University of Chicago Law School,
University of Miami,
B.A., with honors, 1987
Phi Beta Kappa
Public Counsel's Wiley Manuel Award for Pro Bono Services
Thompson Coburn LLP
Kaye Scholer LLP
Alschuler, Grossman & Pines
Dewey Ballantine LLP
Constitutional Rights Foundation
Lawyers Advisory Council
Mock Trial Coach
Los Angeles County Bar Association-- Trial Attorney Project
Volunteer Prosecutor, prosecuting several criminal jury trial to verdict
Clients know Julian as an experienced and highly effective litigator who finds creative and novel approaches to all of the cases he handles, without sacrificing efficiency or cost-effectiveness.
A partner in Thompson Coburn's Los Angeles office and a member of the firm's Business Litigation and Antitrust Practice groups, Julian has successfully represented a wide range of clients, from major multinational corporations and Fortune 50 companies to small businesses and entrepreneurs, in antitrust and other high-stakes litigation. For over 25 years, his aggressive defense of his clients, large and small, has produced a track record of success.
Julian has decades of experience in a wide range of antitrust and unfair competition cases. Julian is currently defending one of the world's largest oil companies in a class action alleging price fixing claims. He also continues to represent a large muIti-national semiconductor manufacturer in connection with dozens of civil antitrust cases filed in the wake of guilty pleas to federal criminal antitrust violations by several major suppliers of computer memory. The civil cases included an MDL and individual and class actions in numerous states and foreign countries, state attorney general claims, opt-out litigation, and actions by competition authorities in several other countries.
In addition to being an experienced antitrust litigator, Julian has handled cases involving a wide range of industries and types of claims, including shareholder disputes involving closely held businesses, consumer class actions, product liability, fraud, breach of contract, employment, entertainment, intellectual property, false advertising and unfair competition. Julian has tried cases before juries, judges and arbitration panels. He also has handled appeals on behalf of parties and amici curiae in various states and federal circuits, including the Third, Sixth and Ninth circuits and United States Supreme Court.
Defended ExxonMobil in consumer class actions in California state and federal courts alleging claims for unfair competition, false advertising and fraud, including a class action that alleged that multi-grade pumps can overstate the octane grade in certain circumstances. In that case, the court granted motions to dismiss based on a statutory "safe harbor" for regulated activities, and federal preemption of state regulation of octane disclosures. The Ninth Circuit upheld the resulting judgment on appeal.
Defended semiconductor manufacturer in actions in numerous jurisdictions in the United States and worldwide arising out of a Department of Justice investigation into claims of price fixing in the sale of dynamic random access memory ("DRAM"). These included class actions brought by both direct and indirect purchasers, claims brought by opt-outs from those classes, foreign purchasers, state attorneys general, and consumers and businesses in class actions filed in numerous states, as well as proceedings in Canada, Brazil, South Korea, the United Kingdom, and the European Union, and have resulted insignificant federal district court and appellate rulings concerning, among other things, limitations on standing for indirect purchasers and application of the Sherman Act to foreign purchasers.
Defended Texaco against a large group of service station operators challenging its marketing and dealer practices based on antitrust and fraud claims. The court granted summary judgment on the claims of price discrimination and unlawful vertical restraints under federal and California state law. Then, after a month-long jury trial, Texaco won a complete defense verdict on the remaining claims. The judgment was upheld on appeal.
Defended ExxonMobil in a putative class action in the Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas Island alleging various false advertising, antitrust, and consumer protection claims arising from the sale of gasoline. The trial court granted motions to dismiss all claims. The Commonwealth Supreme Court upheld the dismissal of all claims except a claim alleging price fixing, which was remanded for further proceedings in the trial court, including application of a new pleading standard in the Commonwealth
Represented Marvel Entertainment in longstanding disputes over motion picture production and distribution rights in its signature Spider-Man character. After taking over the case after many years of litigation, Julian was instrumental in quickly obtaining summary judgment on most claims based on a variety of novel defenses, including the "strong arm" power of bankruptcy trustees. Marvel then defeated the remaining claims in a bench trial, paving the way for one of the most successful franchises in motion picture history.
Defended ExxonMobil in a lawsuit in federal court in New Mexico alleging state and federal antitrust claims arising out of its participation in a standard setting body. The court granted motions to dismiss based on failure to adequately allege antitrust violations in connection with ExxonMobil's alleged activities in the standard setting process.
Represented founder and majority shareholder of closely held franchise business in series of related actions arising out of efforts to squeeze him out of the companies, and related claims for breach of fiduciary duty, fraud, and conversion.
Defended Texaco in jury trial against former service station dealer alleging fraud and breach of contract claims arising out of its exercise of a "right of first refusal" upon sale of the station. After week-long trial, the jury rejected the dealer's claim for damages and awarded damages to Texaco. Julian also defended Texaco in several other dealer disputes, including claims under the Petroleum Marketing Practices Act.
Defended Mobil in jury trial on whistleblower claims by former refinery employee for wrongful termination in violation of public policy based on allegations his employment was terminated for complaining about safety and environmental issues. The court granted motion for judgment at the close of plaintiff's case.
Represented Astrium, one of the world's largest manufacturers of satellites, in litigation with various suppliers alleging claims for fraud and misrepresentation arising out of gradual failure of solar panels on several communications satellites after launch.
Represented various aircraft leasing companies in lawsuits against lessees of aircraft for nonpayment of rent and other amounts and for repossession of aircraft, resulting in judgments in the millions of dollars for his clients.
Represented private equity fund sponsors in connection with litigation with investors in privately held manufacturing company, including claims of fraud and breach of contract.
Represented consultant in successful efforts to recover finders' and consulting fee in connection with multi-million investments in publicly held nutrition supplement supplier.
"Power and Responsibility- Avoiding the Risk of Personal Liability";
Los Angeles Business Journal, July 9, 2008
Co-presenter, In-house Counsel Antitrust Update of the ABA Section of Antitrust Law;
Corporate Counseling Committee
Although we would like to hear from you, we cannot represent you until we know that doing so will not create a conflict of interest. Also, we cannot treat unsolicited information as confidential. Accordingly, please do not send us any information about any matter that may involve you until you receive a written statement from us that we represent you (an ‘engagement letter’).
By clicking the ‘ACCEPT’ button, you agree that we may review any information you transmit to us. You recognize that our review of your information, even if you submitted it in a good faith effort to retain us, and, further, even if you consider it confidential, does not preclude us from representing another client directly adverse to you, even in a matter where that information could and will be used against you. Please click the ‘ACCEPT’ button if you understand and accept the foregoing statement and wish to proceed.