Jeremy A. Rist
|Philadelphia, PA||v. +1.215.569.5361||f. +1.215.832.5361|
Jeremy Rist's practice focuses on the resolution of disputes related to business transactions - including mergers, acquisitions, joint ventures, and divestitures - ongoing business relationships, commercial controversies implicating constitutional rights and unconstitutional state action, corporate governance, securities regulation, and antitrust law. He also has a robust practice counseling clients in the antitrust aspects of transactional activity, including mergers and acquisitions, the formation of joint ventures, joint development agreements, licensing arrangements, and the exchange of information among competitors and within vertical associations.
Mr. Rist is a former law clerk for the Honorable Paul A. Magnuson, Chief Judge of the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota.
- Risk-minimizing advice to clients involved in “2-to-1” and “3-to-2” mergers.
- Coordination of international competition-related advice from attorneys in various jurisdictions in $900 million cross-border transaction.
- Regular antitrust advice to clients in the chemicals, pharmaceuticals, transportation, banking, healthcare, marine transport, electrical cable, steelmaking, and publishing industries.
- Defense of $400 million breach of contract and tort action related to a joint venture in the phosphorus industry.
- Defense of underwriters and issuers in federal class action litigation in the banking and telecommunications industries.
- Defense of health insurer in federal RICO class action litigation.
- Represented consortium of builders in due process challenge to city licensing and inspection practices; settlement included termination of entire licensing and inspection staff and adoption of new building code.
- Defense of economic development board of major American city against an action by city council challenging award of busing contract on state constitution separation of powers grounds.
- Filed amicus brief in the Supreme Court of the United States on behalf of over a dozen state biotechnology associations, challenging on First Amendment grounds state statutes restricting use of pharmaceutical prescription information. (Sorrell v. IMS Health, Inc., 131 S. Ct. 2653 (2011)).)