At Kitchen Law Group, we recognize that business disputes aren’t just legal issues — they’re turning points that can reshape a company’s future. These conflicts often threaten operations, strain relationships, and jeopardize hard-earned reputations. We treat each matter as a high-stakes challenge requiring thoughtful strategy, rigorous preparation, and a deep understanding of both law and business.
Led by veteran trial lawyer and strategist Jonathan Saville Kitchen, our team brings decades of experience to the resolution of complex commercial conflicts across a wide range of industries. We represent businesses of all sizes — from emerging startups to global enterprises — in disputes involving:
- Breach of fiduciary duty
- Partnership and shareholder conflicts
- Business torts
- Derivative actions
- Unfair competition
- Corporate governance issues
- Class actions
What sets us apart is our ability to align legal strategy with business objectives. We take the time to understand your priorities — whether that’s protecting long-term value, preserving key relationships, or sending a strong message in the market. Every case plan is tailored, practical, and built to drive results.
We are equally comfortable at the negotiating table or in the courtroom. Our reputation for trial readiness gives our clients an edge, often helping us achieve favorable settlements without ever setting foot in court. But when litigation is necessary, we bring seasoned courtroom judgment, creative arguments, and relentless focus.
Kitchen Law Group is not just a litigation boutique — we are trusted business advisors and strategic problem-solvers. We thrive in complexity, and our clients count on us to resolve their most critical disputes with clarity, insight, and integrity.
Representative Case Study
Selectica v. Versata
We successfully defended Selectica in the first major legal challenge to a corporate poison pill in over 25 years. The case arose from a hostile takeover attempt designed to exploit Selectica’s net operating loss (NOL) carryforwards. The Delaware Chancery Court upheld the pill’s validity, and the Delaware Supreme Court affirmed — establishing a key precedent in corporate governance law.
Additional Examples
- Lee v. Lee – Secured a unanimous jury verdict voiding fraudulent mortgages on San Francisco real estate.
- Hendry v. Exide Electronics Inc. – Reduced a $750 million government-contract claim to a fraction through strategic litigation, trial and negotiation, helping the company avoid insolvency.
- Franchise Tax Board v. EMI & Capitol Records – Defended EMI and Capitol Records in a dispute over California’s tax treatment of the revenue from the sale of Beatles and Pink Floyd albums.
- Thor Industries (Dutchmen RV Division) – Defeated class action antitrust claims alleging improper product tie-ins.
- Labreque v. L-3 Communications – Defended a Fortune 100 defense contractor in a wrongful termination and corporate ethics case.
- State of Alaska v. BP – Defended BP in a billion-dollar dispute over Prudhoe Bay oilfield re-unitization and reallocation.
- Thor Industries (Dutchmen RV Division)
We defended a subsidiary of Thor in a class action brought under the Clayton and Robinson-Patman Acts. The plaintiffs alleged improper product tie-ins involving RV air conditioning units. We defeated the claims and preserved critical operations — protecting our client from reputational and financial damage.