state court

Mark Meadows’s Lawyer Pressed on Bid to Move Georgia Election Case to Federal Court

A lawyer for Mark Meadows, the White House chief of staff under former President Donald J. Trump, faced tough questions from a panel of judges on Friday as Mr. Meadows renewed his bid to move a Georgia election interference case from state court to federal court.

The panel of three appeals court judges heard brief oral arguments from a Georgia prosecutor and a lawyer for Mr. Meadows over the jurisdiction of the case, in which Mr. Meadows is accused of working with a group of people to overturn Mr. Trump’s 2020 election loss in the state.

The judges asked sharp questions of both sides but seemed particularly skeptical of the arguments advanced by Mr. Meadows, who claims that the allegations against him concern actions he took as a federal officer and thus should be dealt with in federal court.

Moving the case to federal court would give Mr. Meadows advantages, including a jury pool drawn from a wider geographic area with moderately more support for Mr. Trump. But in September, a federal judge sided with the prosecutors, writing that Mr. Meadows’s conduct, as outlined in the indictment, was “not related to his role as White House chief of staff or his executive branch authority.”

Mr. Meadows appealed that decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit, where the three-judge panel — consisting of two Democrat-appointed judges and one Republican-appointed judge — peppered lawyers with questions on Friday in an ornate courtroom in downtown Atlanta.

In her questioning of Mr. Meadows’s lawyer, Judge Nancy Abudu, an appointee of President Biden, said that Mr. Meadows’s own testimony, in August, had seemed to broadly define what actions were part of his official duties as chief of staff.

“The testimony that was provided essentially didn’t provide any outer limits to what

Read the rest

State attorney general actions: Strategies for venue and settlement differ from typical litigation

February 16, 2023 – Litigation against a state attorney general can be catastrophic for the company on the receiving end of the confidential regulatory investigation that precipitated the filing of a complaint. When a state attorney general makes the previously unknown regulatory investigation public, a company will likely face negative publicity, customer or consumer questions, outrage, regulatory scrutiny, and private lawsuits. And that is before taking into account the business opportunities, employee recruitment efforts, goodwill in the marketplace, and valuations that are all likely to suffer in the wake of an investigation being made public.

Many companies and their outside counsel mistakenly believe that the same tactics they employ for typical litigation against the plaintiffs’ bar or commercial competitors would be just as effective when litigating a state attorney general action. Relying on these same tactics, however, could cost companies dearly because litigation initiated by state attorneys general differs significantly from litigation initiated by private plaintiffs.

Latest Updates

View 2 more stories

In the first part of this two-part series, we discuss three reasons why litigators must approach state attorney general actions differently than typical litigation:

(1) Unlike private plaintiffs, state attorneys general can and usually do investigate companies before filing a lawsuit.

(2) State attorneys general are motivated by public policy considerations.

(3) Changes within state attorneys general offices can affect the direction of a suit.

There are two additional reasons why litigators should approach these two kinds of actions differently. State attorneys general may have procedural advantages in that venue normally remains in state court; and they could have leverage in settlement discussions when civil penalties were available. Both concern the way litigators must engage with state attorneys general in the litigation trenches.

Litigation involving state attorneys general will almost always take place in state

Read the rest