X

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
You want to be Dan Webb. You want Jack Welch calling you when his divorce gets ugly. You want John Reed, a man you’ve never met before, asking you to get to the bottom of how Richard Grasso ended up with nearly $200 million from the New York Stock Exchange. You want former Illinois Gov. George Ryan reaching out to you when federal prosecutors indict him for fraud and racketeering. You want The New York Times anointing you a “superlawyer”; clients falling over themselves to pay your $700-an-hour fee. It must be great to be Dan Webb. You want to be Dan Webb? This is how you would have spent most of May. Holed up in Gilmer, Texas, a fleck of a town in East Texas whose claim to fame is its annual Yamboree yam festival. Stepping over two months’ worth of cigarette butts, in blast-furnace heat, on your way to a courtroom squeezed into the building housing the county jail. Dodging rabid pickup trucks as you walk the cracked asphalt to a rented office next to the Tater-Town Barbershop, where you’ll gulp down a lunch of chicken strips. Leaving court at the end of the day and driving 25 miles to the nearest decent motel, across from the Waffle House, to start preparing for tomorrow. You’re spending three weeks in Gilmer because your big drug company client, Wyeth, is accused of heartlessly toying with the health of a sweet mother of two who took the diet-drug combination called fen-phen. Two weeks earlier, in another fen-phen case, a jury in Beaumont, Texas, clobbered Wyeth with a $1 billion verdict. Desperate to stanch the courtroom bleeding, Wyeth asked you to drop everything and hightail it to Texas. You’re working night and day to contain the damage. Then, near the end of trial, a bolt of bad luck. The Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals overturns a lower court and allows a pile of damaging evidence to be admitted in fen-phen cases around the country. Wyeth settles. You leave town without a verdict. Webb is used to anticlimactic endings. Eight times in the past two years, the marquee partner at Chicago’s Winston & Strawn has plunged into a case, often right before the scheduled trial date, furiously geared up, only to be forced to walk away without finishing the fight. Earlier this year another fen-phen case in Madison County, Ill., was postponed on the day of jury selection. A trademark case for Microsoft Corp. against Lindows Inc., set for trial in March, was delayed shortly before its starting date. A showdown over Grasso’s pay, to be played out in a suit filed by New York State Attorney General Eliot Spitzer, was derailed when Grasso’s lawyer, Brendan Sullivan Jr., of Williams & Connolly, filed a surprise request for a transfer from state to federal court. Starting next week, Webb, 58, may get to go the distance. The “mother of all trials,” as Webb likes to put it, it is set to begin — the U.S. Department of Justice’s $280 billion racketeering suit against the tobacco industry. Webb will be lead trial lawyer for Philip Morris USA Inc., the nation’s biggest cigarette maker. The tobacco giant’s trial team also includes an arsenal of major law firms: Arnold & Porter; Hunton & Williams; and Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison. William Ohlemeyer, vice president and associate general counsel of Altria Group Inc., the parent company of Philip Morris, says Webb is the “best fit” to lead this army. For one thing, he has represented the company in similar cases, such as the attorney general suits brought by Texas and Washington State. (The Texas case settled on the eve of trial, and Washington settled 10 weeks into trial.) Ohlemeyer also praises the “great team” from Winston & Strawn behind Webb, including partners Thomas Frederick and Kevin Narko. But, perhaps most important, is Webb’s personality: He’s a famous trial lawyer who is able to keep his ego in check. Lawyers from other firms like him and work well with him. Along with Philip Morris’ band of law firms, Webb is coordinating efforts with counsel for the other defendants, including: Jones Day, representing R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.; Kirkland & Ellis, for Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp.; St. Louis’ Thompson Coburn, representing Lorillard Tobacco Co.; and New York’s Kasowitz, Benson, Torres & Friedman, for Liggett Group Inc. Kirkland partner David Bernick, who will be Brown & Williamson’s lead trial counsel, describes Webb as “very down-to-earth and easy to get along with.” Bernick continues, “I’ve never seen him lose his temper or talk down to somebody. � Dan is a guy I genuinely look forward to trying a case with.” The Kirkland partner adds, “I’m not a wallflower. I’m not always easy to get along with. That says a lot about Dan.” The Clinton Justice Department filed this suit in 1999, seeking reimbursement of health care expenses under two relatively obscure statutes, the Federal Medical Care Recovery Act and the