News &
Resources

Thorpe Shwer attorneys Brad Shwer and Andrea Marconi successfully defended one of the nation’s largest and fastest-growing franchisors with over 1,000 franchisee-owned locations in an employment-related matter in California state court. The complaint alleged, inter alia, retaliation under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act, wage and hour violations under the California Labor Code, and tort claims. Plaintiff dismissed all claims against our client without prejudice, less than two months after our firm’s initial appearance and while Thorpe Shwer’s motion for summary judgment was still pending.

Thorpe Shwer attorneys Bill Thorpe, Adam Reich and Jamie Gill Santos obtained a defense verdict for a client following a two-day bench trial of a forcible entry and detainer action. The case was brought by a landlord to evict Thorpe Shwer’s client, a successful, high-end nightclub in the Downtown Scottsdale Entertainment District. Thorpe Shwer aggressively defended the client through expedited discovery and trial, obtaining a complete victory, including a finding by the court that the client was entitled to recover its attorney’s fees from the adverse party.

Thorpe Shwer attorneys Bill Thorpe, Brad Shwer, and Kristin Paiva represented BNSF Railway Company in an appeal brought before the Arizona Court of Appeals, Division I. The appeal involved the preemptive scope of the Locomotive Inspection Act, 49 U.S.C. § 20701, et seq. (the “LIA”). The Court of Appeals, in a 3-0 published decision, determined that the LIA did not preempt BNSF’s state law cross-claims for indemnification and contribution against a locomotive seat manufacturer, holding: “although [the] LIA establishes uniform safety regulations and preempts claims based on a state-specific standard of care, it does not preempt claims based on the federal standard.” See BNSF Railway Company v. Seats Incorporated, 237 Ariz. 259 (App. 2015).

Thorpe Shwer attorneys Bill Thorpe and Adam Reich achieved a dismissal with prejudice of a claim brought pursuant to an asset purchase agreement between two manufacturers of pet-care products. Thorpe Shwer moved to dismiss the complaint owing to plaintiff’s failure to comply with certain provisions in the asset purchase agreement concerning preconditions to any suit between the parties. The court granted the motion and dismissed the lawsuit with prejudice, and awarded attorney’s fees to Thorpe Shwer’s client.