Gerald E. Hawxhurst

Partner

Direct: (310) 893-5151
Cell: (310) 293-2233
Fax: (310) 893-5195

jerry@hawxhurstllp.com

Profile

Jerry is a founder and resident partner in the Firm’s Austin and Los Angeles offices. He has engaged in commercial trial practice since 1994, when he graduated with honors from The University of Texas School of Law. Before co-founding the Firm, Jerry practiced at the Los Angeles office of Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan and, before that, at Simpson Thacher & Bartlett’s New York and Los Angeles offices.

Jerry’s trial practice includes complex commercial disputes, class actions, antitrust, employment matters, royalty, copyright, trade secret, entertainment and general business litigation in state and federal courts, as well as private arbitrations. His matters span a variety of industries and legal topics, including private disputes over a famous Andy Warhol painting, high-speed rollercoaster technology, alleged price fixing and market division in the petroleum and entertainment industries, false advertising claims for consumer goods and product liability—often in the class action setting. Jerry also provides pre-dispute and compliance counseling on a variety of legal issues.

Jerry has tried or co-tried over a dozen cases and arbitrations; he’s lost three, two of which were completely or substantially reversed on appeal.

In 2016, Law360 chose the Firm as one of ten national trial boutiques “giving Big Law a run for its money.” The Firm was chosen because of its success, the complexity of the matters it handles and the quality of the Firm’s partners and associates.

Jerry has been recognized by Los Angeles Magazine as a Southern California “Super Lawyer” (2005, 2007 – 2023) and as a national “New Star” by Law Dragon magazine (2006). Jerry was recognized by Law Dragon as one of the top 3,000 lawyers in the U.S., based on a survey of attorneys and clients. Jerry has a Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Rating of A-V Preeminent (the highest rating).

Jerry is the former First Vice-Chair of the Executive Committee of the California State Bar Antitrust and Unfair Competition Section (on which he served for six years). He is admitted to practice in California, New York and Texas state, appellate and federal courts, as well as the Second, Fifth and Ninth Circuit Courts of Appeal. Before beginning private practice, Jerry was a briefing intern for former Texas Supreme Court Justice and current U.S. Senator John Cornyn.

Lectures and Publications

Jerry serves as an Adjunct Professor at The University of Texas School of Law, where he teaches a course on Advanced Litigation: Problems and Strategies. He has authored articles and lectured on several topics, including collective liability, class action defense, federal and state antitrust law, consumer protection laws, corporate criminal liability, wage and hour defense, and trial strategy.

