William A. Brewer III Writes for Texas Lawyer on the Price Markets Pay for Political Volatility
In a Texas Lawyer commentary, partner William A. Brewer III examines a new study by Felix Stolze analyzing the economic consequences of populism and looking beyond the ballot box to how political volatility reverberates through markets, boardrooms, and commercial agreements.
Using the recent electoral gains of Germany’s Alternative for Germany as his starting point, Stolze analyzed 129 elections across the EU and OECD, finding measurable economic, climate, market, and corporate consequences following right-wing electoral victories.
The broader lesson from Stolze's analysis, Brewer argues, extends beyond any one election or political movement. Changes in energy, tax, and trade policy can reshape investment decisions, disrupt supply chains, and upend the assumptions underlying commercial agreements.
“Markets are constantly repricing the world politicians create,” Brewer writes. “A change in energy policy can alter the economics of an industrial plant. A change in tax policy can move millions in capital across borders. A change in trade policy can upend supply chains.”
For companies and their counsel, that volatility can ultimately become a legal problem. “Contracts, after all, possess no built-in shock absorbers for sudden ideological warfare,” Brewer observes.
Ultimately, Brewer argues that political rhetoric may offer simple answers, but markets are governed by the cold arithmetic of risk and return: “So if you want simple solutions to complex problems – be careful what you wish for.”
Read more here.
William A. Brewer III Recognized Among Lawdragon’s 2027 500 Leading Litigators in America
September 14, 2026 – NEW YORK – Brewer, Attorneys & Counselors announces that founding partner William A. Brewer III has been named to Lawdragon’s 2027 500 Leading Litigators in America.
The guide recognizes leading lawyers who excel in advocacy before juries, judges, and other decision-makers on behalf of their clients. Brewer is recognized for his work in commercial litigation, hospitality, lender liability, antitrust, and plaintiff-side matters.
Lawdragon selected this year’s honorees following a record-breaking number of submissions.
View the full list of 2027 Lawdragon 500 Leading Litigators in America here.
Plaintiffs: New York Attorney General May Not Represent Half of Divided Board of Election Commissioners in New York Even Year Election Law Challenge
Sept. 9, 2026 – Plaintiffs in the constitutional challenge to New York's Even-Year Election Law ("EYEL") wrote to the court today arguing that the New York Attorney General may not advance the position of two commissioners of the New York State Board of Elections in connection with their anticipated motion to dismiss the case.
The case is brought by the New York State Republican Committee, the Nassau and Suffolk County Republican Committees, the New York State Association of Town Superintendents of Highways, and a coalition of local candidates. Plaintiffs allege the EYEL violates the First Amendment by forcing local elections onto even-year ballots dominated by national and statewide races, burying local candidates and issues beneath the avalanche of information associated with federal contests. Plaintiffs also complain that the EYEL carves out an exemption for New York City and the five boroughs.
In the Second Amended Complaint filed July 9, 2026, Plaintiffs name as Defendants the four individual commissioners of the New York State Board of Elections in their official capacities: Henry Berger, Essma Bagnuola, Peter Kosinski, and Anthony Casale.
The Attorney General notified the Court of an intent to move to dismiss on behalf of Commissioners Berger and Bagnuola. The other two named Defendants, Kosinski and Casale, are absent from that effort. Both publicly urged Governor Hochul to veto the EYEL in 2023.
Under New York law, the Attorney General represents state officers in their official capacities, and the client in that role is the office itself, not the Commissioners individually. New York Election Law reinforces the point directly: any official action by the Board requires the affirmative vote of three of its four commissioners.
With only two of the four named Defendants behind the motion, Plaintiffs argue there is no institutional authorization for the Attorney General to file a motion to dismiss the suit — only the preference of half the Board. Plaintiffs ask the Court to deny leave for the motion altogether, or, at minimum, to treat whatever is filed as the position of Berger and Bagnuola alone.
"The positions advanced in Court must reflect the Board of Elections' authorized position, not the preference of a fraction of its officeholders," said William A. Brewer III, partner at Brewer, Attorneys & Counselors and lead counsel for the Plaintiffs. "New York required three votes for any action by this Board precisely to ensure fairness and equal representation between the two parties. We are asking this Court to deny leave for this motion altogether — or, at the very least, to recognize it for what it is: the position of two commissioners, not the Board."
Business Insider Names William A. Brewer III Among New York’s Best-Dressed Lawyers
NEW YORK – William A. Brewer III, founder of Brewer, Attorneys & Counselors, was named one of New York’s best-dressed lawyers by Business Insider.
Brewer is among nine attorneys selected for Business Insider’s feature on the city’s standout legal style. The profile highlights Brewer’s signature approach to dressing – from Bruce Cameron Clark shirts and tailor-made Oxxford Clothes and Zegna suits, to his collection of watches and affinity for embroidered Ralph Lauren jeans. The profile notes that his “old-school polish” has become a hallmark of the firm.
During the interview, Brewer also discussed his longstanding appreciation for watches and the tradition of gifting them to members of his leadership team. Last Christmas, he purchased more than a dozen watches from Ralph Lauren. “You give somebody a timepiece, you’re telling them their time is now,” Brewer told Business Insider.
“William’s style shines in the details: the tailoring, the ties, and even the watches,” said Joi-Marie McKenzie, judge and Editor-in-Chief of Life at Business Insider. “He stood out to me, however, for how he can expertly move from a traditional suit to a casual look without feeling like he’s trying too hard. He just gets it.”
Read more: Meet 9 of New York City's Best-Dressed Lawyers - Business Insider
William A. Brewer III on What Teen Debaters Can Teach the World
In an article for Equality in Forensics, Brewer Foundation Founder and Chairman William A. Brewer III and Jasmine McClure, program coordinator of the International Public Policy Forum (IPPF), examine what high school debaters can teach adults about advocacy and constructive disagreement.
