Effective November 24, 2014 Morgan Lewis & Bockius LLP and Bingham McCutchen LLP have concluded a transaction. Visitors seeking information on this page should visit the corresponding page on the Morgan Lewis & Bockius LLP website.

Bingham

Bingham

Thomas R. Lotterman

Partner

As of November 24, 2014 practicing with Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP.

Tom Lotterman handles a wide variety of litigation matters, including environmental, toxic tort, commercial, and trade secret. He represents clients before federal courts, state courts, and agencies from Alaska to Florida. Tom has handled large, multiparty cases in Alabama, Florida, New York, and North Carolina, and has conducted numerous arbitrations before the American Arbitration Association and other associations. His clients have included large oil and natural gas companies, international utilities, national trade associations, and manufacturing companies.

Experience

  • Represents a large oil and natural gas exploration and production company in defending claims by the federal government and others arising from spin-off of Tronox from Kerr-McGee in 2006. The claims, which were brought in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court in the Southern District of New York, allege actual fraud, constructive fraud, and breach of fiduciary duty. Tom served as lead counsel at trial, which lasted four months and concluded in September 2012.
  • Represents a coke manufacturer in a lawsuit by neighbors of plant alleging violations of the Clean Air Act and RCRA, and common law tort claims. The case is pending before the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio.
  • Represents a national pilots association in a lawsuit filed in federal court in Washington, D.C. against the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC). The lawsuit challenges the PBGC’s failure to perform its statutory and fiduciary duties as trustee of the pilots’ retirement plan.  The case goes to trial in early 2013.
  • Represented a national trade association challenging the constitutionality of California’s Low Carbon Fuels Standard. Obtained summary judgment and preliminary injunction on the grounds that the regulation discriminates against interstate commerce and improperly regulates Midwest corn ethanol producers.  The rulings by the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California are on appeal to the Ninth Circuit.
  • Represented an international electricity and gas company in a lawsuit involving the cleanup of a Superfund site in Troy, N.Y. In 2010, the Second Circuit ruled in Niagara Mohawk Power Corp. v. Chevron that client was entitled to bring a contribution claim under CERCLA §113(f)(3)(B) based on a settlement with the New York Department of Environmental Conservation.
  • Represented one of the largest companies in the United States in an internal whistleblower investigation.
  • Represented a large pulp and paper company against a lawsuit by the State of Vermont seeking to halt the test burn of used tires as fuel for a manufacturing plant. The challenge was dismissed by the state court and, after Vermont sought a writ in federal court, dismissed by the Second Circuit.

Representative Reported Cases

  • Niagara Mohawk Power Corp. v. Chevron, 596 F3d 112 (2d Cir. 2010) (reinstating contribution claims against defendants under CERCLA §113(f)(3)(B))
  • Rybachek v. USEPA, 904 F.2d 1276 (9th Cir. 1990) (upholding national regulations on placer mining promulgated by the EPA under Clean Water Act)
  • Interim HealthCare of Northern Illinois, Inc. v. Interim Health Care, Inc., 225 F.3d 876 (7th Cir. 2000) (upholding summary judgment by district court on behalf of franchisor following termination of franchise agreement)
  • Rocky Mountain Farmers Union v. Goldstene, 843 F.Supp.2d 1071 (E.D. Cal.) (enjoining implementation of California’s Low Carbon Fuel Standards on grounds that regulations violated commerce clause)
  • State of Vermont v. New York State Dept. of Environmental Conservation, 841 N.Y.S.2d 823 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2006) (rejecting attempt by Vermont to halt test burn of used tires as fuel at paper mill owned by client)
  • City of Alexandria, Va. v. Slater, 46 F.Supp.2d 35 (D.D.C. 1999) (enjoining construction on new bridge until FHWA fulfilled its responsibilities under environmental statutes)
  • Hauck Mfg. Co. v. Astec Industries, Inc., 2004 WL 3396122 (E.D. Tenn. 2005) (finding other party in contempt for violating injunction)
  • Wolfgramm v. Mukasey, 277 Fed. Appx. 676 (9th Cir. 2008) (overturning decision by BIA that client was ineligible for withholding of removal under federal immigration law)

Memberships

  • American Bar Association

Awards & Honors

  • Super Lawyers, Washington, D.C. (2013–2014)
  • Special achievement award, U.S. Department of Justice (1989)

Legal insight. Business instinct. Global intelligence. ®