Lawrence S. Ebner

Capital Appellate Advocacy

For more than 45 years, Capital Appellate Advocacy founder Larry Ebner has represented and advised a multitude of businesses and industries on complex legal issues before the Supreme Court, federal courts of appeals, state appellate courts, trial courts, government agencies, arbitration panels, and other forums. He strategizes and drafts certiorari petitions and oppositions, merits and amicus curiae briefs, interlocutory appeals, dispositive motions, and many other types of advocacy documents. Larry’s mission is to deliver high-quality written and oral advocacy and achieve civil justice for his clients.

Chemicals & Other Manufacturing

• Defense of toxic & environmental tort litigation
• Pursuit of statutes of limitation & repose defenses
• Spoliation of evidence and related matters
• National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), Endangered Species Act (ESA), & Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) compliance
• California Proposition 65 litigation

Class-Action Defendants

• Challenges to state court jurisdiction over out-of-state defendants
• Interlocutory appeal of adverse class-certification decisions
• Pursuit of mootness, commonality/predominance, and other class-action defenses
• Scope and applicability of arbitration provisions under Federal Arbitration Act

Critical Infrastructure

• Litigation opposing judicial interference with operation of telecommunications, transportation, and other national critical infrastructure sectors
• Industry challenges to environmental restrictions on construction & maintenance of transportation, energy, and other critical infrastructure
• Federal preemption of local government restrictions on interstate passenger rail operations

Drugs, Vaccines & Medical Devices

• Lack of state court jurisdiction over out-of-state drug manufacturers
• Advocacy of federal preemption defenses in drug, vaccine, and medical device product liability litigation
• Labeling, misbranding, & false advertising issues
• Product liability prevention

Government Contractors

• Pretrial defense of government contractors in False Claims Act qui tam suits
• Advocacy of political question, combatant activities preemption, qualified immunity, Defense Base Act, and other specialized pretrial defenses on behalf of war-zone contractors in wrongful death & personal injury litigation
• Boyle government contractor product liability defense
• State secrets doctrine
• Protection of privileged internal investigation communications

Insurance & Financial

• Constitutionality of SEC administrative enforcement proceedings
• Availability of arbitration to resolve insurance coverage disputes
• Scope and application of Fair Debt Collection Practices Act
• Telephone Consumer Protection Act

Pesticides

• Representation of manufacturers, formulators, distributors, and users of agricultural, industrial, wood preservative, structural, landscaping, and consumer pesticides
• Pretrial defense of pesticide-related product liability & toxic tort suits, including the FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act) preemption defense
• Industry intervention in public interest group suits against U.S. EPA and state regulatory agencies
• Joint data development group & individual registrant representation in cancellation, suspension, and other regulatory review proceedings
• Arbitration of FIFRA data compensation disputes
• Settlement & defense of enforcement proceedings
• Preemption of state & local regulation
• Prop 65 and other California issues

Trade Associations / Nonprofit Groups - Amicus Briefs

High-impact amicus curiae (“friend of the court”) briefs on behalf of national trade associations & other non-profit, pro-business organizations in the Supreme Court, federal courts of appeals, and state appellate courts.

»  Home Depot U.S.A., Inc. v. Jackson, No. 17-1471 [removal of counterclaim class-action complaints under CAFA, 28 U.S.C. § 1453(b)]

»  Association des Eleveurs de Canards et d'Oies du Quebec v. Becerra, No 17-1258 [federal preemption of California statute banning sale of foie gras]

»  Medical Device Business Services, Inc. v. United States ex rel. Nargol, No. 17-1108 [application of Fed. R. Civ. P. 9(b) to False Claims Act qui tam complaints]

»  In re KBR, Inc., Burn Pit Litigation, No. 17-1960 (4th Cir.) [application of political question doctrine to damages suits against "battlefield contractors"]

» Ferrellgas Partners v. Morgan-Larson, No. 17-441 [continuing-violation exception to 4-year antitrust statute of limitations]

» Supreme Court of New Mexico v. United States, No. 16-1323 [federal prosecutors’ compliance with state-imposed professional conduct rules governing issuance of grand jury subpoenas to attorneys]

»  Schoenefeld v. Schneiderman, No. 16-780 [New York statute imposing in-state physical office requirement against non-resident bar members]

»  Bristol-Myers Squibb v. Superior Court, No. 16-466 [California state-court exercise of specific jurisdiction over out-of-state plaintiffs’ product liability claims against out-of-state corporate defendants]

»  FCA U.S. LLC v. The Center for Auto Safety, No. 15-1211 [federal standard for unsealing of discovery documents containing confidential business information]

»  State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. v. United States ex rel. Rigsby, No. 15-513 [sanction for  violation of False Claims Act qui tam suit mandatory seal requirement]

»  AT&T v. United States ex rel. Heath, No. 15-363 [judicial enforcement of Fed. R. Civ. P. 9(b) fraud-pleading requirements in False Claims Act qui tam suits]

»  The Dow Chemical Co. v. Industrial Polymers, Inc., No. 14-1091 [class-certification principles governing predominance & commonality]

»  Campbell-Ewald Co. v. Gomez, No. 14-857 [class-action mootness & derivative sovereign immunity]

»  Carpenter Co. v. Ace Foam, Inc., No. 14-577 [Supreme Court jurisdiction to review class-certification decisions where a federal court of appeals has denied interlocutory review]

»  CTS Corp. v. Waldburger, No. 13-339 [viability of state statutes of repose governing CERCLA hazardous substance-related personal injury & property damage suits]

Law Practice

• Representation of in-house counsel bar association as amicus curiae in U.S. Supreme Court case involving application of state professional conduct rules to federal prosecutors who subpoena attorneys to present grand jury evidence about current or former clients
• Representation of in-house counsel bar association as amicus curiae in U.S. Supreme Court constitutional challenge to in-state physical office requirement applicable to nonresident members of the New York Bar