Travis Ritter

Litigation Chair & Partner I Past Legal: Double Federal Law Clerk & Big Law Litigator I Past Business: Private Equity — Not Legal Advice

[Travis Ritter @RitterLawyer]

https://t.co/JKmZBQczJD

[Travis Ritter @RitterLawyer]

We’re hiring. Our standard: zealous, honest advocacy; substantive excellence. We litigate high-stakes commercial and post-M&A disputes nationwide—contingency and flat fee, never hourly—often in Delaware. We go to trial. We win. And we take on the most “venerable” firms.

[Travis Ritter @RitterLawyer]

@elialbrecht + understands what it takes to pursue excellence (phrased precisely).

Shorthand: loved The Last Dance.

[Travis Ritter @RitterLawyer]

This is how great trial attorneys move.

The arguments move the listener (or reader) to where we want them to go.

Leave just enough space to make it their own idea — so their eureka moment is inevitable and powerful.

Less words the better.

[How I Write Clips @PerellClips]

Best-selling author Michael Pollan shares the perfect example of why metaphors are so powerful:

"I set up an opposition between a food chain grounded in sunlight and a food chain grounded in oil."

"Corn is grown using fossil fuel fertilizers. That massive amount of 90 million acres of corn that we grow in this country is floating on a sea of oil. When you feed animals on grass, which they evolved to do, you are eating from a food chain founded on sunlight."

"Which do you like better? What sounds better? So I don't even have to say that's really wrong and stupid and unsustainable. People get there on their own."

"It's just this very simple metaphor. Sun based food chain, oil based food chain."

"If you can find the right metaphor, you can persuade people without even arguing. You can persuade them at almost a subliminal level."

[Travis Ritter @RitterLawyer]

@JerimiahLee Makes sense if you switched to Marlboro Reds.

[Travis Ritter @RitterLawyer]

Many such cases. But I like giving them a week to deliberate. Meeting once before filing can also be significant: (1) the first interaction is often probative of their posture for the remainder of the case, (2) sometimes the case does settle -- but because we sent the complaint they'll actually defend against, so can properly underwrite risk.

[Travis Ritter @RitterLawyer]

@SinaiLawFirm @elialbrecht I don't do volume work, but: Non-hourly flat fee (% of what it would ordinarly cost hourly) with a success fee (both time to posession and cost). Bundle for larger players with an upward ratchet for success and efficency (at scale). Has to be an obvious win-win for both players.

[Travis Ritter @RitterLawyer]

@SinaiLawFirm @elialbrecht Never had an issue with it. We’re paddling in the same boat.

[Travis Ritter @RitterLawyer]

@chiajy2000 @elialbrecht Matter selection is driven by the case, client, and facts; happy to chat

[Travis Ritter @RitterLawyer]

@elialbrecht And while we love solving and litigating serious issues — like a doctor, we’ll encourage you to eat your vegetables and exercise so you don’t need us …

[Travis Ritter @RitterLawyer]

@GodLitigation We can pursue on a contingency basis. Former appellate (and trial court) law clerk. (Cc @elialbrecht). Will DM.

[Travis Ritter @RitterLawyer]

@elialbrecht I would not take that case on contingency … and the Court would likely have to figure out the intent of the parties / *probably* consider it a drafting error.

[Travis Ritter @RitterLawyer]

@elialbrecht Apropos of nothing, Gandalf said this to Pippin after Pippin touched the Palantir stone (where the company gets its name).

[Travis Ritter @RitterLawyer]

To your point, (1) I’d rather have a great M&A attorney who addressed the major issues on the front end than have to backfill with a great litigator years later; (2) a no-reliance provision can indeed save millions in litigation costs; (3) in the case I mentioned earlier, we’re representing the sellers in a $500MM deal where there’s both an earn out and rollover equity.

[Travis Ritter @RitterLawyer]

That’s generally right (though I need to write an article on the issue).

DE courts will generally enforce the provision on the basis that sophisticated parties have carefully and thoughtfully negotiated the risk allocation under the clause.

But the question can get dicey under the right set of facts. For instance, with rollover equity / earn outs. A seller may want to pursue damages for pre-agreement statements or omissions as to certain clauses or issues and seek a damage award — rather than seeking rescission of the entire agreement.

I’m currently litigating a $50MM equity rollover dispute where, absent an anti-reliance provision, I’d have a few additional arguments.

So, the deal size, type, and facts *can* matter a lot when deciding whether to include.

[Travis Ritter @RitterLawyer]

The reason your lawyer (or craftperson) doesn’t excel at leveraging AI to get you the best results is simple.

Your lawyer and their firm are almost all paid hourly.

They have no incentive. First, to learn the tools. Second, to use those tools to cut their own bills.

“Show me the incentive and I'll show you the outcome." Charlie Munger.

Arguments to the contrary are farcical. Built on the ever-eroding billable hour model.

For sophisticated cases the AI research tools don't cut it. Not even close. I know how I’d fix the issue but I run a law practice, not an AI company.

Not so for the other tools. And if an attorney (or craftsperson, generally speaking) isn’t leveraging Grok, ChatGPT, and Claude (which create the best product together; the highest cost versions are a must) – they are doing it entirely wrong. The client is paying the price.

The learning process requires "40 years of wandering through the desert" – a lengthy "valley of despair.” It takes time, focus, and practice. It takes sophisticated work to use as a whetstone to hone the skill.

But it will change how you wield your craft.

It won't replace it (yet).