Founded in 2001 by the Brewer Foundation and now jointly administered with New York University, the IPPF is the world's only international competition that challenges high school students to debate matters of public policy in writing and in person.
The article, "What Teen Debaters Can Teach the World," reflects on the 2026-27 topic for the IPPF, which asks students to consider the rights of women and girls alongside questions of state sovereignty. Brewer draws on his experience with the program to examine how young people approach difficult questions.
Brewer and McClure argue that "debate"- as an academic competition, is about more than learning how to win an argument. It teaches students to listen, engage with opposing views, and build their arguments around evidence and reason. Those skills, they write, have value far beyond the competition itself—particularly at a time when public discourse too often turns disagreement into division.
In the IPPF, Brewer and McClure see firsthand how disagreement can coexist with respect and intellectual curiosity. Their example underscores the overarching purpose of the program: preparing young people to become thoughtful future leaders.
"Debate equips its participants with the tools to lead, to question, and to speak with purpose," Brewer and McClure write. "The IPPF and other programs like it are not just a competition; they are a proving ground for tomorrow's policy thinkers and public voices."
Read more here.
Brewer Secures Injunction for Wholesale Payments in Fight Against Trade Secret Theft
LUBBOCK, TEXAS — August 19, 2026 — Brewer, Attorneys & Counselors secured a preliminary injunction on behalf of Wholesale Payments, Inc. (“WPI”), a Texas-based payments company, in its trade-secret action against ClearPay Processing, LLC (“ClearPay”). The order bars ClearPay from using WPI’s confidential merchant information to solicit identified WPI merchants, marking a major victory in WPI’s ongoing campaign to protect its enterprise from corporate espionage.
U.S. District Judge James Wesley Hendrix of the Northern District of Texas found that WPI is likely to succeed on its claims under the Defend Trade Secrets Act and the Texas Uniform Trade Secrets Act. The Court also denied the defendants’ challenge to the exercise of personal jurisdiction in the case pending Credit Wholesale Company, Inc. v. ClearPay Processing, LLC, Case No. 5:26-cv-00177-H (N.D. Tex. Lubbock Division).
The federal injunction is an important milestone in WPI’s broader, multi-front campaign to dismantle "shadow pipelines" built by rogue former agents and rival processors. Over the past year, WPI has taken aggressive action to stop former contractors from breaching their agreements and funneling millions of dollars into the coffers of WPI’s competitors.
This latest ruling reinforces a central theme of WPI's case: competitors who attempt to act as corporate safehouses for rogue agents and smuggled trade secrets will be held strictly accountable.
“This ruling sends a clear message that former agents who steal protected merchant information will be pursued,” said Counsel for WPI William A. Brewer III. “The Court correctly recognized that trade secret theft causes irreparable injury and took decisive action to protect our client’s interests.”
WPI is represented by lead counsel William A. Brewer III alongside partner Joshua Harris and associates Valerie Evans, Jordon Smith, and Amir Saada.
Digiday, MediaPost Examine Evidence in Foster Amended Complaint
Coverage of Richard Foster's amended complaint continued at Digiday and MediaPost. Foster, the former CEO of WPP's Motion Content Group, alleges that WPP improperly retained value generated by clients' advertising spend. The amended complaint further alleges that Sony Group Corporation, one of WPP's largest clients, launched an independent investigation into those practices.
Digiday reported on what it described as WPP's stalled turnaround, detailing former executives' accounts of "the transformation that never was," due to organizational problems and major client departures. Digiday connected those accounts to the new allegations surrounding Sony's investigation.
MediaPost dug into the evidence cited in Foster's amended complaint, including the financial records, internal emails, and WPP tracking documents allegedly presented by Sony — highlighting the complaint's allegations that WPP representatives had "no answer to give" when confronted with "black box" rebates funding media discounts.
The amended complaint in Foster v. WPP was filed on August 13, 2026 in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, New York County (Index No. 659721/2025). Lead counsel for Foster is William A. Brewer III, a partner at Brewer, Attorneys & Counselors.
Read the Digiday article on new court filings and WPP's stalled turnaround.
Read the MediaPost article on Foster's amended complaint and Sony's investigation.
Industry Analysts and International Press Weigh In on Foster Filing and the Breakdown of Agency-Client Trust
Trade analysts and international outlets reported on Richard Foster's amended complaint, filed August 13, 2026. Foster, the former CEO of WPP's Motion Content Group, alleges wrongful termination after reporting the company's alleged misuses of client rebate ad revenue. The amended filing alleges that Sony Group Corporation, one of WPP's largest clients, launched an independent investigation into WPP's rebate practices, raising concerns similar to Foster's.
Media Leader broke down seven key takeaways from the latest filing, quoting Nick Manning, an industry veteran and expert witness for the plaintiff, who called it "the most revealing" look at the "inner wiring" of the industry.
More About Advertising's Omar Oakes examined the complaint's account of what happened when Sony "stopped trusting WPP," using the alleged retention of 76% of Sony's China rebate funds to explore the deeper breakdown of trust between agencies and their clients.
MediaCat, in Turkish, focused on the significance of the alleged Sony review.
The filing was also covered by Business Insider, EMARKETER, Marketing Magazine Asia, and Adformatie.
Foster v. WPP (Index No. 659721/2025) is before the Supreme Court of the State of New York, New York County. William A. Brewer III of Brewer, Attorneys & Counselors is lead counsel for Richard Foster.
Read the Media Leader article here.
Read the More About Advertising article here.
Read the MediaCat article here.