Secondary Payer Act. It also lobbed in civil claims under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, charging the industry with conspiring to conceal the dangers of smoking and its marketing plans for children. It sought disgorgement of the defendants’ “ill-gotten gains” from 1954 until 2050 and a host of monitoring measures. When President Bush took office at the start of 2001, skeptics predicted the Republican administration would drop this suit. It didn’t. Each side has scored some pretrial victories. In 2000, U.S. District Judge Gladys Kessler, of Washington, D.C., who will preside over the trial, granted the industry’s motion to toss out the MCRA and Secondary Payer Act claims, holding that Congress did not intend these laws to be used to recover costs like these. But the Clinton appointee refused to dismiss the RICO elements. The industry has filed an interlocutory appeal of Judge Kessler’s decision to allow the government to seek disgorgement of profits under RICO. Kessler has indicated she will start the trial before the D.C. Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals rules. In early September, the tobacco defendants asked to have the trial stayed for several months. Kessler denied that motion, and the trial started Tuesday. There, Webb faces a team of Justice Department career attorneys, led by deputy Attorney General Sharon Eubanks. The government’s team, which includes about 25 lawyers, is vastly outnumbered by the industry’s army. If you were Dan Webb, you’d have to sit in a courtroom facing a small-town jury and listen to the opposing counsel paint you as a slick city lawyer who is in bed with Big Tobacco. During jury selection in the Gilmer fen-phen trial, plaintiffs’ lawyer Douglas Monsour pointed out Wyeth’s army of lawyers, then confided to the local residents: “The primary reason that I’m concerned, it’s not all the lawyers that I’m really worried about, it’s Mr. Webb here. He is from Chicago. He’s very, very good. He’s a much better lawyer than I could ever dream of. We all aspire to be Mr. Webb as a lawyer, but only a few people get there.” Monsour then told the potential jurors that Webb had defended Philip Morris in a suit brought by their very own state of Texas. “They wrote an article about it in Business Week. � It’s called ‘Can Dan Webb Pull Big Tobacco Out of the Fire?’ � OK. Here’s what I’m worried about. � I’m worried that Mr. Webb is going to pull Wyeth out of the fire on this one.” Monsour, a partner in the four-lawyer Sloan Monsour firm in Longview, Texas, admits he had never heard of Dan Webb before the Chicago lawyer popped up in this case a month before trial. So the 35-year-old lawyer called up some friends in the plaintiff bar and got the bad news. “I said, ‘Oh, shit. He’s the real deal. When Jack Welch or Bill Gates are in trouble, they call him.’” During the trial Monsour acted like the one who owned the courtroom, tipping back in his chair and playfully twirling a binder clip on his pinkie finger. Webb hunched over counsel’s table, furiously writing on a pad of paper with all the diligence of a fourth-year associate whose career depended on catching every word. Occasionally Webb would lean back and assume his stock position: one hand crammed under the waistband of his pants and the other holding a pen that he gnawed with his back teeth. Webb’s co-counsel, Don Griffin Jr., from Vinson & Elkins’ Houston office, possessed the down-home Texas accent and patter. But Griffin couldn’t hide the sheen and polish that screamed “big-firm lawyer.” Webb, who grew up in a small Illinois town not unlike Gilmer, could pass as a local insurance agent, with his slightly stooped shoulders, loose-fitting gray suit, scuffed loafers and lank brown hair slipping onto his pale forehead. When Webb stood to examine a witness, he placed a ring binder on a plastic garbage barrel that served as a podium. Last year Webb’s peers voted him the nation’s top white-collar lawyer in a survey by the newsletter Corporate Crime Reporter. Given his reputation, you expect him to burst with charisma and dazzle. You eagerly await the sizzle. But nothing exciting happens. Webb is simply up there doing his job. Diligently. Thoroughly. Without fanfare. No great orator, he speaks in a voice that’s slightly high-pitched and staccato. He wraps his arms around his body and rarely gestures. He’s working, not putting on a show. Shortly before a break, Webb spots an oversize cockroach touring the courtroom. When the judge adjourns, Webb chases down the critter, lifts his foot, takes aim and smashes the bug on the carpet. He looks pleased. “He’s not what I expected at all,” says Monsour. “I expected a hard-ass, and he’s not. � He’s a real good guy. � I’d call him up at 11 at night and say, ‘What are you doing?’ He’d say, ‘What do you think I’m doing?’ I said, ‘Get down here!’ I’d pour some Scotch and we’d shoot the breeze.” The Texas lawyer offers a professional assessment: “A lot of defense lawyers out there, I think, are awful and don’t have good judgment. He’s got good judgment.” In an interview after the case settled, one juror says that given all the buildup that Monsour gave Webb, he was disappointed. “I expected to see some fantastic lawyer at work. It never came about to fruition,” says Huey Mitchell, a retired telecommunications manager for IBM Corp. Still, says Mitchell, he was leaning toward voting for Wyeth, because he thought the plaintiffs’ evidence wasn’t convincing. Another juror, David Holloway, had a hard time remembering which of the many lawyers was Webb. “Is he the one who looks like that actor, the one who was in that movie with Nicolas Cage, ‘Con Air’?” asked the 26-year-old grocery store clerk. Even if Webb didn’t wow these two jurors, others appreciate his style. “I think Dan is a very easy guy to underestimate,” says former Sullivan & Cromwell partner Michael Lacovara, who worked with Webb on the remedies phase of the Department of Justice’s antitrust case against Microsoft. “He’s not a snappy dresser. He’s not a polished guy,” says Lacovara, who left the Wall Street firm last year to join investment bank Sandler O’Neill & Partners as a principal and general counsel. “But what he is is sharp. � There are not many rooms where Dan is not the smartest person there.” “Dan is not the silver-tongued orator,” says Microsoft Vice President and Deputy General Counsel Thomas Burt. “I think he comes across to jurors as a highly credible advocate, an everyman sort of person.” Burt says when he hired Webb to join Sullivan & Cromwell on the antitrust team, he “wanted someone who could play well with others.” He adds, “He’s not the kind of guy who comes to a meeting or the courtroom with a great deal of ego on his sleeve.” “Dan is a real straight-up guy,” says Altria’s Ohlemeyer. “That’s the reason his name is attached to so many things. � The businesspeople really like him and really respect him. He speaks candidly and directly to them. A lot of lawyers don’t have the confidence to do that.” Webb’s confidence comes from the experience of trying more than 100 jury cases, and an estimable record of success. Other lawyers can match his list of victories, but there’s something about Webb’s genuineness that inspires exceptional trust and loyalty. “I know a lot of lawyers who come from similar backgrounds [as Webb], but you would think they’re one generation removed from English royalty,” says Lacovara. “Dan has not reinvented his exterior.” Says Webb’s partner, Bruce Braun: “Despite all the trappings of excellence, prestige and wealth, he’s just a normal, really nice guy.” If you were Dan Webb, you would have had to stand in a Miami courtroom on a hot July day in 2000, and listen as your client, Philip Morris, and its competitors were smacked with the largest verdict in U.S. history in Engle v. Liggett Group — $145 billion in punitive damages. Your reaction would have been broadcast around the country by television cameras. Live. Webb had stepped into Engle after the defendants were already in bad shape. Before Webb was involved, in the first phase of this class action, the jury found that smoking caused many of the class’s injuries and that the tobacco companies’ conduct warranted punitive damages. (The class includes all Florida residents who suffer from diseases caused by an addiction to nicotine, and survivors of those who have died.) Philip Morris asked Webb to jump into the case to try to limit the punitives. He figured he’d be there for a couple of months. It turned out to be more than a year. “We knew going in we were in deep trouble,” says Webb’s partner Bradley Lerman, who tried the case with him. Lerman recalls the sinking feeling that he and Webb got the first time they watched the Engle jury enter the courtroom: “It was as bad a feeling from a jury as I’ve ever had. � You could just see the looks on their faces — it was not warm.” Still, Lerman says, Webb thought he could turn things around. “[Webb] felt he could go down there and pull something out of his hat that would save a grim situation.” Lerman says Webb’s strategy for this case and others is simple: “He rolls up his sleeves and works through the facts with each witness. � Dan doesn’t get mad, he operates in the courtroom like a doctor in an operating room.” Like everyone else interviewed for this article, Lerman stressed Webb’s exhaustive preparation. His team of lieutenants works up materials for him, but he doesn’t just lean on their work. “He doesn’t take outlines from an associate or junior partner and walk into court with it,” says Lerman. When preparing to examine a witness, Webb leaves nothing to chance. He writes out the exact wording of each question. Lerman recalls the effort Webb put in before cross-examining a major plaintiff witness in Engle: “He reworked that outline 12 to 15 times. � It is worked and reworked and reworked till he has it perfect.” When the jury announced its stunning verdict, Webb predicted