Sara Margolis of MoloLamken LLP litigates complex and high-value matters concerning pioneering inventions, bankruptcy and breach of contract disputes. She is especially noted for her leadership in running complex cases at both the state and federal level. Notably, over the last five years she has reportedly helped recover over $2bn for her clients.
Legal 500 redaktioneller Kommentar
Telefon
(212) 607-8172
E-Mail
Profil

Auszeichnungen

New York City Elite

Profil

Position

Sara Margolis is a partner who litigates complex matters—mostly business and some intellectual property disputes—from the filing of a complaint through appeal. She is a skilled advocate and a master at running cases.

Karriere

Ms. Margolis began her career as an associate at Cravath, Swaine & Moore. She is a member of the New York Inn of Court and the New York Intellectual Property Law Association.

Ausbildung

Columbia Law School, J.D. Middlebury College, B.A., magna cum laude

ProfileSections.contentSuppliedFootnote

Referenzen

Unabhängig vom Legal 500-Forschungsteam zusammengestellt.

  • 'Sara was the lead partner on a complex litigation and was exceptional at handling both the strategy and the small details. She was on top of everything and did a masterful job steering the litigation to a very favorable conclusion.'

Kernmandanten

  • EEA Life Settlements, Inc.
  • Regents of the University of California, the University of Vienna, and Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively, “CVC”)
  • Revlon
  • Allergan Sales LLC, Duke University, and AbbVie Inc.
  • Natera Inc.
  • Moderna
  • Carpatsky Petroleum Corporation
  • Veterinary Orthopedic Implants
  • The Cherokee Nation
  • Ad Hoc Group of Convertible Amyris, Inc. Noteholders

Highlight-Mandate

  • Representing EEA Life Settlements, Inc., the holder of a portfolio of life settlements, in a breach of contract and fraud action brought by Coventry Capital.
  • Representing and argued for the Nobel Prize-winning CVC scientists in a dispute over who owns the CRISPR-Cas9 technology.
  • Represented Revlon in defending against a lawsuit brought by objecting lenders which had the potential to upend Revlon’s capital structure and delay previously filed Chapter 11 cases.