future-focused

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.

Overview

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.

Notable Experience

  • Secured a dismissal on the pleadings without leave to amend in a case asserting breach of contract, detrimental reliance and unjust enrichment claims against our client, Restoration Hardware.
  • Represented Walter Oil & Gas Corporation in an action in which the plaintiff contractor sought more than $34.6 million based on claimed schedule delays and unanticipated and/or extra work incurred in fabricating the jacket of an oil & gas platform. Our team secured a successful motion for summary judgment that resulted in the dismissal of all of the plaintiff’s quasi-contract claims, successfully defeated the plaintiff’s Daubert motion and summary judgment motion, and ultimately positioned the case for a very favorable settlement. Gulf Marine Fabricators LP v. Walter Oil & Gas Corp., et al.,” No. 62-910 (24th Judicial District Court for the Parish of Plaquemines).
  • Retained on appeal and obtained full reversal of summary judgment against client in case involving enforceability of contractual restrictions on the use of its unpatented products. Luv n’ care, Ltd. v Groupo Rimar, a.k.a. Suavinex, 844 F.3d 442 (5th Cir. 2016).
  • Secured Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal of action involving the intersection of bankruptcy law and the La. Oil Well Lien Act. Bordelon Marine, LLC v. Devon Energy Co., et al., No. 14-1784, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 42814.
  • Secured the dismissal of all claims (breach of contract, unjust enrichment, and abuse of rights) against a major oil company at the pleadings stage without leave to amend, which was affirmed in full on appeal. Insulation Technologies, Inc. v. Industrial Labor & Equipment Servs., Inc., et al., 122 So. 3d 1146 (La. App. 4th Cir. 2013).

We are known for these strengths

  • Liskow routinely handles contract and quasi-contract disputes of all kinds, regularly obtaining pre-trial relief for our clients to avoid the time, expense, and risk of unnecessary trials
  • We have successfully represented plaintiffs and defendants in numerous complex contractual disputes at trial, on appeal, in settlement negotiations and before administrative agencies.
[Liskow] lawyers are very knowledgeable, prompt and fast and responsive to clients and the courts.
Chambers USA 2022, Band 2, Louisiana

Initial Contacts

Our Team

Shareholders

Of Counsel

Associates