Taj J. Clayton, P.C.

Since joining Kirkland, Taj has been involved in the following matters:

• Represented Ariel Alternatives in its $1.45 billion closing of the “Project Black” fund, the first private equity initiative of Ariel Investments, that seeks to invest in middle-market companies that may not currently be minority-owned, as well as existing Black- or Latino/a-owned businesses.
• Defended the Los Angeles Rams and its owner, E. Stanley Kroenke, in a multi-billion dollar breach of contract and fraud lawsuit arising from the 2016 relocation of the Rams football club to Los Angeles. Settlement achieved in 2021.
• Defending JUUL Labs, Inc. and its co-founders in multidistrict litigation involving alleged fraudulent marketing and products liability claims related to JUUL e-cigarette and e-vapor products. In 2020 and 2021, Kirkland achieved a series of pre-trial victories, including dismissal of more than 600 cases for the plaintiffs’ failure to comply with a discovery order, full dismissal of RICO claims, and dismissal of Government Entity complaints and certain state law claims. In 2022, JUUL announced a global resolution in the federal MDL and related JCCP cases. The settlement seeks to resolve many of the cases in the litigation.
• Representing Abbott Laboratories and its affiliate, Abbott Molecular, in a $30-plus million race discrimination/retaliation lawsuit brought by a former Abbott employee. In 2021, after a two-week trial, a jury returned a unanimous defense verdict for Abbott. Pending appeal.
• Representing Maverick Ventures in connection with SoftBank Vision Fund 2’s $300 million investment in LTK, a global influencer marketing platform.

Prior to joining Kirkland, Taj was involved in the following matters:

• Breach of Contract/Invasion of Privacy – Defended filmmakers of a Sundance Film Festival award-winning documentary in a lawsuit filed by one of the individuals depicted in the film on behalf of herself and her minor children alleging that the filmmakers breached an appearance/portrayal agreement by failing to pay money allegedly owed from the film. A jury returned a complete defense verdict for the filmmakers and awarded the plaintiff nothing.
• Product Liability – Defended client in over 12,000 individual product liability cases. The first bellwether trial ended in a defense verdict, and the vast bulk of cases settled thereafter.
• Patent Infringement – Represented a network security company in a lawsuit to recover for the infringement of one of its key patents. After a seven-day trial, a federal jury returned a multi-million dollar verdict in favor of client.
• Declaratory Judgment/Breach of Contract/Conversion – Represented a petrochemicals distribution company in a lawsuit against a former employee in an employment contract dispute. After exposing the legal flaws in the defendant’s case, the case settled on favorable terms.
• Retaliation/Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress – Obtained summary judgment on behalf of an electric distribution and transmission company in lawsuit filed by a current employee who alleged that his employer gave him poor performance reviews and disfavored work assignments in retaliation for registering complaints about the company.
• Breach of Fiduciary Duties/Breach of Contract/Fraud/Professional Malpractice/Tortious Interference with Contract – Represented a business executive in a lawsuit filed against his former business partner and legal counsel in connection with a dispute over the acquisition of a real estate finance entity through discovery, legal analysis and briefing. The case resulted in a favorable settlement.
• Trademark Infringement – Represented a trading and investment firm in a dispute involving the infringement of one of its key trademarks. After presenting the merits of client’s legal position to opposing side, the case settled.
• White Collar Crime – Defended numerous clients against investigations by the federal government.
• Trade Secret Theft – Represented a Fortune 50 computer/printer company in a multi-million dollar suit against former high-level employees who, while still employed by the client, covertly organized and began operating a competing business venture using the client’s resources, contacts, and trade secrets to steal product designs, market analyses and other confidential and proprietary business information. After prevailing in jurisdiction dispute, the case settled.