Michael N. Ungar

Mike has successfully represented the following:

• The plaintiff in a complex dispute to recover millions of dollars in damages incurred as a result of incorporating a defective part into medical oxygen regulators it manufactured. Obtained a favorable settlement before trial.
• The prevailing defendant – a biopharmaceutical company – in a pricing dispute arising from a blood plasma supply agreement with the plaintiff-blood center. Successfully defended the client after coming in as new counsel only a month before trial. Achieved a partial directed verdict on one count and a full defense verdict on the remaining claims. Defense verdict affirmed in the Florida Court of Appeals. Click here to see video of Mike’s oral argument in the Second District Court of Appeals, Florida.
• A company seeking judicial confirmation of a significant arbitration award. Mike presented oral argument regarding the interpretation of key provisions of the Ohio Arbitration Act, R.C. 2711.09 (confirmation of arbitration award) and 2711.13 (vacate, modify, or correct award). Click here to see a video of the argument.
• The prevailing party in a groundbreaking Ohio Supreme Court decision interpreting and applying Ohio’s advancement statute, where the court clarified the scope of protections afforded to corporate directors under Ohio law. Click here to see video of Mike’s Supreme Court oral argument. Miller v. Miller, 132 Ohio St.3d 424, 2012-Ohio-2928.
• The prevailing party – a large national bank in an important preemption case – before the 6^thCircuit.Chase Bank USA, N.A. v. Cleveland, 695 F.3d 548 (6th Cir. 2012).
• The prevailing defendants in a 10b-5 “material omissions” case. Summary judgment was granted by the Federal Court and affirmed on appeal by the 6^thCircuit. Filing v. Phipps 2012 WL 5200375 C.A.6 (Ohio), 2012.
• A large securities firm and its financial consultant accused of causing significant monetary harm to a former customer who was the winner of the $102 million Indiana lottery. All claims were dismissed by a FINRA arbitration panel following a lengthy hearing. Roberta Eaton, Individually and as Trustee of the Rondal Eaton Trust vs. Chase Investment Services Corp. and Jeffrey L. Roache, FINRA Arbitration No. 11-01585.
• A national retailer in a consumer class action alleging statutory and common-law claims; trial court dismissed case on early dispositive motion, court of appeals affirmed dismissal, discretionary appeal denied by Supreme Court of Ohio. Grey v. Walgreen Co., 131 Ohio St.3d 1553, 967 N.E.2d 764, 2012-Ohio-2263 (Ohio May 23, 2012) (Table, NO. 2012-0341)
• A large national bank in a purported class action alleging violations of the Electronic Funds Transfer Act (EFTA). All claims were dismissed at summary judgment stage by district court and affirmed by Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals.
• A major law firm accused by a court-appointed receiver of malpractice in connection with a $65 million Ponzi scheme (all claims dismissed at summary judgment stage).
• A large investment bank in a one-week arbitration involving claims against it arising out of a “busted deal” concerning a large power generation facility in Anchorage, Alaska. All claims determined in client’s favor.
• A major law firm accused of malpractice by a real estate developer client. After trial, judgment was rendered in favor of law firm client on all claims.
• A large publicly traded company and its directors defending against claims alleging fraud/misrepresentation/breach of fiduciary duty filed by the company’s largest shareholder (all claims against our clients were dismissed).
• A large national bank and its executives accused of causing over $40 million in damages to a major customer based on alleged violations of various federal securities laws and lending laws (State court in Seattle dismissed all claims).
• A publicly traded bank and its officers and directors in shareholder derivative claims arising out of a contemplated merger transaction (all claims against our clients were dismissed).
• A national securities firm in defense of claims brought by the trustee of a large trust seeking damages in excess of $20 million. All claims against our clients were dismissed, and after a successful appeal, we recovered all of our clients’ attorneys’ fees against the Plaintiff.  Hollern v. Wachovia Securities, Inc., 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 20995 (10^th Aug. 16, 2006).
• A large bank and its broker-dealer in multimillion dollar claims arising out of highly publicized criminal misconduct by a senior executive (all claims against our client were dismissed).
• A national securities broker-dealer in defense of a lawsuit brought by an Ohio county in an attempt to recover $115 million in investment losses sustained by large pooled public investment fund.
• Major national and international companies in numerous cases involving trade secrets, non-competition/non-solicitation, inevitable disclosure, raiding, and unfair competition issues.
• A national banking institution, accused of breach of fiduciary duty under ERISA for failing to timely invest participants’ contributions to the pension and profit sharing plan of a major insurance company.
• A regional discount brokerage firm in its defense against significant order execution claims involving “when issued” securities (favorable jury verdict).
• A national broker-dealer, accused in a nationwide class action complaint of misleading investors in limited partnerships (obtained dismissal of all claims, affirmed on appeal).
• A national securities firm and its broker accused of churning, switching between mutual funds, and recommending unsuitable investments (obtained dismissal of both clients after NASD Arbitration hearing).
• An Ohio manufacturer of environmental testing equipment for multimillion dollar losses resulting from breach of a multi-stage requirements contract.
• A national securities firm, accused in a nationwide class action complaint of failing to pay interest to commodities customers (obtained dismissal by federal court; dismissal affirmed by Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals).
• A public company in its defense against shareholder claims alleging violations of Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5, fraud and conspiracy claims.
• A public company in an action against a major competitor for misappropriation of trade secrets involving manufacturing processes in the commercial lighting industry (obtained injunctive relief and favorable settlement).
• A national broker-dealer in its defense against ERISA-based breach of fiduciary duty claims and claims of unsuitability, churning, and common law fraud for alleged losses to a pension and profit sharing plan.
• A public company and its recently hired senior executive accused by a competitor of inevitable disclosure of trade secrets.