Experience
    • Constitutional challenge to eminent domain provision of Natural Gas Act
      Represent multiple industry associations, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, in connection with appeal involving a state’s constitutional challenge to interstate natural gas pipeline companies’ use of the federal eminent domain power to acquire state-owned property interests.

      International arbitration in Chile
      Represent owner of tunnel complex through Andes Mountains for hydroelectric power generation in ICC arbitration regarding contractor’s abandonment of work.

      Representation of growers in challenges to federal authorizations for herbicides
      Represent multiple national growers associations in connection with challenges to federal authorizations applicable to herbicides that are important to the growers’ successful operations.

      Toxic-tort litigation
      Represent a national chemicals company in connection with toxic tort litigation brought by former plant workers.

      Pharmaceutical litigation
      Represent a national pharmaceutical company in connection with national mass tort litigation.

      Occupational tax cases
      Represented online travel company priceline.com in defense of numerous occupational tax cases and audits across the country. 

      Breach of anti-piracy and confidentiality covenants
      Represented a commercial insurance broker in the broker’s lawsuit against former employees for breach of anti-piracy and confidentiality covenants, and the employees’ new employer for intentional interference with contractual and business relations. The trial court entered a $1 million sanction in favor of the broker as a result of discovery abuses committed by the defendants. After years of contentious litigation, including two attempts at appellate relief, the parties reached a settlement on the day the tortious-inference trial was to begin.  

      Fallin v. City of Huntsville, Alabama, Nos. 1141155, 1141279, 1150244 (Ala. 2016)
      Represented the City of Huntsville in these consolidated appeals involving alleged constitutional claims. This appeal involved an allegation that the City of Huntsville overpaid for real property that the city indisputably had the right to purchase. Bradley’s team obtained a dismissal of the claims in the trial court, which ruling was affirmed by the Alabama Supreme Court.

      Gulf Restoration Network, Inc. v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, No. 16-15545 (11th Cir. 2016)
      Represented a major natural gas pipeline company in this lawsuit, which challenged the pipeline’s required federal authorization. The lawsuit ended when the challengers voluntarily withdrew their claims after the court denied their request to stay construction and operation of the natural gas pipeline.

      General Medicine PC v. HealthSouth Corporation (Ala. Cir. Ct. 2015)
      Defended HealthSouth in litigation in Alabama brought by a Michigan company seeking to force HealthSouth to pay a $376 million judgment entered in federal court in Michigan in favor of the plaintiff and against a former subsidiary of HealthSouth.

      United American Resources, Inc. v. United Land and Jim Walter Resources, No. 1100539 (Ala. 2012) 
      Helped secure a victory in the Alabama Supreme Court in this commercial litigation case involving allegations of tortious interference, wantonness, and unjust enrichment. The underlying dispute arose from a failed attempt by the plaintiff to purchase coal mining companies. The plaintiff ultimately claimed over $50 million in damages. Following extensive discovery, summary judgment was obtained from the trial court and affirmed by the Alabama Supreme Court.

      Oak Grove Resources, LLC, et al. v. White, et al., 86 So. 3d 963 (Ala. 2011) 
      Obtained a significant appellate victory for the operator of the Concord Coal Preparation Plant in this toxic tort class action. After the parties settled the case, the plaintiffs sought and obtained further relief from the trial court. Oak Grove Resources, together with Cliffs North American Coal, appealed to the Alabama Supreme Court, which reversed the order granting further relief.

      T-Mobile South, LLC v. Bonet, 85 So. 3d 963 (Ala. 2011)
      Represented Alabama’s 911 Board in this litigation; Bradley partners in the firm’s Huntsville office served as deputy attorneys general in this case. The Alabama Supreme Court unanimously affirmed a $2 million judgment in favor of Alabama's 911 Board against T-Mobile for failing to pay 911 fees on prepaid cellular phones. The case, besides definitively resolving an important statutory issue, resulted in over $8 million going to the state's 911 system, considering escrowed service charges from other cellular carriers.

      Cooper Tire & Rubber Co. v. Phillips County, Cir. Ct., 381 S.W.3d 67 (Ark. 2011)
      Assisted Cooper Tire & Rubber Company in an effort to prevent the public disclosure of its most valuable trade secrets. Bradley was instrumental in obtaining a writ of certiorari from the Arkansas Supreme Court vacating a trial court order compelling Cooper Tire to respond to more than 450 discovery requests for 20 years’ worth of trade secrets with no confidentiality protections. This precedent will provide substantial assistance both to litigants seeking to protect trade secrets and to parties seeking extraordinary relief in discovery disputes with constitutional implications.

      Badger v. Southern Farm Bureau Life Ins. Co., 612 F.3d 1334 (11th Cir. July 30, 2010)
      Southern Life was sued for securities fraud arising out of its purchase of a debt instrument. At trial, Southern Life (then represented by different counsel) suffered an adverse jury verdict and a $31.7 million judgment; by the time the appeal was decided, the judgment, with interest, had ballooned to approximately $45 million. Served on the team that handled Southern Life’s appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, which reversed. In addition to negating a $45 million liability for the client, the case also addressed a novel securities-law issue. Reflecting its legal and practical importance, the case prompted amicus curiae briefs by both the Washington Legal Foundation and a diverse group of corporate and securities law professors from Yale, Georgetown, Michigan, and Northwestern.