Jameson Reece Jones
Jameson is an experienced trial and appellate lawyer, representing clients in all stages of high stakes litigation. He has a diverse practice, representing clients in complex disputes involving commercial issues, products liability, mass torts, and intellectual property. Jameson has spent over eight months on trial over the last eight years of practice, examined multiple witnesses and given opening statements in a confidential arbitration. Jameson excels at crafting legal strategy and for preparing high-stakes cases for trial.
Among other significant accomplishments, Jameson briefed, argued, and obtained a unanimous favorable decision before the United States Supreme Court on behalf of Static Control Components, Inc in Lexmark International v. Static Control Components (No. 12-873). Recently, Jameson briefed and argued an appeal on behalf of NL Industries, obtaining a substantial reduction in what had been a $1.15 billion public nuisance judgment related to lead paint. And Jameson represented PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP in a bench trial related to the failure of Colonial Bank, which led to a win for PwC on the claims of Colonial Bancgroup and a substantial reduction in claims brought by the FDIC.
Prior to joining Bartlit Beck in 2009, Jameson clerked for Associate Justice Antonin Scalia on the United States Supreme Court and Judge Jeffrey S. Sutton on the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. Jameson was elected partner at Bartlit Beck in 2013.
United States Supreme Court Briefing and Argument
Lexmark International v. Static Control Components (No. 12-873)
Briefed, argued, and obtained a unanimous favorable decision before the United States Supreme Court on behalf of Static Control Components, Inc. The district court had held that Static Control lacked standing, as a prudential matter, to sue Lexmark for false advertising under the Lanham Act. The Sixth Circuit reversed, and the Supreme Court granted certiorari. Jameson crafted the winning strategy to frame Static Control’s position in relation to first principles, rather than any of the regional circuits’ tests. The Supreme Court unanimously ruled that Static Control adequately pleaded a viable false advertising claim against Lexmark, adopted Static Control’s suggested zone-of-interests approach, and clarified the law with regard to standing and proximate cause for all federal statutes. The opinion is here. Press reports relating to the case are Bloomberg BNA (Court Struggles With Question of Who Should Have Standing Under Lanham Act), and the American Lawyer (Supreme Court Rookie Scores with Lexmark Ruling).
Climate Change Litigation
Represents ConocoPhillips as national counsel in multiple public nuisance cases filed by cities, counties, and the State of Rhode Island related to climate change. ConocoPhillips has successfully obtained dismissal of three such cases thus far. Plaintiffs have appealed those rulings, and Jameson will represent ConocoPhillips on appeal.
Santa Clara County et al. v. NL Industries (District Court for Santa Clara County, California)
Represents NL industries in a public nuisance action related to lead paint, brought on behalf of a number of California municipalities. Jameson briefed and argued the appeal in California’s Sixth District Court of Appeal, obtaining a substantial reduction in what had been a $1.15 billion judgment. NL subsequently settled its share of the case for $101.67 million.
FDIC & Colonial BancGroup vs. PwC (M.D. Ala. 2017-2018)
Defended PwC against Colonial Bank and the FDIC in a suit filed after the collapse of PwC’s audit client Colonial Bank. Colonial Bank sought several hundred million dollars in damages. The FDIC sought over $2 billion in actual damages, plus unspecified punitive damages. Following a bench trial on liability, the Court ruled for PwC on the entirety of Colonial Bank’s claim. The Court ruled against PwC on some of the FDIC’s claims and in favor of PwC on others. The Court also ruled in favor of PwC on the FDIC’s request for punitive damages. Following a bench trial on damages, the Court awarded the FDIC $625 million. Before judgment was entered, and while post-trial motions were pending, the parties settled the case for $335 million. One member of the FDIC’s board of directors publicly dissented from the settlement because it did not contain an acknowledgment of liability by PwC.
Liverpool Football Club Litigation (England)
Represented American investor George Gillett, and related entities including Kop Investment LLC, in litigation arising out of the sale of the Liverpool Football Club, one of the most valuable sports franchises in the world.
Co-lead trial counsel for defendant in a confidential damages-only arbitration stemming from a product-liability settlement.
Imprelis® Litigation (Eastern District of Pennsylvania)
National counsel for DuPont in product liability litigation, including putative class actions pending in an MDL in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, alleging damage caused by DuPont's Imprelis® herbicide.
Meins v. Bayer, et al. (Arkansas Circuit Court, Arkansas County)
Represented Bayer in a case against Riceland Foods, Inc. in a four week trial concerning the presence of genetically modified rice in the U.S. long-grain rice supply.
Briggs v. Bayer CropScience LP (Arkansas District Court, Jefferson County)
Represented Bayer in case brought by large Jefferson County rice farmer. Plaintiffs’ counsel engaged in improper publicity on eve of jury selection and trial team obtained continuance three days before trial.
Sims, et al v. Bayer CropScience LP, et al. (Arkansas Circuit Court, Desha County)
Represented Bayer in case brought by six Desha County rice farmers. Jury awarded $946,000, only 7% of plaintiffs' $14,000,000 in requested damages and just $70,000 more than Defendants' expert testimony regarding damages. Jury unanimously rejected punitive damages.
In re: Genetically Modified Rice Litigation - MDL Bellwether Trial (E.D. Missouri)
Represented Bayer for second MDL bellwether trial in St. Louis. Two Missouri rice farmers prevailed, but jury awarded less than requested and no punitive damages.
GEA v. Bechtel Power (Federal District Court, District of Colorado)
Represented Bechtel in dispute with subcontractor over subcontractor's performance during construction of power plant in Athens, New York. Case settled.