Brian D. Hail
Overview
Brian Hail is a partner in Crowell & Moring’s New York office and member of the Litigation Group. He is a first chair trial lawyer with more than 20 years of experience focusing on complex disputes involving financial products, corporate transactions and capital funding disputes. His clients have included companies, financial institutions, investors, joint ventures and financial funds, from large national banks to family offices and portfolio companies.
Career & Education
- Southern Methodist University, B.B.A., cum Laude, 1989
- University of Michigan, J.D., cum Laude, 1992
- New York
- Texas
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
- U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York
- U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York
- U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas
Professional Activities and Memberships
- Member, New York State Bar Association, State Bar of Texas, Association of the Bar of the City of New York, Dallas Bar Association and Federal Bar Council
Brian's Insights
Client Alert | 4 min read | 04.10.24
On February 20, 2024, the Supreme Court finally brought the curtain down on the Kirschner v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. et al., action when it denied Plaintiff’s petition for certiorari that challenged the Second Circuit Court of Appeal’s determination that syndicated bank loans were not “securities.” While the Second Circuit made that decision in August, fears of significant market disruption were raised again in December, when the plaintiff asked the Supreme Court to review the case. But, as a result of the denial of cert, the Second Circuit decision stands, and for the time being, syndicated term loans will not be subject to securities regulation.
Speaking Engagement | 07.31.23
“Signature CLE Webinar: Advanced Tools and Tips for Identifying and Avoiding Common Traps in Commercial Contracts,” ACC New York, Webinar.
Publication | 06.21.23
Implications Of Borrowers Rejecting Assignments Of Syndicated Bank Loans
Representative Matters
- Representation of large manufacturer in complex commercial dispute involving a “bet the company” case after alleged fraud and overcharge. Case involved a multi-decade time period of electronic and paper discovery, expert testimony and briefing. Case dismissed at summary adjudication prior to trial, with no settlement offer made or received.
- Representation of Luxury Hospitality brand in multi week arbitration in connection claims asserted by the owner of the company’s namesake hotel, which is also a global hospitality brand. The asserted damage claim exceeded $100 million, as well an attempt to terminate the management contract. After a multi week, international arbitration involving proceedings in two countries, arbitration panel unanimously found for his client.
- In cases spanning over a decade, representation of the nation’s largest mortgage originator and sponsor in a series of lawsuits by monoline insurers seeking repayment of $10 billion relating to Residential Mortgage- Backed Securities (RMBS) loan origination, securitization structure, rights and remedies of sponsor, trustee, noteholders and insurers. Cases have involved appeals to the state’s highest courts, multiple reported decisions and legal issues from discovery to making contract and tort.
- Representation of real estate investors in series of development disputes involving real estate investments, hotel developments and management contracts.
- Representation of private equity funds in series of earn out disputes, commercial disputes and post-closing adjustments.
- Representation of RBS Securities and Greenwich Capital in repurchase and representation and warranty claims, and in cases brought both by trustees and by a monoline insurer. The representation produced a precedent setting opinion on damages recoverable when an insurer waived right to rescission in the underlying policy. Assured Guar. Mun. Corp. v. RBS Secs., Inc., 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 63811, 2014 WL 1855766 (S.D.N.Y 2014).
- Representation of the largest equity holder and mezzanine holder in RadioShack bankruptcy in a claim brought by a last out creditor in a unitranche facility claiming that a restructuring had violated the relevant intercreditor agreement. Obtained dismissal. In re RadioShack Corp., 550 B.R. 700, 2016 WL 2865125 (D.Del. Bankr. 2016).
- Lead counsel in three-week trial in Delaware Chancery Court in representation of noteholders challenging buyout and financial restructuring to benefit a majority shareholder In re Loral Space and Communications Inc. Consolidated Litig., 2008 WL 4293781 (Del. Ch. 2008).
Brian's Insights
Client Alert | 4 min read | 04.10.24
On February 20, 2024, the Supreme Court finally brought the curtain down on the Kirschner v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. et al., action when it denied Plaintiff’s petition for certiorari that challenged the Second Circuit Court of Appeal’s determination that syndicated bank loans were not “securities.” While the Second Circuit made that decision in August, fears of significant market disruption were raised again in December, when the plaintiff asked the Supreme Court to review the case. But, as a result of the denial of cert, the Second Circuit decision stands, and for the time being, syndicated term loans will not be subject to securities regulation.
Speaking Engagement | 07.31.23
“Signature CLE Webinar: Advanced Tools and Tips for Identifying and Avoiding Common Traps in Commercial Contracts,” ACC New York, Webinar.
Publication | 06.21.23
Implications Of Borrowers Rejecting Assignments Of Syndicated Bank Loans
Insights
Speaking Engagement | 07.31.23
Brian's Insights
Client Alert | 4 min read | 04.10.24
On February 20, 2024, the Supreme Court finally brought the curtain down on the Kirschner v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. et al., action when it denied Plaintiff’s petition for certiorari that challenged the Second Circuit Court of Appeal’s determination that syndicated bank loans were not “securities.” While the Second Circuit made that decision in August, fears of significant market disruption were raised again in December, when the plaintiff asked the Supreme Court to review the case. But, as a result of the denial of cert, the Second Circuit decision stands, and for the time being, syndicated term loans will not be subject to securities regulation.
Speaking Engagement | 07.31.23
“Signature CLE Webinar: Advanced Tools and Tips for Identifying and Avoiding Common Traps in Commercial Contracts,” ACC New York, Webinar.
Publication | 06.21.23
Implications Of Borrowers Rejecting Assignments Of Syndicated Bank Loans