Representative Engagements

In October 2022, Jerry and our team won summary judgment in two high-profile antitrust cases pending in the Federal District Court for the Southern District of California. Two groups of plaintiffs in proposed class actions accused major U.S. oil refiners of price fixing and manipulation of gasoline pricing in California. Plaintiffs sought $28 billion in damages, prior to trebling. The firm represents Valero Marketing and Supply Co.
In April 2022, Jerry obtained summary judgment on a declaratory judgment claim brought for our client in the Federal District Court for the Central District in Florida. The federal court issued an order declaring that the firm’s client, the world’s leading designer and manufacturer of high-speed amusement park thrill rides, was not required to arbitrate claims concerning a project in Dubai.
In early 2022, Jerry obtained two victories for the firm’s client Southwest Airlines in the California Court of Appeals. The first victory affirmed the trial court’s finding that certain claims against Southwest were preempted and therefore barred by the Federal Airline Deregulation Act. The second appeal affirmed the trial court’s award to Southwest of hundreds of thousands of dollars in fees and costs that Southwest incurred in successfully defending itself in the trial court.
In late 2021, the Firm won summary judgment against the plaintiff’s claims in the Southern District of Texas. The plaintiff alleged that the Firm’s client—an international petroleum services provider—breached a confidentiality agreement and engaged in fraud in connection with a possible acquisition of plaintiff’s business, causing alleged damages in excess of $12 million. On summary judgment, the Firm disproved key elements of each of the plaintiff’s claims, resulting in a complete defense victory and leaving only the Firm’s client’s counterclaims for trial, which is scheduled to take place later this year.
Jerry obtained reversal of federal trial court’s order (following a bench trial) that misallocated indemnification obligations to the Firm’s client under a merger agreement. The Ninth Circuit sided with the Firm on how certain asbestos-related liabilities were to be apportioned.
Jerry and the Firm’s trial team also recently obtained a complete dismissal of the complaint and was also awarded attorney’s fees for the Firm’s client on appeal to the Texas Court of Appeals. The plaintiff sued in state court alleging violations of the Texas Debt Collection Act and unreasonable debt collection practices by the Firm’s Michigan client. The trial court denied the Firm’s motion to dismiss, which argued that the alleged conduct was protected by the client’s First Amendment right to petition and that the plaintiff’s causes of action based on that conduct should be dismissed pursuant to the Texas Citizen’s Participation Act (“TCPA”). The Firm sought immediate appeal of the trial court’s order. The Court of Appeals sided with each of the Firm’s major arguments, finding as a matter of first impression that pre-suit debt collection conduct can be protected by the TCPA. The Court of Appeals’ order instructs the district court to dismiss all claims against the Firm’s client and to order the plaintiff to pay the Firm’s client’s legal bills incurred in its successful defense.
2019 saw the Firm and its clients once again win a number of high-stakes cases. Jerry and the Firm’s trial team successfully represented the leading manufacturer and distributor of energy shots against antitrust claims brought by seven plaintiffs in the Central District of California. Following a nearly three-week trial involving extensive expert testimony, the jury returned a complete defense verdict. The court subsequently denied all of the plaintiffs’ post-trial motions, including a motion for a permanent injunction, a new jury trial and motion for judgment as a matter of law.
In 2019, the Firm also obtained dismissal of a proposed consumer class action in which the named plaintiff alleged that the Firms’ client mislabeled its products and misled consumers into believing those products were “all natural.” The firm devised and implemented a litigation strategy that resulted in the plaintiff making several key admissions during her deposition. The Firm’s team also marshalled expert opinion testimony that refuted several of the plaintiff’s allegations concerning the composition of the products at issue. Following disclosure of these opinions and faced with her own testimony, the plaintiff voluntarily dismissed with prejudice the entire case.
2018 was another very good year for the Firm and its clients. Once again, Jerry and the Firm were hired to take over a case from another firm after it had suffered several defeats, which included an order certifying a class of California consumers who allegedly paid overcharges at the gas pump. The Firm was hired after fact discovery had concluded, but before expert discovery was completed. The Firm was successful in obtaining an order decertifying the damages class and defeating plaintiffs’ attempt to certify an injunctive relief class. The Firm also obtained summary dismissal of plaintiffs’ claims for statutory and punitive damages. The orders were so devastating to the plaintiffs’ case that the trial court vacated the upcoming trial date. The case was later settled on a class basis, but without the payment of any damages to the plaintiff class and a super-negative loadstar for their counsel.
In 2018, the Firm also obtained a complete victory for our client in one of the first cases brought under the United States Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 (DTSA) (Pub.L. 114–153, 130 Stat. 376, enacted May 11, 2016, codified at 18 U.S.C. § 1836, et seq.). After two years of litigation, the primary defendant entered into a consent judgment in which the defendant admitted to the allegations of the complaint and agreed to pay the Firm’s client significant damages. The Firm also obtained a stipulated permanent injunction against the defendant.
