In September of 2009, our firm was contacted by the CEO of a start-up company who was being sued by a huge global food and beverage company in Hennepin County District Court. A hearing was already scheduled – for five days hence – for a temporary restraining order/preliminary injunction that, if granted, would put the start-up out of business. The plaintiff company, where our CEO used to work, was suing for breach of a non-compete, misappropriation of trade secrets, breach of fiduciary duty, and breach of contract. Our client had poured the last several years of his life, a great deal of his financial resources, and his research and development expertise into this new venture.

Before we could help this entrepreneur, we had 24 whirlwind hours to convince the start-up Board of Directors that Holstein Law Group was the right choice for the case. We had two long phone interviews, after furiously reviewing the just-filed pleadings, which included a motion for expedited discovery. During those phone calls, the executive and his team wanted reassurance on one key question: “Could this four-attorney firm possibly be big enough to defend a case this complex against such a formidable opponent?” We convinced them the answer was “yes,” and that we knew how to partner with co-counsel if needed (whom we brought onto the case shortly thereafter), as well as how to work with an experienced outside document management team.

The plaintiff’s resources dwarfed those of our client and included representation by two large, prominent law firms. The opposition knew that they could afford to go to trial and lose, while the costs to our client—not only monetary, but the strain on his valuable time and energy—could easily put his fledgling company out of business.

Two weeks later, we appeared in front of a Hennepin County District Court judge—who made it very clear that he sympathized with the plaintiff a great deal more than with our client. We narrowly dodged the TRO, keeping the company in business, but the judge set the trial for one month out, effectively hitting “fast-forward” on the process. In the three weeks that followed, we exchanged hundreds of thousands of pages of documents, deposed fifteen key witnesses from around the country and overseas and successfully prosecuted a Motion to Compel. All the while, we were preparing for the trial itself: forming the trial strategy, drafting the opening statement and motions in limine, and learning the inner workings of both companies.

When the plaintiff failed to produce vital documents the week before trial, we scheduled an unconventional Saturday morning conference call with the judge, who struck the trial from the court calendar. For the first time in eight weeks, we were able to return to our normal work schedules, feeling relief and savoring success. In the following months, we were able to settle all of the claims against our client, allowing him to get back to his life and the company he had helped create.