Brewer, Attorneys & Counselors Names Joshua Harris as Partner in Dallas Office
Dallas - August 8, 2025 – Brewer, Attorneys & Counselors is pleased to announce that attorney Joshua Harris has been promoted to its partnership.
Harris’s practice focuses on high-stakes commercial litigation, dispute resolution, and complex advocacy. Since joining the Firm’s Dallas office in January of 2024, Harris has consistently delivered exceptional results for clients in their most challenging legal matters.
In addition to serving commercial clients, Harris is a driving force in the Firm’s community impact advocacy affiliate, the Brewer Storefront, where he plays an important role in fighting for the rights of individuals, organizations, and communities in need. Harris is also a mentor to students in the Brewer Foundation Future Leaders Program, an educational and leadership development program that serves students from the urban sector of the Dallas Independent School District.
“Josh demonstrates an unwavering commitment to both our clients and our community advocacy,” says Brewer Partner William A. Brewer III. “His promotion to partner reflects his contributions to the Firm and his leadership as we expand our practice, broaden our reach, and elevate our impact.”
Prior to joining the Firm, Harris practiced with Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan LLP. He received his Juris Doctor from The University of Chicago Law School and his bachelor’s degree in political science from Morehouse College, where he graduated magna cum laude.
“I’m proud to be part of Brewer and, in particular, its commitment to training future generations of lawyers,” Harris says. “This firm is defined by an unparalleled commitment to advocacy – in the courtroom and the community.”
To learn more about Harris, please click here.
Politico Reports on Potential Lawsuit by New York State Republicans
August 6, 2025 — Politico reports today that New York State Republicans are planning a federal lawsuit in opposition to New York’s new law moving elections to even years.
The controversial 2023 law rescheduled town and county races. According to Politico, the future lawsuit was previewed in an amicus brief filed by the Brewer law firm on behalf of Riverhead and Nassau County Legislator Mazi Pilip. The brief was filed as the State Court of Appeals prepares to hear oral arguments in a series of existing state-level cases.
“The First Amendment doesn’t stop at the steps of the state capital [sic],” said William A. Brewer III, the counsel representing Riverhead and Pilip. “Our clients contend that in their communities, democracy will be drowned out – not by censorship, but by unnecessary burdens to local speech.”
Read more here: https://www.politico.com/newsletters/new-york-playbook-pm/2025/08/05/blue-state-republicans-respond-to-redistricting-00494408
Bahamas Media Reports on Dispute Involving Brewer Client Soho Development
August 1, 2025 – Leading Bahamian news outlets are reporting on a legal dispute surrounding the Ocean Club, Four Seasons Residences, Bahamas, a $350 million luxury resort project on Paradise Island. The coverage highlights claims by Brewer client Soho Development and its principal, Roger Stein, that South Florida developer Two Roads Development used confidential and proprietary information to circumvent Stein’s role in the development.
The Nassau Guardian reports that “Stein, who was tapped to lead the project by Access Industries, alleges that Two Roads Development was brought on as a co-sponsor but later excluded him and used his proprietary materials to move the project forward.” The article states that the project has generated over $150 million in residential pre-sales and that Soho Development is seeking $35 million in damages in the New York Supreme Court.
In its report, Eyewitness News Bahamas underscores allegations that Two Roads “breached a confidentiality and non-disclosure agreement by circumventing Soho, using its work product and connections to proceed with the development unilaterally.”
According to The Tribune, “The two parties allegedly signed a confidentiality and non-disclosure agreement that 'expressly prohibited' Two Roads from disclosing Soho Development's confidential information or ‘pursuing’ the development without the latter's involvement.”
"Unfortunately, Two Roads violated the agreement by pursuing the project without Soho’s consent, misusing Soho’s proprietary information for its own benefit and engaging with other potential co-sponsors. Two Roads exploited the confidential information and contracts provided by Soho, thereby breaching their contractual obligations. This conduct constitutes a clear breach of the agreement," the lawsuit claims.
As reported, William A. Brewer III, counsel for Soho, commented: “No one should be able to circumvent binding agreements and profit without consequence.”
