Minimizing our clients’ expense and risk is the main goal of our powerful motion practice. When handling contract and quasi-contract disputes, Liskow lawyers use our extensive experience and know-how to target the issue that will win the case.
Most often, our clients want us to get the case dismissed as early as possible, whether on pleadings, before the costly discovery, or at the summary motion stage. Even if the case proceeds to trial, at our client’s request, we position it for the best possible settlement terms while at the same time being prepared for trial.
We help our clients, who range from companies of all sizes to individuals, with complex contract disputes, including purchase and supply agreements, distribution contracts, licensing contracts, indemnity and insurance agreements, construction contracts, employment contracts, real estate and equipment leases, real estate purchase agreements, supply and service contracts, franchise contracts, professional services contracts, commercial lending agreements, and contracts related to mergers and acquisitions.
Liskow also has more extensive handling quasi-contract claims than most firms we know, including, unjust enrichment, detrimental reliance, quantum meruit, third party beneficiary contract claims, abuse of rights, payment of a thing not due, and more. We routinely get such claims dismissed via pre-trial motions. We also have ample experience successfully asserting breach of contract and quasi-contract claims on behalf of our clients.
Persuasive arguments that make sense
Liskow’s surgical precision in zeroing in on the pivotal issues is what secures our win at the earliest stage possible. We mercilessly discard issues that are difficult to win and not worth the risk for our client, instead focusing on those where we can present the law and the fact. Our motions and briefs focus on the key facts, evidentiary support, and essential legal principles – no fluff nor loopholes. In our experience, most judges have their minds made up before oral arguments – which means that our main tool is the persuasive briefing submitted in advance of the hearing. In one such case, we obtained a unanimous reversal by the Fifth Circuit, which held that unpatented products can be given patent-like protection by a common contract clause – with precedent-setting implications for companies seeking to protect their product designs.
Because we are fluent in the elements for each cause of action, we focus immediately on our opponent’s weakest link. For example, does the agreement at issue comply with the legal prerequisites for an enforceable contract? Does the contract waive the particular type of damages sought by our opponent? Has our opponent satisfied the contractual requirements for asserting a claim? The list goes on and we are intimately familiar with it.
We have plenty of trial experience if need be, but our focus is on achieving the most optimal result for our client, which typically means a favorable resolution in advance of trial. We know how to do that.
Smart, effective staffing
There is both art and science in staffing our teams. If a partner is intimately familiar with the law, we don’t run up the bill with unnecessary associate research assignments. While we have the resources to scale up for a case that needs additional resources, we avoid over-staffing and typically use strategically smaller teams guided by a partner who is laser-focused on your case.