Gupta Wessler PLLC is a national appellate, constitutional, and complex litigation boutique. We brief and argue high-stakes cases in the U.S. Supreme Court and courts across the country. Through all of our efforts, we aim to help shape the law in ways that enhance justice and improve people’s lives.

____________________________________

An “impressive” and “highly rated appellate practice,” known for “terrific briefs” and “incredible oral advocacy.” — Chambers USA

Gupta Wessler has “staked a name for itself” as the nation’s “premier plaintiffs-side appellate firm.” – Law 360

____________________________________

____________________________________

Our advocacy before the U.S. Supreme Court on behalf of plaintiffs and public-interest clients has produced an unbroken string of improbable victories. The firm’s work was honored with the National Civil Justice Institute’s 2022 and 2020 Appellate Advocacy Award, which “recognizes excellence in appellate advocacy in America,” for three separate U.S. Supreme Court wins by four different firm lawyers.

For its steak of wins in the Supreme Court and state and federal appellate courts, Gupta Wessler was placed on the National Law Journal’s Appellate Hot List for two years running, in 2020 and 2021. In addition, for the past two years, the firm’s partners have served as instructors in the Supreme Court Litigation Clinic at Harvard Law School.

In June 2022, Jennifer Bennett prevailed 8-0 in Southwest Airlines v. Saxon, 142 S. Ct. 1783 (2022), a rare win for workers over forced arbitration. Slate cited the case as one in which “good lawyering” made all the difference, noting that “Jennifer Bennett, who represented Saxon, deployed her seemingly encyclopedic knowledge of interstate labor in 1920s America to shred each layer of Southwest’s reasoning.”

In June 2021, Jon Taylor won a rare summary vacatur for the family of a homeless man killed by the police. In a 6-3 decision in Lombardo v. City of St. Louis, 141 S.Ct. 2239 (2021), the Court tossed out a ruling that had failed to consider “well-known police guidance recommending that officers get a subject off his stomach as soon as he is handcuffed.”

In March 2021, Deepak Gupta won a landmark victory for consumers’ access to justice in Ford Motor Co. v. Montana Eighth Judicial District, 141 S.Ct. 1017 (2021), in which the Justices unanimously ruled that people injured by mass-market products may sue out-of-state corporations where their injuries occurred, bucking a decades-long trend of restrictive decisions. The American Association for Justice recognized Deepak’s advocacy with the Steven Sharp Public Service Award, the National Civil Justice Institute awarded him its Appellate Advocacy Award, and the National Law Journal named him a finalist for “Winning Litigator” of the year.

In February 2020, in Intel Corp. v. Sulyma, 140 S.Ct. 768 (2020), Matt Wessler won a 9-0 victory for workers seeking to hold companies accountable under ERISA for risking their retirement savings. The Wall Street Journal called this a “pretty significant” victory for “people’s ability to bring lawsuits over fiduciary breaches.”

And in 2019, in Smith v. Berryhill, 139 S. Ct. 1765 (2019), Deepak Gupta was invited by the Justices to present argument in support of a judgment left undefended by the Solicitor General. He is the first Asian-American to be appointed to argue a case by the U.S. Supreme Court.

In another recent Supreme Court term, Gupta Wessler served as counsel of record in three merits cases and prevailed in two, securing certiorari and reversal for our clients, and Empirical SCOTUS ranked one of our merits briefs the single most readable brief of the term.

____________________________________

The introduction of Gupta Wessler’s “impressive team” into a legal battle against a large corporate adversary means that “the opposing parties’ legal forces have been equalized” in the “arena of appellate combat.” — Bloomberg Businessweek

____________________________________

In the lower state and federal courts, Gupta Wessler continues to rack up major appellate victories nationwide—on class actions, arbitration, antitrust, consumers’ and workers’ rights, civil rights, preemption, punitive damages, standing, the First Amendment, and a wide range of other issues. And, in recent years, the firm has handled an increasing number of very high-stakes cases in state supreme courts, including the defense of several nine-figure and eight-figure jury verdicts.

A few recent examples: A historic Federal Circuit win against the federal judiciary for overcharging people by hundreds of millions for access to electronic court records, leading to a $125 million class settlement. Seventh Circuit and Third Circuit wins allowing military reservists to sue over pay discrimination. A Fourth Circuit affirmance of a rare $60 million class-action jury verdict for consumers. An Eighth Circuit ruling rejecting immunity for cities that use jail to make poor people pay fines. Rulings from multiple circuits invalidating forced arbitration clauses in various settings—including mobile apps, privatized criminal justice, and tribal internet lending.

____________________________________

A “vibrant appellate practice focused on public interest cases and plaintiff-side representations.” Chambers USA

“Gupta Wessler — a small firm that scores big wins.” — David Lat, Original Jurisdiction 

____________________________________

We’ve also won major victories in constitutional and administrative litigation.

We persuaded the D.C. Circuit to issue an emergency injunction halting the Trump Administration’s attempted takeover of the Open Technology Fund, a global internet-freedom nonprofit. We successfully represented environmental groups in an innovative APA challenge to a midnight rule that would have crippled the EPA’s ability to rely on science in setting public-health standards. We established that Trump’s Acting Director of the Bureau of Land Management had been serving unlawfully for 424 days. And we persuaded the Second Circuit that competitors of the former President’s hotels had standing to sue him for accepting payments from foreign and domestic governments in violation of the Constitution’s Emoluments Clauses.

____________________________________

“The difference with Deepak and with Gupta Wessler is that the firm is very well known as very strong in consumer rights appeals and they have a lot of Supreme Court experience. Gupta’s increasing presence in the Supreme Court . . . is particularly notable because of the small size and boutique nature of the firm.” Empirical SCOTUS

____________________________________