it wouldn’t stand. Last year a Florida appellate court nullified the Engle verdict and decertified the class, finding that the plaintiffs’ claims varied so much that they should not be tried as a class. This victory for the tobacco companies was thrown into doubt in May, when the state Supreme Court decided to hear the plaintiffs’ appeal of the reversal. A hearing is set for November. In the upcoming Justice Department tobacco trial, Webb won’t be playing to a jury. The tobacco companies had asked for a jury trial, but Judge Kessler denied the request. She concluded that the relief sought by the government, including the disgorgement of profits, was equitable in nature and did not require a jury trial under the Seventh Amendment. Kessler has not been pleased with Webb’s client in recent months. In July she sanctioned Philip Morris $2.75 million for the “reckless disregard and gross indifference” it displayed when it deleted a mass of e-mails it should have turned over in discovery. Philip Morris maintained that the deletions were inadvertent, and stressed that the company had come forward to alert the judge about the problem. But Kessler blamed Philip Morris for waiting four months after it discovered the problem in 2002 to tell her. The judge also punished the company by ruling that at least 11 Philip Morris witnesses, including one of its top in-house scientists, will be barred from testifying. Despite Kessler’s narrowing of the case, it remains a beast: More than 300 depositions have been taken, more than 200 witnesses are expected to testify, more than 600 pretrial orders have been entered, roughly 40 million pages of documents have been exchanged in discovery, and the two sides have designated more than 70,000 potential exhibits for trial. The trial is predicted to stretch into next year. Webb tries to ease the toll of such lengthy stints away from home. During the year he spent in Miami on Engle, his five children, now 6 to 27, would fly in for occasional visits. “I’m very close to my kids. But I’m not there as much as I should be,” says Webb, who has been married once, for 32 years. He met his wife when she worked as a secretary at the U.S. attorney’s office. “My kids have been great about it,” he says. “But they think I work too hard.” If Webb is enamored of the financial trappings of success, he’s managed to keep it a secret. The Winston & Strawn partner doesn’t keep a yacht on Lake Michigan, belong to a country club or even have a second home. Webb’s secretary, Gail Wooten, laughs when asked if her boss lunches at fancy restaurants. “Normally he orders in,” says Wooten. If you were Dan Webb, you would have spent your youth in the small town of Bushnell, Ill., roughly 200 miles southwest of Chicago, where your father juggled jobs, including delivering mail and selling farm implements, while your mother worked as a dental assistant. Some small towns are quaint. Bushnell isn’t one of them. Today half of the fading downtown stores are boarded up. The rest are barely hanging on. For college, you would have moved 15 miles away to Western Illinois University in Macomb. The school’s motto: “Endless Options, Zero Pretensions.” When Webb moved to Chicago to attend Loyola University of Chicago School of Law, his mother was appalled by the condition of his apartment. “There were three or four of them living there,” says Hoyle, “and Dan’s bed was in a closet. Mother was shocked and could not believe her son was living like that.” Back in his corner office in Chicago in the prestigious 35 West Wacker Dr. skyscraper, Webb reveals what he dreads the most. “Easily my biggest fear in life is boredom,” he says. “I think the practice of law can by and large be pretty boring: pushing paper and dealing with abstract issues and constantly being bogged down with a mass of things to do with very little focus. At least when you’re on trial, you do not get bored. You’re living by hard work and your wits. � I tend to balance a lot of balls in the air. I do fear boredom. � In a small town, you have to go out of your way to stay occupied.” You still want to be Dan Webb? Susan Beck is a San Francisco-based senior writer for The American Lawyer.

This content has been archived. It is available exclusively through our partner LexisNexis®.

To view this content, please continue to Lexis Advance®.

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber? Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® customers will be able to access and use ALM's content by subscribing to the LexisNexis® services via Lexis Advance®. This includes content from the National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Law Technology News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.

ALM's content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisNexis® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]

 
 

ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2020 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.