Trial List
(2003-2008)
Washington, D.C. Office Gordon A. Coffee
(202) 282-5741
gcoffee@winston.com
In re Episcopal Church Litigation
Served as lead trial counsel for a multi-firm team representing former Episcopal
congregations in Virginia in a battle with the Episcopal Church over property
with an estimated worth of more than $40 million. Successfully led the team
through two bench trials, with the trial court issuing a series of decisions
affirming the right of the congregations to leave the Episcopal Church while
retaining their property.
Midwestern Energy Company
Led defense of a Midwestern utility against a claim that it was contractually
obligated under a power purchase agreement to provide customers with
capacity credits worth more than $30 million. After a hearing and several
briefs, an arbitration panel ruled in favor of the utility on all major issues.
Tennessee Gas Pipeline (In re USGen New England)
Was lead counsel in defending a $41 million claim against USGen arising from
its rejection of a long-term gas transportation contract. The case raised novel
issues regarding the calculation of future damages and projected mitigation of
those damages. After the pipeline alleged that the filed rate doctrine controlled
the calculation of damages, we secured a declaratory judgment from the FERC
stating that state law governed. Ultimately, after extensive discovery and a six-
day bench trial, the trial court entered favorable factual findings, reducing the
claim to less than $15 million. The case ultimately settled for $9 million.
In re Enron Power Marketing, Inc.
Successfully defended a large international consulting firm against allegations
that the firm’s employees had withheld evidence during a Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission investigation into Enron’s activities. After an
investigation and a series of technical conferences and hearings, the FERC
affirmed a finding by its chief administrative law judge of no wrongdoing by
any of the consulting firm’s employees.
Attala Generating Co, LLC v. Attala Energy Company, LCC
Acted as lead counsel in defending a $477 million breach of contract claim
arising from termination of a long-term tolling agreement with a power plant
owner. The case presented complicated issues regarding the calculation of
damages, such as projected future energy prices, the likelihood of carbon
taxes, and appropriate discount rates. Managed the case through a one-week
arbitration hearing and post-hearing briefs and argument. The case settled
favorably before the arbitration panel issued its award.
Attorney advertising materials
TransCanada PipeLines, Ltd. (In re USGen New England)
Served as lead counsel in defending a $51 million breach of contract claim
arising from USGen’s termination of a natural gas transportation contract with
TransCanada PipeLines Ltd. The dispute over TransCanada’s damage
calculation centered on its right to invoke lost volume seller status and whether
its recoupment of losses from other customers barred any recovery. Directed
the case through discovery and a nine-day bench trial. The case is awaiting
decision.
U.S. Ship Management v. Maersk Line Limited
Shared duties as lead counsel in an arbitration proceeding involving contract
termination rights valued at $25 million. After an evidentiary hearing and
extensive briefing, the panel issued an award in favor of our client on all
points. Also obtained a preliminary injunction from a federal court in aid of
arbitration.
National Housing Partnership v. Municipal Capital Appreciation Partners
Lead counsel in a dispute arising over foreclosures on low-income housing
projects in Maryland and Virginia. Won motion for summary judgment, later
affirmed on appeal, extinguishing the claim that our client was liable for
partner loans made by NHP to fund improvements to one of the projects.
Further led the team through a seven-day bench trial centering on the
reasonableness of the foreclosure auction. The case ultimately settled.
Sporicidin Int’l v. Baker & Hostetler
Co-led a team in defending national law firm against a $70 million legal
malpractice claim. At the conclusion of a nine-week trial, a District of
Columbia jury found in favor of the law firm on the malpractice claim, finding
that none of its lawyers was negligent in representing the former client before
various federal agencies.
Jennings v. Cedar Cliff
After contentious discovery and a four-day jury trial, secured a verdict that the
defendant breached a commercial lease claim and that our client had not
wrongfully evicted the defendant from the premises.
Miller & Miller v. Modesto Broadcast Group
Defended a partnership against a fee claim brought by the partnership’s former
lawyer. Secured a defense verdict after a four-day jury trial.
Mark Barron, O.D. v. Vision Service Plan
Represented an optometrist in his effort to remain on the provider panel of the
nation’s largest vision care insurer. Obtained a preliminary injunction from a
federal judge preventing VSP from terminating Dr. Barron’s membership. The
case ultimately settled.
American Lithotripsy Society v. Thompson
Managed an effort on behalf of a group of urologists and affiliated professionals
to enjoin the Department of Health and Human Services from enforcing Stark
II regulations with respect to lithotripsy. Ultimately, obtained a declaratory
judgment and permanent injunction against the government, thereby
preserving our client’s contractual relationships that were adversely impacted
by the regulations.
Shuffle Master, Inc. v. VendingData Corp.
Defended a company in a patent infringement action over card-shuffling
machines. Briefed and argued a Markman hearing that resulted in a favorable
patent construction, and wrote the briefs that persuaded the Federal Circuit to
first stay and later reverse a preliminary injunction entered by the trial court.
Lee Technologies, Inc. v. Virginia Department of Taxation
Led an effort to secure refund of sales tax paid on sales to an entity that went
bankrupt. The tax authority initially refused to issue a refund to anyone other
than the customer, but after several months of litigation, it refunded the sales
tax in full, with interest.
The above is a list of the more notable cases. In all, Mr. Coffee has acted as
first or second chair in over 30 civil and criminal trials and arbitration and
administrative hearings, most of which resulted in positive outcomes. He
further has handled numerous other civil and criminal disputes and criminal
and regulatory investigations that were favorably resolved short of trial. He has
argued more than 80 motions before state and federal courts.
Practice Areas
Antitrust International Arbitration
Appellate and Critical Motions Labor and Employment Relations
Banking Lease Finance
Corporate Governance Litigation
Corporate Internal Investigations Maritime
Corporate Lending Mergers and Acquisitions
e-Discovery and Electronic Information Private Equity
Employee Benefits and Executive Product Liability
Compensation
Public Finance
Energy
Real Estate
Environmental
Restructuring and Insolvency
Financial Services
Securities
Government Contracts
Securitization
Governmental Relations
CHARLOTTE and Regulatory Affairs Tax
CHICAGO Health Care Trusts and Estates
GENEVA Intellectual Property White-Collar Criminal Defense
HONG KONG
LONDON About Winston & Strawn
LOS ANGELES Winston & Strawn LLP is an international law firm with more than 1,000 attorneys among 12
offices in Charlotte, Chicago, Geneva, Hong Kong, London, Los Angeles, Moscow, New York,
MOSCOW Newark, Paris, San Francisco, and Washington, D.C. The exceptional depth and geographic reach
of our resources enable Winston & Strawn to manage virtually every type of business-related legal
NEW YORK
issue. We serve the needs of enterprises of all types and sizes, in both the private and the public
NEWARK sector. We understand that clients are looking for value beyond just legal expertise. With this in
mind, we work hard to understand the level of involvement our clients want from us. We take
PARIS time to learn about our clients’ organizations and their business objectives. And, we place
significant emphasis on technology and teamwork in an effort to respond quickly and effectively
SAN FRANCISCO
to our clients’ needs.
WASHINGTON, D.C. Please visit us at www.winston.com if you would like more information about our legal services,
our experience, or the industries we serve.
www.winston.com 1.09