Brian D. Schmalzbach Partner

U.S. Supreme Court

• Lackey v. Stinnie, No. 23-621 (2025)
  In a case with major implications for access to justice for civil rights plaintiffs, represented the winners of a preliminary injunction that ended the automatic suspension of their driver’s licenses in a dispute over who qualifies as an eligible  “prevailing party” under the federal civil rights attorney’s fee statute.
• New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen, No. 20-843 (2021)
  Represented 176 members of the U.S. House of Representatives as amici in support of Second Amendment rights.
• Little Sisters of the Poor v. Pennsylvania, No. 19-431 (2020)
  Represented amici supporting application of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act to all federal law.
• Collins v. Virginia, 584 U.S. 586 (2018)
  In an 8-1 decision safeguarding residential privacy rights, the Supreme Court agreed that police generally must obtain a warrant before entering the curtilage of a home to search a parked vehicle.
• Florida v. Harris, 568 U.S. 237 (2013)
  The Supreme Court unanimously agreed that an alert by a well-trained narcotics-detection dog creates probable cause to search an automobile for drugs.

Courts of Appeals

• The Seventh Circuit upheld summary judgment for manufacturers of lead-containing paint on over one hundred Wisconsin product-liability plaintiffs’ claims.  92 F.4th 688 (argued).
• The Fourth Circuit invoked the major questions doctrine to affirm dismissal of North Carolina commercial shrimpers in a bet-the-industry appeal concerning a Clean Water Act (CWA) challenge to their operations.  76 F.4th 291 (2023) (argued).
• The Fourth Circuit affirmed summary judgment on Family and Medical Leave Act claims for an employer who, “suspecting benefits fraud,” terminated employees for dishonesty.  70 F.4th 785 (2023) (argued).
• The Fifth Circuit reversed certification of classes encompassing purchasers of airline tickets for flights that might have used allegedly defective aircraft, and ordered dismissal for lack of Article III standing.  53 F.4th 897 (2022).
• The Federal Circuit upheld summary judgment of invalidity and noninfringement for our client (one of the world’s largest telecommunications companies) in a multidefendant telecom patent infringement lawsuit, 15 F.4th 1121 (2021) (argued), and later upheld a six-figure award of attorney’s fees, 2023 WL 4503520 (argued).
• The Seventh Circuit reversed a $6 million bellwether jury verdict against our client, holding that Wisconsin’s risk-contribution doctrine does not apply to product-liability claims against manufacturers of lead-containing paint.  994 F.3d 791 (2021) (argued).
• The Federal Circuit reversed an unfavorable inter partes review decision that patent claims asserted against our client (one of the world’s largest telecommunications companies) were valid, holding that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board had improperly construed the claims. 2020 WL 2465414. The Federal Circuit also affirmed a favorable PTAB decision holding related claims invalid as obvious. 2020 WL 2312494.
• The Tenth Circuit agreed that operators of hydraulic-fracturing disposal wells are not liable for property owners’ earthquake insurance premiums in the absence of physical earthquake damage. 778 F. App’x 561 (2019) (argued).
• The Ninth Circuit reversed a bench trial verdict against our client because the district court misapplied the willfulness requirement for a tax return preparer penalty. 772 F. App’x 555 (2019) (argued).
• The Fourth Circuit reversed orders remanding corporate merger class actions to state court, becoming the first court of appeals to hold that the Class Action Fairness Act allows removal of claims against corporate merger partners for aiding and abetting breaches of fiduciary duty. 928 F.3d 325 (2019).
• The Eighth Circuit affirmed summary judgment in favor of a major national bank in a long-running Truth in Lending Act dispute, holding that a frequently used acknowledgement form created a presumption that the borrowers had received sufficient copies of a required TILA notice, and that the borrowers’ evidence did not rebut that presumption. 883 F.3d 1010 (8th Cir. 2018) (argued).