George W. Hicks, Jr., P.C.

Supreme Court of the United States

• Herrera v. Wyoming. On behalf of Native American seeking to validate federal treaty hunting right, successfully petitioned Supreme Court for certiorari, then argued case and obtained 5-4 decision holding that tribal treaty right was not abrogated by Wyoming statehood or creation of national forest.
• Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana, S. Ct. (2022). Supreme Court decision holding that Federal Arbitration Act preempts California rule invalidating waivers of arbitration of claims under California’s Private Attorneys General Act.  
• Parker Drilling Management Services, Ltd. v. Newton. Successfully represented energy company in petitioning for certiorari and subsequently obtaining unanimous decision holding that California wage-and-hour law does not displace federal Fair Labor Standards Act on offshore drilling platforms.
• Encino Motorcars, LLC v. Navarro. Successfully represented automobile dealership in case holding that Fair Labor Standards Act overtime-pay exemption does not apply to automobile service advisors.
• Merit Management, LP v. FTI Consulting, Inc. Successfully represented bankruptcy trustee in case unanimously affirming broad scope of trustee’s avoidance powers under Section 546 of Bankruptcy Code.
• Franchise Tax Board of California v. Hyatt. Successfully represented state entity in case addressing state sovereign immunity under U.S. Constitution; obtained vacatur of lower-court decision exposing state entity to $85 million in damages.
• Northwest, Inc. v. Ginsberg. Successfully represented air carrier in case unanimously holding that Airline Deregulation Act preempts state-law claims for violations of covenant of good faith and fair dealing.
• Retirement Plans Committee of IBM v. Jander. Successfully represented retirement plan fiduciaries in case unanimously vacating lower-court decision finding adequate pleading of ERISA duty-of-prudence violations.
• Sekhar v. United States. Successfully represented individual in case unanimously holding that extortion under federal Hobbs Act does not extend to coercive acts lacking obtainable property.
• Armour v. City of Indianapolis. Successfully represented municipality in case holding that taxation mechanism did not violate Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution.
• Smith v. Cain. Successfully represented individual in case holding that prosecutors violated disclosure obligations under Brady v. Maryland, requiring vacatur of conviction and subsequent vacatur of death penalty.

Federal Courts of Appeals

• United States v. North. On behalf of former executive of Wilmington Trust Bank, obtained Third Circuit decision reversing false-statement convictions and vacating securities-law convictions for new trial.
• Holland v. Westmoreland Coal Co. On behalf of coal company, obtained Fifth Circuit decision holding that Bankruptcy Code permits insolvent entities to modify federal Coal Act obligations.
• Snyder’s-Lance, Inc. v. Frito-Lay North America, Inc. On behalf of food company, obtained Fourth Circuit decision reversing dismissal of Lanham Act challenge to adverse Trademark Trial and Appeal Board decision on jurisdictional grounds.
• Immunex Corp. v. Sanofi-Aventis U.S. LLC. On behalf of two pharmaceutical companies, obtained Federal Circuit decision holding that competitor’s antibody patent is invalid due to obviousness.
• Sanofi v. Amgen, Inc. On behalf of two pharmaceutical companies, obtained Federal Circuit decision vacating jury verdict finding competitor’s antibody patent valid under written-description and enablement requirement.
• McGill v. BP Exploration & Production, Inc. On behalf of energy company, obtained Fifth Circuit decision excluding unreliable expert testimony and affirming summary judgment in toxic-tort case.
• EagleMed LLC v. Cox. On behalf of major air ambulance company, obtained Tenth Circuit decision holding that air ambulances are “air carriers” covered by the Airline Deregulation Act and that state efforts to cap air ambulance rates are preempted by the Airline Deregulation Act.
• Krys v. Farnum Place, LLC. On behalf of foreign trustee of insolvent investment fund, obtained Second Circuit decision addressing interplay between federal cross-border bankruptcy statute and Section 363 of Bankruptcy Code and requiring bankruptcy court to undertake Section 363 hearing.
• Ralls Corp. v. Committee on Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States. On behalf of industrial company, brought first-ever successful challenge to presidential decision prohibiting foreign purchase of U.S. company under Defense Production Act; D.C. Circuit held that President violated Due Process Clause of U.S. Constitution in barring transaction.
• FirstEnergy Corp. v. New York State Electric & Gas Co. On behalf of major utility, obtained Second Circuit decision reversing CERCLA liability in successor-liability case.
• Bilheimer v. Federal Express Long-Term Disability Plan. On behalf of individual, obtained Fourth Circuit decision clarifying standard of review in ERISA benefits determinations and granting long-term disability benefits under plan.

Federal District Courts

• Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. U.S. Dep’t of Health & Human Services. On behalf of pharmaceutical company, obtained preliminary injunction prohibiting enforcement of “Most Favored Nation” rule requiring pharmaceutical manufacturers to sell products within United States at lowest price charged in foreign countries.
• In re Specialty Shops Holding Corp. On behalf of retail company, obtained decision denying $36 million claim against company during Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceedings.
• Talarico v. Ultra Petroleum Corp. On behalf of energy company, obtained decision deeming equitably moot shareholder’s challenge to reorganization plan in Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceeding.
• Krys v. Farnum Place, LLC. On behalf of foreign trustee of insolvent investment fund, obtained district court decision invalidating asset transfer under Section 363 of Bankruptcy Code.
• Florida Power Corp. v. FirstEnergy Corp. On behalf of major utility, obtained summary judgment in case involving intersection of CERCLA and bankruptcy.