Attorneys

Rachel E. Schwartz was born in Morton Grove, Illinois and raised in Lawrence, Kansas. In 1998, Rachel received her B.A. with honors in Political Science, Economics and American Studies from the University of Kansas, where she was a member of Phi Beta Kappa and Mortar Board. While at KU, Rachel was an elected Student Senator for three years, received the Chancellor's Alexis F. Dillard Student Involvement Award and was selected as the University of Kansas' Outstanding Greek Senior in 1998. In 2001, Rachel obtained her J.D. from the University of Michigan Law School, where she served on the University of Michigan Journal of Law Review.

After graduating from law school, Rachel began her legal career in the Dallas, Texas office of Gardere Wynne Sewell LLP on the complex litigation trial team, specializing in antitrust, securities, RICO and other business litigation. In 2004, Rachel joined Stueve Siegel Hanson, LLP. In July 2008, Rachel was elected to the Firm's partnership as an equity partner.

Rachel is a member of the Lawyers' Association of Kansas City and the Texas Bar Association. She has a Life Membership in the University of Kansas Alumni Association. Since 2007, Rachel has served on the Board of Directors of DEBATEKansas City, an organization dedicated to providing debate opportunities to schools located in Kansas City's urban core.

LITIGATION EXPERIENCE

Rachel has successfully represented a variety of clients in complex civil matters at both the district court and appellate levels. She has both defended and prosecuted claims in the areas of Antitrust, RICO, Business Torts, Employment Law, Intellectual Property and Contract Disputes. Rachel is admitted to practice in state and federal courts in Kansas, Missouri and Texas, as well as before the United Stated Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit and the United States Supreme Court.

The following cases are illustrative examples of Rachel's trial and litigation experience:

In re: Auction Rate Securities Marketing Litigation (Securities Litigation) Rachel is currently prosecuting several of the cases brought against sellers of so called auction rate securities or ARS. The cases generally allege that the broker-dealers involved in the sale of ARS materially misrepresented the liquidity and risks of the securities to individual investors and corporations by labeling these securities as cash equivalents in press releases, monthly account statements, individual communications with investors, and other investment guidance material. The claims, brought under the federal securities laws, allege that the promised liquidity of the auction rate securities was created through artificial intervention in the auctions by the broker-dealers. The litigation was initiated when the market for auction rate securities collapsed in February 2008 when all of the major broker-dealers announced that they would no longer purchase auction rate securities for their own accounts to ensure that the securities would remain liquid. In the past several months, thousands of auctions run by the broker-dealers failed and over $200 billion in auction rate securities that were once offered as cash equivalents are now illiquid, resulting in economic losses and severe hardships for investors.

Seaboard Corporation et al. v. Grindrod Limited et al Rachel successfully represented Seaboard Corporation, Seaboard Overseas Limited and Seaboard Overseas Trading and Shipping (Proprietary) Limited (collectively Seaboard) against Grindrod Limited, the largest logistics and shipping company in South Africa, and related entities. Plaintiffs alleged multiple causes of action, including fraud, breach of fiduciary duties, misappropriation of corporate opportunities, tortious interference and civil conspiracy, based upon actions taken by one of Seaboard's former officers and directors, who attempted to raid Seaboard of its key employees and force the transfer of Seaboard's highly profitable overseas trading and shipping business for a price far below fair market value. Plaintiffs intended to seek more than $100 million at trial in actual and punitive damages. Approximately six weeks before a three week jury trial was to begin in the Circuit Court of Jackson County, Missouri, Stueve Siegel Hanson settled this lawsuit.

This lawsuit had a complicated and unusual procedural history. Throughout the litigation, Grindrod attempted multiple times to transfer this lawsuit out of the Circuit Court of Jackson County, Missouri. SSH successful fought Grindrod's attempt to remove this litigation to federal court and attempt to compel arbitration in New York. The Circuit Court of Jackson County denied Grindrod's motion to compel arbitration, which was affirmed by the Missouri Court of Appeals Western District in a unanimous decision in January 2008. The Supreme Court of Missouri ultimately denied Grindrod's application to transfer and the United States Supreme Court similarly denied Grindrod's Writ of Certiorari. Discovery in this lawsuit spanned multiple continents, including two full weeks of depositions in South Africa.

Heartland Surgical Specialty Hospital LLC v. Midwest Division, Inc. Rachel completed the prosecution of a groundbreaking Sherman Act Section 1 antitrust lawsuit on behalf of Heartland Surgical Specialty Hospital, a physician-owned acute care hospital in Kansas. Heartland claimed that the dominant hospital systems in the Kansas City metropolitan area conspired among themselves and with the dominant managed care organizations in the region to prevent Heartland from obtaining in-network managed care contracts. Heartland also alleged that the defendants tortiously interfered with Heartland's ability to obtain these managed care contracts. Following three years of intense litigation, including nearly 100 depositions and the exchange of over 2 million pages of documents, Heartland settled with all defendants. This lawsuit settled in February 2008. The case was reported in Modern Healthcare and The National Law Journal as well as other leading health care and legal publications and was followed closely by national health care and antitrust experts. Several published decisions from the United States District Court for the District of Kansas chronicle the litigation and the significant legal issues addressed in this important case: Heartland Surgical Specialty Hospital LLC v. Midwest Division, Inc. d/b/a HCA Midwest Division, et al., Case No. 05-2164-MLB (D. Kan.).

From 2004 to 2009, Rachel successfully prosecuted multiple software licensing, trademark and copyright cases on behalf of Overlap, Inc., a Kansas City software company, against multiple, national securities firms. These defendants provided access to the client's proprietary software to thousands of financial advisors across the country, in violation of the client's software license and intellectual property rights.

In 2005, Rachel successfully appealed a decision by the United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri granting summary judgment in an employment retaliation lawsuit. The United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit reversed the District Court and remanded the lawsuit back for further proceedings.