Attorneys

James Ulwick James Ulwick

James P. Ulwick

Principal
410-347-7426410-539-1269
julwick@kg-law.com
Download vCard
Download Bio PDF

Biography

“Attracts praise for his expert handling of large-scale class actions for both defense and class-side clients, while also drawing on significant experience in white-collar criminal defense proceedings. An outstanding litigator, a fantastic trial lawyer.”- CHAMBERS USA

Jim Ulwick is recognized as one of Maryland's most highly-skilled trial attorneys. His wide-ranging practice includes criminal and civil litigation of many kinds. Jim has successfully tried cases throughout the country. His trial victories include high-stakes cases involving claims of legal malpractice; criminal misconduct by bank officers; breaches of complicated contracts, employment agreements, and land deals; serious personal injuries; RICO violations; securities violations; medical malpractice; and injuries from toxic torts, to name only a few. Jim has a national reputation for handling significant class-action cases in diverse industries on both the defense and class sides.

Jim spent six years as an Assistant United States Attorney – three in the District of New Jersey and three in the District of Maryland. During his years as a federal prosecutor, Jim tried numerous cases, including the prosecutions of defendants charged with labor racketeering, political corruption, and other violations of federal criminal law. Jim also served as a judicial clerk for the Honorable Edward S. Northrop of the United States District Court for the District of Maryland.

According to the legal ranking guide Chambers USA, Jim is "a tenacious courtroom advocate and very strategic thinker, and among the most accomplished civil and criminal orators and trial attorneys."


Recognition

Recipient, Peter A. DiRito Award, Federal Bar Association, Maryland Chapter, 2023

Acceptor, John Adams Award, on behalf of the Criminal Justice Act Panel, U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland, 2019

Selected for Lawdragon 500 Leading Litigators in America, since inaugural edition 2022

Selected for inclusion in The American Lawyer, Southern Trailblazer 2021

Recognized in Chambers USA, Litigation: General Commercial; Litigation: White-Collar Crime & Government Investigations, Maryland, since 2006

Recognized in Benchmark Litigation, "Local Litigation Star," Commercial Litigation and Health Care Litigation, since 2011

Listed in The Best Lawyers in America for Commercial Litigation, since 1993; named Baltimore "Lawyer of the Year" for Criminal Defense: White-Collar, 2019; Bet-the-Company Litigation, 2016; Commercial Litigation, 2016; White-Collar Criminal Defense, 2011

AV® Preeminent™ Peer Review Rated by Martindale-Hubbell


Memberships

American College of Trial Lawyers, Fellow

Bar Association of Baltimore City

District of Columbia Bar Association

Fourth Circuit Judicial Conference, Permanent Member

Maryland State Bar Association


Events

Co-presenter, "One Day Boot Camp Trial Training," Legal Services Advocates Trial Skills Program, American College of Trial Lawyers, ABA Litigation Section, MSBA Litigation Section, FBA - Maryland Chapter, and Maryland Legal Aid, 2017


Representative Matters

Represented plaintiffs in a nationwide class action product defects lawsuit against Viking Group, Inc. in a suit alleging a defect in the Viking VK457 sprinkler system. The suit settled on favorable terms for the class. The case is Jackson, et al. v. Viking Group, Inc., et al., No. 8:18-cv-02356-PJM (D. Md.).

Served as defense counsel in a bilateral class action in the Circuit Court for Montgomery County involving violations of the Maryland Towing Act and related claims. After a successful mediation in 2017, a settlement resolving a substantial number of the claims at issue was approved by the Court. In 2018 and 2019, motions for summary judgment were briefed and the parties engaged in a second mediation. Ultimately the class requested, and the court approved, a significantly reduced settlement demand to individual class members.

Represented  shareholders of a now-defunct medical software company against certain directors and officers to recoup the shareholders’ significant investments. In addition to the complaint filed on behalf of the investor group, also represented the bankruptcy trustee of the company as the plaintiff in a related case. In the parallel lawsuits in D.C. Superior Court, the Kramon & Graham team withstood a personal jurisdiction challenge and conducted national discovery, and obtained a settlement that was ultimately approved by the Bankruptcy Court.

In a major victory for a law firm client, prevailed in the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in challenging the appropriateness of a “filter team” of the U.S. Attorney’s Office to review files and emails confiscated from the client's office. The Fourth Circuit agreed, summarily reversing the District Court only two days after argument and granting all relief requested by the client. The case is In re: Search Warrant Issued June 13, 2019. Click here for the published opinion.

