Site Search
Professionals 467 results
Capabilities 81 results
Practice Area
Our nationally recognized Appellate & Critical Motions (ACM) Practice delivers sophisticated legal advocacy and analysis before trial, at trial, and on appeal. From state trial courts to the U.S. Supreme Court, our ACM attorneys identify, preserve, and present the critical legal issues that can make the difference between winning and losing.
Practice Area
Trial skills matter—even in a world where few disputes ever see the inside of a courtroom. Winston has built a reputation as a trial lawyers’ firm, featuring seasoned litigators who leverage extensive courtroom experience to meet our clients’ business and legal objectives. Our long history of taking cases to trial—and winning—provides our clients with tremendous settlement leverage with their adversaries, as well as a substantial likelihood of a favorable resolution if, and when, they go to trial.
Practice Area
Winston is a global powerhouse in the financial restructuring space. We offer a fully integrated team of attorneys across a global platform to guide clients through any distressed situation, whether the client is a savvy and interested investor, a creditor seeking to maximize its recovery, or a company aiming to proceed through a successful yet complex restructuring. We have advised stakeholders in some of the highest-profile restructurings and bankruptcy cases in the United States and beyond, including Caesars Entertainment, ResCap, the Los Angeles Dodgers, Enron, Lehman Brothers, Pacific Gas & Electric, LATAM Airlines, and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, among others.
Experience 57 results
Experience
|April 6, 2026
MLBPI’s Licensing Fight Ends in Victory and Settlement with DraftKings
Winston is representing MLB Players Inc. (MLBPI), which serves as the exclusive group licensing representative for all MLB (major league baseball) players. MLBPI sued several online sportsbook and mobile-betting platforms, including DraftKings, over their use of hundreds of MLB player images and likenesses without MLBPI’s consent.
Experience
|March 6, 2026
Transition Evergreen & Zencap Agreement: Winston Advises Transition Evergreen on Its Restructuring
Transition Evergreen, a company listed on Euronext Paris and dedicated to ecological transition and carbon-footprint reduction, has completed the first phase of its financial restructuring by carrying out, on February 26 and 27, 2026, the operations set out in a settlement agreement concluded with its main creditor, a private debt fund managed by Zencap Asset Management (“Zencap”).
Experience
|March 4, 2026
End of the Line: Winston Wins Unanimous Supreme Court Victory Against NJ Transit
In a unanimous decision authored by Justice Sotomayor, the U.S. Supreme Court held that NJ Transit is not an arm of the State of New Jersey and therefore is not entitled to sovereign immunity. The ruling means that plaintiffs injured by NJ Transit outside of New Jersey—such as in Pennsylvania and New York—may pursue claims in the courts of the states where their injuries occurred. The court adopted Winston’s position that state-created corporations that are formally liable for their own judgments are not arms of the state, reversing the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s dismissal of Cedric Galette’s negligence suit while affirming the New York Court of Appeals’ decision allowing Jeffrey Colt’s case to proceed.
Insights & News 2,885 results
Competition Corner
|April 29, 2026
|10+ Min Read
Recent settlements in DOJ antitrust enforcement actions have raised concerns on Capitol Hill and beyond about the adequacy of current safeguards governing the settlement of federal antitrust cases.
In the Media
|April 27, 2026
|1 Min Read
Amelia Garza-Mattia Discusses Supreme Court VPPA Case with Law360
Winston & Strawn's Amelia Garza-Mattia was quoted in a Law360 article discussing a closely watched U.S. Supreme Court case addressing the scope of the Video Privacy Protection Act (VPPA). The case follows the Sixth Circuit dismissal of a proposed class action brought by a Paramount Global newsletter subscriber who alleges that the company unlawfully shared users’ personal information with Facebook. After the Sixth Circuit found that the plaintiff was not a “consumer” under the VPPA because he did not subscribe to audiovisual content, the Supreme Court agreed to review the decision.
In the Media
|April 16, 2026
|4 Min Read
Winston Secures Transformative Antitrust Verdict for States in Live Nation and Ticketmaster Trial
A Winston & Strawn team, led by Jeffrey Kessler, secured an antitrust verdict on behalf of more than 30 states and the District of Columbia, with a Manhattan federal jury finding Live Nation Entertainment and Ticketmaster liable for violating federal and state antitrust laws in a decision that has the potential to transform the concert, music, and ticketing industry. The jury concluded that Ticketmaster unlawfully maintained a monopoly in the primary ticketing market for major concert venues and that Live Nation unlawfully monopolized the large amphitheater market, compelling artists to use its promotion services to access its venues. Jurors further found that this conduct resulted in higher ticket fees, leading to an approximate $1.72 overcharge per ticket for consumers.
Other Results 47 results
Site Content
What Is a Delaware Corporation?
A Delaware corporation is a company that is formed in the state of Delaware but can conduct business anywhere. Incorporating in Delaware has become widespread among large U.S. companies, including more than half of the S&P 500.
Site Content
The Video Privacy Protection Act (VPPA), enacted in 1988, prohibits videotape service providers from disclosing a customer’s personal information without express consent. Originally, the term “video tape service provider” targeted brick-and-mortar video rental stores as the statute was created in response to the public disclosure of a Supreme Court nominee's rental history.
Law Glossary
Removal is a procedural mechanism through which a case filed in state court may be transferred to federal court upon the request of one or more parties. Actions filed in state court over which a federal court would have original jurisdiction may be transferred—or removed—to federal court under the removal statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1441. Generally speaking, removal is possible if (1) the plaintiff(s) and defendant(s) are citizens of different states and the case places more than $75,000 in controversy (so-called “diversity” jurisdiction), or (2) the case turns on issues of federal law (so-called “federal question” jurisdiction). In many cases, defendants prefer to be in federal court, and so defendants often analyze early in the case whether removal is possible.