Our Business Litigation Practice

We have often represented companies and their officers and directors in defending claims under both state and federal securities laws. We have represented businesses litigating antitrust claims concerning matters such as the monopolization of gasoline distribution in Connecticut, monopolization of wholesale milk prices throughout the United States, and worker's compensation insurance in numerous states throughout the country. We have also represented large national and international financial institutions in lending and commercial transactions, as well as defending lender liability claims. And, we have represented manufacturers and other businesses in a wide variety of commercial disputes.

Robert Izard, who heads our business litigation practice, is the former Chair of the Commercial and Business Litigation Committee of the ABA Litigation Section. He has successfully litigated numerous major cases on behalf of business clients, including the successful defense of a large Canadian manufacturer in a seven-month trial in Federal Court, and the representation of a national franchisor in several cases brought by franchisees.

Obviously, there are many fine lawyers in the market. Two factors distinguish Izard Nobel. First, because of our extensive experience prosecuting claims on behalf of Plaintiffs, we possess a rare understanding of the economics and incentives that drive Plaintiffs' lawyers – we know what makes them tick. Therefore, we are uniquely positioned to navigate the complex environment within which Plaintiffs' lawyers function and to identify and exploit the interests of Plaintiffs' lawyers to achieve a successful and expeditious resolution.

Second, while our attorneys have experience in some of the State's, and the country's, best and largest corporate defense firms, we have a small firm's ability to offer clients maximum flexibility to meet their needs. We are not wedded to the “billable hour” and embrace a wide variety of alternative billing arrangements. We prefer a compensation arrangement that best aligns our interests with the interests of our clients. And, because of our size, we are not precluded from achieving this goal as a result of institutional restrictions. We can and do agree to any reasonable compensation arrangements that work best for our clients.