In 2018, the Firm also won summary adjudication against all of the plaintiff’s monetary claims in a dispute between the plaintiff and his former employer. In that case, the plaintiff sought millions of dollars of damages based on the allegation that the Firm’s client had supposedly violated the California Labor Code and Business & Professions Code by failing to timely pay the plaintiff millions of dollars he claimed to be owed because of and upon his termination. The Firm established as an “undisputed fact” that plaintiff’s key allegation was false, leading the trial court to summarily dismiss plaintiff’s damages claims.
2017 was another very good year for the Firm’s class action defense practice. After taking over an antitrust case from a large national firm, Jerry and his team successfully defeated class certification. Months later, Jerry and his team defeated class certification in an MDL action that has been pending for six years. Plaintiffs sought billions of dollars in damages on behalf of the proposed classes. Plaintiffs noticed and then later abandoned their appeal. They did, however, pay a cost bill that was thousands of dollars.
Prior to 2017, Jerry and the Firm had numerous other notable victories. Jerry secured a complete defense summary judgment for the Firm’s client—the leading designer and seller in the United States of “mega-coasters” and cutting-edge theme park rides. Jerry was hired to take over the case after the prior law firm lost several significant motions and a prior action for the client, which formed the basis of some of the claims against the client. The plaintiff, represented by one of the country’s top antitrust plaintiff’s firms, sought almost $20 million in damages. The win was especially impressive because the same trial court (in a prior action) had issued an order finding that our client had engaged in fraud on the patent office.
Jerry defeated a proposed class action on behalf of the Firm’s client, which marketed a product that helped allay hangover symptoms. The named plaintiff alleged that the product did not work as advertised and, she alleged, did not work at all. The district court denied certification and also found that plaintiff lacked standing to pursue individual claims. Her counsel paid the Firm’s client thousands of dollars in order to avoid trial on the merits.
Jerry obtained reversal of a multi-million-dollar federal court verdict. Jerry demonstrated that the trial court committed several reversible evidentiary legal errors before and during trial. The case was resolved on favorable terms upon remand.
Jerry obtained millions of dollars in arbitration awards concerning cancellation of contracts to distribute drinks in Mexico. The international arbitrations were conducted before separate arbitrators in parallel. Jerry defeated counterclaims seeking millions of dollars in damages from the Firm’s client.
Jerry resolved on extremely favorable terms a class action against a marketer of consumer health products. Jerry was hired to replace a prior law firm after it unsuccessfully opposed a motion to certify a California class of consumers who had purchased a back wrap that used hot and cold therapy, along with magnetic technology. Jerry developed a strategy to seek a nation-wide settlement class on a “claims-made” basis that would resolve all claims by all consumers for the entire line of products, rather than seeking to decertify the class. The strategy was successful: less than $500 in claims were made and all potential claims by all consumers in the United States were dismissed with prejudice. Although the settlement contained a $600,000 clear sailing fee provision, the court awarded class counsel less than $300,000 in fees, later reduced to about $100,000. Better yet, plaintiffs’ counsel was later forced to pay our client tens of thousands of dollars in costs incurred in enforcing the class settlement. At the end of the day, plaintiffs’ counsel paid for their “victory.”
Jerry obtained a dismissal with prejudice of a proposed nation-wide class action against one of the country’s leading beverage companies. The district court dismissed the case after the named plaintiff refused to continue her deposition, which her counsel stopped after Jerry elicited testimony showing that her claims lacked merit.
Jerry was hired by one of the nation’s largest auto parts companies to take over a case from a prominent national law firm, after the client’s copyright claims were dismissed on summary judgment. In a case of first impression, the Ninth Circuit agreed with the Firm’s theory that the “work for hire” doctrine trumped a copyright owner’s rights to control derivative works. In an unpublished memorandum decision, the Ninth Circuit also affirmed dismissal of antitrust claims against the Firm’s client.
Jerry obtained in arbitration a payment of nearly $1 million from a law firm that had made several strategic errors when previously representing the Firm’s client.
Jerry defeated efforts by the late Michael Jackson to halt the auction of his personal property from Neverland Ranch. After the court denied Jackson’s request for an injunction, Jerry extracted a multi-million-dollar settlement from Jackson in exchange for cancelling the auction and returning Jackson’s property to him.
Jerry’s other victories include securing for a client a $48 million cash settlement in an arbitration where the other side refused to pay anything in connection with the cancellation of distribution rights for a leading energy drink; obtaining for an individual plaintiff an arbitration award of stock valued at over $8 million, where the former employer argued it owed nothing; and extracting a confidential settlement from ABC Cable Networks in a case where Jerry’s client contended that he developed the idea for the hit Disney show Hannah Montana.

