Thomas A.

Casey

Position: Partner
Office: New Orleans

Tom Casey is a partner in the Litigation Practice Group. He has a wide-ranging commercial litigation practice covering matters in both court and arbitration.

Tom maintains a broad business and commercial litigation practice, handling disputes in court and arbitration. He has represented a variety of clients in the manufacturing, insurance, financial, and healthcare industries.

Tom has also handled well over 50 class action cases in multiple states on issues such as products liability, contracts, unfair trade practices, and torts, as well as violations of healthcare, environmental, tax, antitrust, civil rights, and employment discrimination laws and regulations.

He has handled more than 100 franchise-related regulatory and judicial proceedings in ten states. These disputes have involved dealership terminations, sale agreements, relocations, facility requirements, incentive programs, audit challenges, incentive and warranty fraud, performance standards, product allocation, rights of first refusal, and licensing.

Before joining Jones Walker in 1983, Tom was a law clerk for the Honorable Adrian G. Duplantier of the US District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana.

Noteworthy

Experience

Zimmer v. Generac Power Systems, Inc., No. 2:21-cv-01659 (E.D. La.). Tom was lead counsel for the defendant in a putative class action filed by the plaintiff on behalf of purchasers of certain generators, which plaintiff claimed were defective. After we filed a Motion to Dismiss on both the plaintiff’s individual claim and the class allegations, plaintiff voluntarily dismissed the suit.
Lancaster v. Carnival Corporation, No. 4:20-cv-03122 (S.D. Tex.). Plaintiff filed a putative class action against defendant in which he claimed that defendant failed to promptly reimburse cruise cancellation fees. Tom and other Jones Walker attorneys represented the defendant. We were able to resolve the case on an individual basis at a very early stage, and the case was dismissed with prejudice.
Berman v. General Motors LLC, No. 2:18-cv-14371 (S.D. Fla.). Tom was counsel for defendant in this nationwide class action brought on behalf of the owners and lessees of certain vehicles claimed to be defective. Very shortly after suit was filed, the parties agreed to a class wide settlement, and Tom oversaw the approval and implementation of all aspects the settlement.
Dumont v. Reily Foods Co., No. 1:18-cv-10907 (D. Mass) and Fahey v. New England Coffee Co., No. 1:19-cv-00950 (D.D.C.). Tom and other firm attorneys defended two class actions brought against a coffee manufacturer. Plaintiffs alleged that the manufacturer’s flavored coffee packaging was improperly labeled and could mislead consumers about the products’ contents. In one of the cases, we obtained a dismissal at an early stage. In the other case, we gradually reduced the claims through motion practice (limiting the substantive relief available and striking the class allegations), and then the plaintiff agreed to a dismissal.
JMCB, LLC, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Sabine Pass Liquefaction, LLC, No. 3:17-cv-0077 (M.D. La.). Plaintiff, on behalf of a putative class of ad valorem taxpayers, brought a constitutional challenge to $1.4 billion in industrial tax exemptions granted to defendant in connection with its construction of a $9 billion liquefied natural gas facility. Tom along with other Jones Walker attorneys represented the defendant. The court upheld the defendant’s removal of the action to federal court, rejecting plaintiff’s remand arguments based on the Class Action Fairness Act, the Tax Injunction Act, and various tax comity principles. 293 F.Supp.3d 580 (M.D. La. 2017). Thereafter, the court granted defendant’s motion to dismiss the entire action on the merits, finding that the company’s facility satisfied the constitutional requirements. 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 143237 (M.D. La. Aug. 23, 2018).
Steven Juarez, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. General Motors LLC, No. 3:18-cv-00207 (W.D. Tex.). In 2018, Tom served as lead counsel for defendant in this putative nationwide class action alleging that defendant misrepresented the towing capacity of certain 2014 Chevrolet and GMC trucks. Shortly after we filed a motion to dismiss both the substantive claims and the class allegations, the case was settled on an individual basis with the named plaintiff and the case was dismissed. John J. Harris, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. General Motors LLC, No. 5:17-cv-00180 (E.D. Tex.). In late 2017, Tom served as lead counsel for defendant in this putative nationwide class action alleging that the service brakes on certain late model Chevrolet and GMC trucks wear prematurely. Shortly after we filed a motion to dismiss both the substantive claims and the class allegations, the case was settled on an individual basis with the named plaintiff and the case was dismissed.
Dinwiddie v. Suzuki Motor of America, Inc., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 85045 (W.D. Okla. May 27, 2015). Tom was lead counsel for Suzuki Motor of America, Inc., in an Oklahoma federal court in a nationwide class action brought on behalf of about 200,000 purchasers of certain Suzuki vehicles. The plaintiffs claimed that the vehicles were defective because the headlamps had a condition that allegedly created the potential for vehicle fires. In response to the plaintiffs' complaint, which sought economic loss damages for the alleged defect and for Suzuki's alleged negligent implementation of the recall, the firm filed a motion to dismiss all causes of action. The motion was granted in full without leave for plaintiffs to amend.
