John Strasburger

John, click here to claim your profile for free! Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP

Professional Experience

: Current; Reliant Energy Services, Inc., et al. v. Enron Canada Corp.Lead counsel for Enron Canada in suit for $78 million, declaratory relief and injunction. After expedited briefing and an emergency hearing on the request for injunctive relief, the court denied Reliant’s request for injunctive relief, and dismissed the case in its entirety. A favorable settlement was reached after an appeal to the Fifth Circuit.

: Current; Tittle, et al. v. Enron Corp., et al.Co-lead counsel for Enron Corp. in an action brought by a putative class of 24,000 current and former employees of the Enron companies who claim that the assets in their employee benefit plans are worthless as a result of the defendants’ conduct. The allegations include federal claims under RICO and ERISA, and Texas state law claims of conspiracy and negligence.

: Current; Newby, et al. v. Enron Corp., et. al.Co-lead counsel for Enron Corp. in an action brought by a putative class of investors who allegedly purchased Enron equity and debt securities and are alleging violations of both federal and state securities laws, related to Enron’s financing structure and public disclosures.

: Current; Enron Trading LitigationCo-lead counsel representing Enron in numerous bankruptcy court adversary proceedings, mediations, and settlement negotiations seeking to recover, collectively, several billion dollars in payments owed to various Enron entities as a result of physical and financial commodity trading activities. Many of these cases involve defending against allegations that Enron, by using misleading financial data, fraudulently induced counterparties to enter into business arrangements.

: Current; Petrotemex v. EulerLead counsel for plaintiff in an insurance coverage dispute - obtained multimillion dollar settlement.

: Current; Power Company of America v. PG&E Energy TradingLead counsel defending Pacific Gas & Electric’s unregulated commodity trading affiliate in a lawsuit seeking to recover damages based upon allegations of breach of contract. Achieved successful confidential settlement after aggressive defense.

: Current; Gulf Properties, et al. v. Washington MutualLead counsel defending Washington Mutual in federal court litigation involving allegations of fraud and fraudulent transfers and preference payments made in violation of the Bankruptcy code. Case settled for a favorable confidential amount after aggressive defense.

: Current; In re Encompass Services CorporationLead litigation counsel to Chapter 11 debtor Encompass related to confirmation of plan of liquidating reorganization and defended against allegations of D&O liability. Encompass, a Houston-based construction services company with 2001 revenues of more than $4 billion, had its bankruptcy plan confirmed in just over six months.

: Current; Neumann v. General Motors CorporationCo-lead counsel representing GM in product liability suit against allegations that an out-of-specification seat belt caused the ejection of a brain damaged teenager in an SUV rollover accident. The federal jury returned a complete defense verdict.

: Current; Powell v. General Motors CorporationCo-lead counsel defending GM in product liability suit against allegations that an allegedly defective seat resulted in a broken neck and brain damage. The east Texas jury returned a complete defense verdict.

: Current; Pruitt v. General Motors CorporationCo-lead counsel defending GM in product liability suit against allegations that an admittedly defective seat, later involved in a recall campaign, resulted in serious spinal injuries. The north Texas jury found that the defective seat did not proximately cause the plaintiff’s damages and returned a zero verdict. The National Law Journal listed the case as an Honorable Mention Defense Verdict of the Year.

: Current; Norris v. General Motors CorporationLess than one week before trial, hired as lead counsel in California trial de novo appeal of product liability award. The plaintiff claimed that an uncrashworthy automotive seat caused her brain damage. The jury returned a mixed verdict and significantly reduced the amount of the previous award.

Education