Family and Community Service

Jerry spent his formative years on a small farm in the Texas Hill Country, along with seven brothers and sisters. Jerry and his wife Sue now divide their time between Austin, Texas, and Los Angeles, California. They have four children.

Sue and Jerry enjoy participating in community service organizations and are loyal supporters of The University of Texas at Austin. They are members of the Charles Alan Wright Society and are Keaton Fellows and Sheffield Fellows of The University of Texas School of Law, members of The University of Texas Littlefield Society and Chancellor’s Council. Sue and Jerry are appointed members of the UT Development Board and Jerry served as an appointed member of the University of Texas System Chancellor’s Council Executive Committee. Jerry was nominated and elected to serve on the Executive Committee of the University of Texas School of Law Alumni Association; he was re-nominated in 2014, and completed his second four-year term in 2018. Before attending law school, Jerry received a mayoral appointment to the Higher Education Authority of San Antonio, Texas.

In 2009, Jerry and Sue established the Gerald E. Hawxhurst and Susan St. Denis Endowed Presidential Scholarship at The University of Texas and increased their gift in 2011. This endowment provides financial aid to university students who did not graduate high school, but through perseverance are pursuing a college education. In 2015, Jerry and Sue also established an endowed Dean’s Scholarship for Excellence at Texas Law. The endowment honors Jerry’s late brother, Richard Moses Hawxhurst, and provides tuition support for students who excel academically. In 2016, Sue and Jerry funded the President’s Associate’s Endowment. In 2019, as a birthday gift to Sue, Jerry established the Ella and Howard Christensen Presidential Scholarship at the University of Texas, named in honor of Sue’s parents. This scholarship is earmarked to provide tuition assistant to the current student president of the Federalist Society at U.T. Law. Sue and Jerry’s scholarships have provided financial support to dozens of deserving undergraduate and law school students.

Jerry has represented a variety of clients pro bono, including the Natural Resources Defense Council (Jerry defeated on summary judgment a breach of contract claim seeking over $180 million in damages), an undocumented immigrant-owner of a small landscape company against a general contractor who refused to pay for work and materials (the general contractor paid up), and an elderly client for whom he obtained social security benefits that had been wrongfully denied (Uncle Sam did the right thing), and a domestic worker in a lawsuit in which a real-estate speculator refused to complete the sale of investment property because he believed the contract price was “too low” (the client is building her dream house on her new property). The Firm’s lawyers have also helped military veterans expunge misdemeanor convictions to help them obtain civilian jobs upon leaving the military.

Education
The University of Texas School of Law
(J.D., cum laude)

University of the Incarnate Word
(B.B.A., magna cum laude)

Representative Clients

Jerry has represented a diverse group of clients, including Valero Marketing and Supply Company, Trinity Industries, Arcosa, Inc., Caliber Collision, Southwest Airlines Co., Innovation Ventures, LLC (the makers of 5-hour ENERGY®), Micron Technology, Inc., Boingo Wireless, Inc., Intamin, LTD., Dr Pepper Snapple Group, Inc., U.S. Auto Parts, Inc., Colt Industries, Marmot Mountain, LLC, Blockbuster Inc., Herbalife International of America, Mattel, Inc., Viacom Inc., BAT Industries PLC, Intertek PLC, Paramount Pictures, The Producers’ Guild of America, Oracle Corporation, Yankee Candle Company, off-shore liquidators, corporate executives, high net-worth individuals, a well-known boxing promoter, and the owners of NBA and MLB franchises.

Publications, Speeches, and Presentations

“Trying a Section 1 Case”
State Bar of California Antitrust and Unfair Competition Section Annual Meeting, Fall 2006

“A State-by-State Look at the Law of Indirect Purchaser Damage Actions”
Journal of Competition (2006)

“The Nuts and Bolts of California’s Unfair Competition Law”
State Bar of California Antitrust and Unfair Competition Section, Spring 2006

“California Cartwright Act: A Defendant’s Perspective”
State Bar of California Annual Meeting, Fall 2005

”Proposition 64: A Comparative Analysis”
Journal of Competition (2005)

“Does Proposition 64 Apply to Pending Cases?”
State Bar of California Antitrust and Unfair Competition Section
Seminar, Fall 2004

“Competitor Collaborations”
State Bar of California Antitrust and Unfair Competition Section
Golden State Institute, Fall 2004

“Preventing Corporate Criminal Liability”
Benders’ Legal Publications (2002)

“Antitrust Developments in the Media and Entertainment Industries”
Antitrust Review of the Americas (2002)

”Collective Industry Liability”
Association of the Bar of the City of New York, Fall 2000