Attorneys

Print Pdf
 
Richard Buckner
RICHARD BUCKNER

Richard Buckner

Of Counsel

Los Angeles (main)

t: 310.282.6221
f: 310.785.3521
rbuckner@glaserweil.com

Richard Buckner

Of Counsel

Los Angeles (main)

Rich Buckner is Of Counsel in Glaser Weil’s Litigation Department.  Mr. Buckner has extensive experience in complex civil litigation covering an extraordinarily broad range of subject matters, including contract claims, business torts, antitrust claims, trade secrets and other intellectual property matters, insurance coverage and bad faith disputes, professional malpractice, and public corruption. 

Mr. Buckner has handled over twenty trials, arbitrations, or similar live, evidentiary proceedings.  In addition to his trial practice, Mr. Buckner has briefed and argued appeals involving bankruptcy, interference with prospective economic advantage and contract, insurance, construction, public corruption, and commercial landlord-tenant disputes in Federal and State appellate courts.

More More

Mr. Buckner earned his bachelor’s degree from George Mason University and his law degree from the University of Southern California Gould School of Law.  After graduating from law school, Mr. Buckner served as a law clerk for The Honorable Walter Ely, Judge of the United States Court of Appeal for the Ninth Circuit.  Before joining Glaser Weil, Mr. Buckner practiced at O’Melveny & Myers LLP.

Small
 
 
  • Practice Areas
  • Education
    • University of Southern California Gould School of Law, J.D.

    • George Mason University, B.S., Business Administration

  • Federal and Patent Bar Admissions
    • United States District Court for the Northern, Central, and Southern Districts of California

    • United States District Court for the District of Arizona

    • United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

  • State Bar Admissions
    • California

  • Representative Matters
    • Represented nine states and the District of Columbia in submitting an amici curiae brief to the United States Supreme Court in support of the Government in Abramski v. United States of America, 134 S. Ct. 2259 (2014) (decided in the Government’s favor).

    • Successfully defended a major concert promoter and two of its employees in defeating wrongful death claims in excess of $1 billion brought by the mother and children of a well-known pop star after a four-month jury trial.

    • Successfully defended a major electronics manufacturer in a six-month jury trial against Cartwright Act (state antitrust law) claims seeking in excess of $11 billion in damages (after trebling).

    • Won an award in excess of $12 million on behalf of a major government contractor in an arbitration against its former attorneys for legal malpractice.

    • Successfully represented a seafood company in a six-week jury trial against two former employees and their new employer for misappropriation of trade secrets and obtained a judgment of approximately $4.5 million and an award of attorneys’ fees for willful misappropriation.

    • Successfully represented a governmental agency in a seven-week jury trial against two of its former executives and an entity they formed for breach of fiduciary duty, legal malpractice, and violation of Cal. Gov’t Code § 1090 and obtained a judgment of approximately $9 million (including punitive damages and pre-judgment interest).  Also  successfully handled the appeal from that judgment which was affirmed in its entirety.  (California Housing Finance Agency v. Hanover/California Management and Accounting Center, Inc., 148 Cal. App. 4th 682 (2007)).

    • Successfully defended a major government contractor in a jury trial and on appeal against damages claims in excess of $10 million for alleged intentional interference with contract and economic advantage.

    • Represented a large telecommunications firm in an arbitration against another telecommunications firm over a complex series of agreements and disputes over services each provided to the other and obtained a net award of approximately $60 million.

    • In a pro bono matter, obtained a six figure settlement for an individual injured as a result of medical malpractice.

    • Obtained summary judgment for an insurer against claims for fraud and breach of the insurance contract in connection with a “vanishing premium” life insurance policy (i.e., a policy in which projected policy dividends could be sufficient to cover all remaining policy premiums without additional contributions by the insured).

    • Retained by an insurer after it had suffered an adverse jury verdict for compensatory and punitive damages of approximately $2.5 million while represented by other counsel and successfully reversed the punitive damages award by post-trial motion and reversed the compensatory damages award on appeal, resulting in the insurer’s complete vindication.

  • Practice Areas
  • Education
    • University of Southern California Gould School of Law, J.D.

    • George Mason University, B.S., Business Administration

  • Federal and Patent Bar Admission
    • United States District Court for the Northern, Central, and Southern Districts of California

    • United States District Court for the District of Arizona

    • United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

  • State Bar Admissions
    • California

  • Representative Matters
    • Represented nine states and the District of Columbia in submitting an amici curiae brief to the United States Supreme Court in support of the Government in Abramski v. United States of America, 134 S. Ct. 2259 (2014) (decided in the Government’s favor).

    • Successfully defended a major concert promoter and two of its employees in defeating wrongful death claims in excess of $1 billion brought by the mother and children of a well-known pop star after a four-month jury trial.

    • Successfully defended a major electronics manufacturer in a six-month jury trial against Cartwright Act (state antitrust law) claims seeking in excess of $11 billion in damages (after trebling).

    • Won an award in excess of $12 million on behalf of a major government contractor in an arbitration against its former attorneys for legal malpractice.

    • Successfully represented a seafood company in a six-week jury trial against two former employees and their new employer for misappropriation of trade secrets and obtained a judgment of approximately $4.5 million and an award of attorneys’ fees for willful misappropriation.

    • Successfully represented a governmental agency in a seven-week jury trial against two of its former executives and an entity they formed for breach of fiduciary duty, legal malpractice, and violation of Cal. Gov’t Code § 1090 and obtained a judgment of approximately $9 million (including punitive damages and pre-judgment interest).  Also  successfully handled the appeal from that judgment which was affirmed in its entirety.  (California Housing Finance Agency v. Hanover/California Management and Accounting Center, Inc., 148 Cal. App. 4th 682 (2007)).

    • Successfully defended a major government contractor in a jury trial and on appeal against damages claims in excess of $10 million for alleged intentional interference with contract and economic advantage.

    • Represented a large telecommunications firm in an arbitration against another telecommunications firm over a complex series of agreements and disputes over services each provided to the other and obtained a net award of approximately $60 million.

    • In a pro bono matter, obtained a six figure settlement for an individual injured as a result of medical malpractice.

    • Obtained summary judgment for an insurer against claims for fraud and breach of the insurance contract in connection with a “vanishing premium” life insurance policy (i.e., a policy in which projected policy dividends could be sufficient to cover all remaining policy premiums without additional contributions by the insured).

    • Retained by an insurer after it had suffered an adverse jury verdict for compensatory and punitive damages of approximately $2.5 million while represented by other counsel and successfully reversed the punitive damages award by post-trial motion and reversed the compensatory damages award on appeal, resulting in the insurer’s complete vindication.