Harding v. MidSouth Bank, N.A. Tom and other firm attorneys represented a bank in connection with allegations that it manipulated its posting procedures for debit transactions. The case was brought by multiple plaintiffs' firms as a 10-year, nationwide class action. The suit was essentially identical to dozens of class actions brought against other banks across the country, which most banks settled after classes were certified. In response to the bank's motion to compel arbitration, argued by Tom, a federal court ordered the case to arbitration despite that the arbitration provision at issue had several non-standard provisions. Harding v. MidSouth Bank, N.A., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 143984 (W.D. La. Oct. 3, 2012). Thereafter, the bank filed a motion to dismiss in the arbitration and the arbitrator dismissed the claims against the bank on the merits in 2014.
Bush v. Ruth’s Chris Steak House, Inc., No. 1:10-cv-01721 (D.D.C.). In this employment discrimination class action, Tom took the lead on defending the class certification issues. After fact and expert class certification discovery and full briefing on plaintiff’s motion for class certification, we resolved the case on an individual basis and the case was dismissed.
Strong, derivatively on behalf of Tidewater Inc. v. Taylor, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 29234 (E.D. La. Mar. 5, 2013); and Strong, derivatively on behalf of Tidewater Inc. v. Taylor, 877 F. Supp. 2d 433 (E.D. La. 2012). Tom and other firm attorneys defended Tidewater Inc., a corporation that is a leading provider of offshore service vessels to the global energy industry, in a shareholder derivative action. The suit arose out of alleged violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. After successfully staying discovery pending rulings on pre-trial motions, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss the case because of the plaintiff’s failure to adequately plead that prior demand on the board of directors would have been futile. The court granted the motion to dismiss. The plaintiff then filed a motion to stay, which the defendants opposed, in order to provide the plaintiff with an opportunity to dispense with the demand futility allegations and instead pursue a formal demand on the board of directors. The court denied that motion as well and dismissed the case with prejudice.
Tom co-led a team of Jones Walker attorneys and paralegals from several offices in 2010 in defending a major motor vehicle manufacturer in 38 arbitrations. The arbitrations were brought by dealerships in five states (Arkansas, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Tennessee). The arbitrations were conducted under specially-targeted congressional legislation that allowed the dealerships a one-time opportunity to contest the scheduled terminations of their dealer agreements.
Cole v. General Motors Corp., 484 F.3d 717 (5th Cir. 2007). Tom served as primary counsel for the defendant in this nationwide class action brought on behalf of 225,000 purchasers of products in every state in the nation. The US Court of Appeals issued an opinion upholding the defendant's position that a nationwide class action would be contrary to law. Tom argued the appeal. The case has been dismissed.
Maldonado v. Ochsner Clinic Foundation, 493 F.3d 521 (5th Cir. 2007). Tom, along with other Jones Walker lawyers, defended a not-for-profit hospital in litigation where the plaintiffs contended that the hospital overcharged uninsured patients for services rendered over a ten-year period. The firm successfully defeated class certification in the district court, and the appellate court affirmed. There were approximately 50 similar class actions on the same issue against other hospitals around the country, but this was the first favorable ruling on certification for any hospital.
Atlas Roofing Corporation class actions (E.D. La.). Tom served as primary counsel for Atlas Roofing, a major manufacturer of roofing shingles, in a series of three class actions brought against the company. The suits alleged the defective manufacture of shingles. All of the cases were removed to federal court, and subsequently transferred before one federal district judge. In the first matter, we defeated class certification of a Rule 23(b)(2) class (the rule pertaining to an injunctive class). See Hilton v. Atlas Roofing Corp., 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 88290 (E.D. La. Dec. 5, 2006). In the second, we were successful in having the class claims dismissed inasmuch as the plaintiff did not timely move for class certification. See Sewell v. Atlas Roofing Corp., 2007 WL 1198921 (E.D. La. Apr. 20, 2007). In the third, the plaintiff's request for certification under Rule 23(b)(3) (a damages class) was also denied. See Welch v. Atlas Roofing Corp., 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 81563 (E.D. La. Nov. 2, 2007).
Massey v. ICF Emergency Services, 07-462 (M.D. La.). We represented the contractor managing the State of Louisiana's multibillion-dollar "Road Home" program (for victims of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita) in a class action brought on behalf of program applicants. We filed a motion to dismiss (argued by Tom), which was granted at the outset of the case.
In re The Western and Southern Life Insurance Co. Industrial Life Insurance Litigation, MDL No. 1395 (E.D. La.). Tom served as lead and liaison counsel in an MDL on behalf of a defendant insurer. The MDL was made up of eight nationwide class actions alleging discriminatory pricing over a 60-year period by 80 companies acquired by the client. The cases were filed in four different states by a group of about 25 law firms. The district judge denied certification. In re Industrial Life Ins.Litig., 208 F.R.D. 571 (E.D. La. 2002). In August of 2003 the US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, by a 2-1 vote, reversed the district court's legal analysis without deciding whether a class should be certified. In re Monumental Life Ins. Co., Industrial Life Ins. Litig., 365 F.3d 408 (5th Cir. 2004). However, on remand, the district court again denied certification. The matter was settled on an individual basis thereafter, and all cases were dismissed in 2007.

Thomas A.

Casey

Noteworthy

Experience

Publications

Presentations

Memberships

Education

Bar Admissions

Court Admissions

Related Practices

Thomas A. Casey

Noteworthy

Experience

Publications

Presentations

Memberships

Education

Bar Admissions

Court Admissions

Related Practices

Thomas A.

Casey