Brian T. Glennon

Glennon said he is struck by how much the marketplace in general and his practice in particular have evolved over the years.

"I was at L.A. Airport a year ago and ran into a law school classmate," he said. "I said that I was flying up to San Francisco on a hearing on a stock option backdating case. She said, 'They still make those?' There was a time when it seemed everybody in my practice area was working on stock option backdating cases. It struck me how suddenly they disappeared."

To keep up with the shifting landscape, Glennon said that he tries to remain flexible in order to quickly adapt to the changes. For instance, he has expanded his practice to focus on matters involving public companies, directors and officers and accounting and professional services firms.

"The most recent wave of cases are arising out of the financial crisis," he said.

Among his significant cases, Glennon represented Insight Enterprises Inc. and its officers and directors in a string of high-profile securities and derivatives lawsuits, including a shareholder class action involving allegations from 31 different confidential informants, in which plaintiffs alleged hundreds of millions of dollars in damages. Karpov v. Insight Enterprises Inc., CV-09-856 (D. Ariz., filed Nov. 16, 2010).

"Just because a complaint is lengthy and relies on confidential informants doesn't mean there is any substance to the fraud allegations," Glennon said. "That's precisely what happened in this case. We demonstrated that the confidential witnesses had no involvement in any of the accounting issues, or knowledge about the officers accused of engaging in fraud. The district court agreed and dismissed the claims."

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the ruling in March 2012.

Glennon also successfully represented Joanne Kim, the chief executive officer of Wilshire State Bank, in a securities class action and derivative litigation. Fairservice v. Wilshire Bancorp Inc. et al., CV-11-2645 (C.D. Cal., filed Feb. 8, 2012).

"She was accused of lying to the marketplace about the bank's financial condition," Glennon said. "They cited red flags that they claimed should have alerted her to the falsity of the statements. But there were no facts to suggest she intended to commit fraud and, on that basis, we won. We showed that these were not even flags, let alone red flags."

In March 2012, the case was dismissed with prejudice.

- PAT BRODERICK