As chairman of the appellate and constitutional law practice at Gibson Dunn & Crutcher, Thomas Hungar is accustomed to analyzing high court opinions. An amicus brief he wrote on behalf of six law professors in Courtney v. Danner let him delve into Reconstruction-era history.
“My son is a history buff,” said Hungar, who has argued 25 times before the U.S. Supreme Court. “I’m planning to send him our brief in this case, which is not the case for the vast majority of what I work on.”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