Prevailed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit on behalf of noted anti-trust attorney Joseph Saveri and his firm - the Joseph Saveri Law Firm - in a legal dispute stemming from a price fixing case that settled in 2013 for $163.5 million. The case was on appeal following Kramon & Graham's success in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland where the firm persuaded the Court to reject a claim by the Florida law firm Criden & Love that the Saveri firm owed a referral fee to Criden for referring a plaintiff in multidistrict litigation. The Court awarded Saveri $10 million in attorney's fees. Criden then claimed a referral fee. The Court agreed with Saveri that no fee was due under the circumstances. The Fourth Circuit upheld the lower Court’s ruling in the Saveri firm’s favor, rejecting Criden’s bid for additional fees from the underlying case. It was a widely reported case, including 4th Circ. Hands Saveri Firm Win In $1.2M Legal Fees Battle (January 15, 2019).

Arguing in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland, served as local counsel and presented the damages case in Paice LLC v Hyundai Motor Co. Working with patent specialists Fish & Richardson, Kramon & Graham presented a compelling claim that Defendants Hyundai and Kia should pay between $200 and $250 per car for their infringement of the Plaintiffs’ patents. After a full day of deliberations, the jury returned a $28.9 million verdict against the automakers, which equated to $200 per car.

The Second Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a summary judgment obtained by Jim Ulwick and Jean Lewis on behalf of a law firm sued for legal malpractice. The plaintiff alleged 13 separate acts of malpractice and sought $17 million in damages. Jim and Jean successfully moved to have the case withdrawn from the Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York and obtained summary judgment on all counts in the district court.

In a major victory for Kramon & Graham's client, the City of Baltimore, the Court of Appeals of Maryland upheld local governments' rights to make reasonable prospective changes to their pension plans. Kramon & Graham represented the City continuously since it reformed the public safety unions' pension plan in 2010. At that time, the City faced dire financial circumstances that threatened its ability to provide core services to its citizens, and all relevant actors agreed the pension plan was actuarially unsound. Among other things, the changes involved increased length of service and contribution requirements for active employees and a new, guaranteed Cost of Living Adjustment formula to provide raises for retirees that replaced a variable benefit formula that was endangering the plan's ability to provide basic benefits. The unions filed suit in 2010 in federal court to challenge the reforms.  After a federal appellate court held in 2014 that the changes did not constitute impairments under the federal Constitution's Contract Clause, the public safety unions brought a state law breach of contract action in the Circuit Court for Baltimore City. The circuit court determined that Maryland law permitted the City to make prospective changes for active members of the pension plan, and that these changes were reasonable; consequently, there was no breach of contract as to these members. The court also rejected the unions' experts' damages assumptions and instead accepted the damages model the City's expert developed, concluding that retirees and retirement-eligible plan members experienced approximately $30 million in damages from the change in plan. This amount was a small fraction of the damages the unions claimed, and the court ruled that many retirees and retirement-eligible members were not damaged by the changes but actually fared the same or better under the new tiered COLA than the variable benefit it replaced. The Court of Appeals affirmed the circuit court's determination in all respects. Click here for the Court of Appeals opinion in Robert F. Cherry et al. v. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore City.

Successfully defended a law firm and its management against claims by a former partner of fraud and breach of contract. The arbitrator found no fraud and awarded the claimant less than 10% of his claimed contractual damages.

Obtained an acquittal for a former Eastern Correctional Institution correctional officer criminally charged in a case involving the largest number of individuals ever indicted in a single criminal matter filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland. Following a three-week trial, successfully persuaded a jury to acquit the firm’s client of racketeering, bribery, and narcotics distribution charges. In the indictment in which the firm's client was charged, federal prosecutors charged 41 people with bribery and smuggling-related crimes: 40 were convicted, the firm's client was acquitted.

Successfully defended allegations of securities fraud made by the former CEO of a public, technology company against the company’s majority shareholders and members of its board and management. The United States District Court for the District of Maryland entered summary judgment for the defendants, and that ruling was affirmed on appeal. The case was important in light of the nature of the allegations and the relief sought -- approximately $50 million.

News

Events

  • Boot Camp Trial Training
    10/09/2017

    Litigation principals Jim Ulwick and Natalie McSherry are featured instructors at the Legal Services Advocates Trial Skills Program, "One Day Boot Camp Trial Training," presented by The American College of Trial Lawyers, ABA Litigation Section, MSBA Litigation Section, FBA - Maryland Chapter, and Maryland Legal Aid.

    More +

Recognition

professional_detail.inc