individuals offer our litigation team the additional perspective sometimes needed to quickly access the correct government officials and policymakers, we fully understand the respective areas of responsibility for the hundreds of positions within government offices and agencies.
Few firms can compete with our deep bench when it comes to individuals that have actual government experience and ongoing relationships with public representatives at all levels.
HEAD-TO-HEAD LITIGATION—WHERE EXPERIENCE COUNTS
While our team takes an aggressive approach in our litigation role, we also understand the value of looking at other ways to achieve victory for our clients. Put simply, we look toward results—taking innovative approaches when necessary to accomplish our client’s goals with the least amount of wasted time and expenses. For example, when our homeowner clients opposed a landfill project, but found themselves up against a board of supervisors that overwhelmingly favored the project, we relied on our knowledge of election cycles as an additional tool. Instead of proceeding to court at the earliest possible moment, we waited for the opportunity for the board composition to change, which ultimately resulted in lessening the obstacles standing in the way of victory.
Our attorneys with governmental backgrounds often find that their intimate knowledge of various agencies helps us fashion an expedient solution to litigation matters. For example, we were able to efficiently resolve a potentially expensive litigation matter regarding contracts worth millions. Our process knowledge allowed us to determine that the agency in question did not properly follow the established procurement protocol—so we obtained a victory for our client without going to court.
Our approach always focuses first on leveraging our team’s prior experience in government, as well as its strong, trust-based relationships with government decision makers and executives, to find a satisfactory early solution. Only if that fails, do we apply our litigation experience to defending our clients’ interests through the courts.
Maintaining a creative approach to our client’s goals, even if that doesn’t rely solely on winning in the courtroom, is our strength.
UNIFIED COLLABORATIVE CULTURE
Butler Snow’s significant governmental knowledge and connections helps our litigation clients move matters along swiftly largely because our attorneys—across the firm—work collaboratively and seamlessly with each other.
We easily and effectively draw on the expertise of our colleagues from across practice areas and across geographic locations. For litigation matters, this means we can draw on attorney expertise in practically any area of law. Those experts often provide the texture needed to help ensure that our work is effective and efficient.
- Ronald Adams Contractor v. Mississippi Transportation Commission, 777 So. 2d 649 (Miss. 2000), Trial and Appellate Counsel.
- Farrell Construction Company v. Jefferson Parish, Louisiana, 896 F. 2d 136 (5th Cir. 1990), Trial and Appellate Counsel.
- Ronald Adams Contractor v. The United States, 2003 WL 459650 (Fed. Cir. 2003), Trial and Appellate Counsel.
- Michael Construction Company v. Florida Department of Transportation, (Leon County, Florida Circuit Court), Trial Counsel.
- Perkins v. McAdams, 234 So.3d 413 (Miss. 2017) (Election Contest).
- Gunn v. Hughes, 210 So.3d 969 (Miss. 2017) (Brief of Amicus Curiae – Hon. Tate Reeves).
- McDaniel v. Cochran, 158 So.3d 992 (Miss. 2014) (Election Contest – Sen. Thad Cochran).
- Jackson HMA, LLC v. Miss. State Dep’t. of Health, et al., 98 So. 3d 980 (Miss. 2012) (agency authority to determine application of CON Laws to University Hospital).
- Bay St. Louis – Waveland School District v. FEMA, CBCA 1739 (December 8, 2009) and (February 1, 2010) (first Hurricane Katrina FEMA arbitration hearing under ARRA).