To read the full coverage:
The Real Deal Reports on Brewer Client Soho Development, Bahamas Luxury Resort
July 29, 2025 – The Real Deal reports today on a dispute regarding a high-profile Bahamas resort and claims from real estate developer and Soho Development principal Roger Stein that he was “sidelined [from the project] by South Florida luxury developer Two Roads Development.”
As reported, “Roger Stein, a Delray Beach resident and attorney who has established professional relationships in the Bahamas during his real estate career, claims that West Palm Beach-based Two Roads circumvented him from the development of the $350 million Ocean Club, Four Seasons Residences, Bahamas on Paradise Island, after he brought the firm onboard and introduced it to key architects, marketing staff and other professionals, and shared his proprietary information on the project.”
On Monday, July 28, 2025, New York-based Soho Development sued Two Roads in New York Supreme Court for breach of their confidentiality and non-disclosure agreement, which included a non-circumvention provision. As reported, Soho claims $35 million in damages.
“Soho seeks to hold Two Roads accountable for its betrayal of the trust he [Stein] placed in them,” William A. Brewer III, attorney for Soho, said in a statement. “No one should be able to circumvent binding agreements and profit without consequence.”
The Real Deal reports that Stein doesn’t want to discontinue the project due to its potential as an economic engine for the Bahamas. According to the article, “So far, he has received no compensation for his pre-development work and time, future profits and development fees, according to the complaint.”
“If business partners can sidestep NDAs without facing real consequences,” Brewer said, “then every developer, investor, and business partner who works in good faith is vulnerable.”
To read more: Roger Stein Sues Two Roads Over Four Seasons Bahamas Project
To read the complaint, click here.
Workplace Fairness Files Amicus Curiae in Support of Dr. Cara Wessels Wells’ Supreme Court Petition Urging Title VII Protections for Unpaid Workers
July 11, 2025 — In an important show of support for workplace justice, Workplace Fairness, a leading national nonprofit fighting for the dignity and rights of all workers, filed an amicus curiae brief supporting Dr. Cara Wessel Wells in her civil rights Petition to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Dr. Wells, represented by Brewer, Attorneys & Counselors, is a scientist and entrepreneur who alleges she was pushed out of a Texas Tech University business accelerator after reporting sexual misconduct by her supervisor in the program, then denied Title VII protection because she wasn’t paid for her workplace contributions.
In June, Dr. Wells turned to the Supreme Court to urge it to declare what should be clear-federal civil rights laws protect all those who " work"- regardless of whether the compensation is money or other benefits. The Petition asks the Court to strike down the Fifth Circuit’s “remuneration” rule, which categorically excludes workers whose pay is not money from Title VII’s reach.
“The brief by Workplace Fairness powerfully underscores the critical issue at stake: denying Title VII protections to unpaid workers leaves countless individuals exposed to workplace harassment and retaliation without recourse,” said William A. Brewer III, partner at Brewer, Attorneys & Counselors, and lead counsel to Dr. Wells. “Their advocacy reinforces our client’s position that the Supreme Court should close this gap and ensure that federal civil rights laws protect all workers — regardless of pay.”
“The remuneration rule creates an artificial barrier to civil rights protections — one that is at odds with both Title VII’s purpose and today’s workplace realities,” said William A. Brewer IV, partner at Brewer, Attorneys & Counselors, and counsel to Wells. “Civil rights should not hinge on compensation. We urge the Court to clarify the law on this important federal issue.”
Dr. Wells served as a mentor in Texas Tech University’s business accelerator program in 2022. After speaking out about alleged sexual misconduct, she was abruptly excluded from the program and subjected to retaliation. Because she did not receive a paycheck, the Fifth Circuit ruled she was not legally an “employee” under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act — stripping her of protection.
The Workplace Fairness brief warns that excluding such workers — interns, fellows, volunteers — from federal protections “creates a dangerous loophole.” The Fifth Circuit’s decision, it argues, “encourages employers to reclassify labor to avoid accountability,” subverting Title VII’s central purpose: eradicating workplace discrimination.
“This is a civil rights crisis. The uneven application of federal civil rights laws creates disparate impacts for similarly situated workers—an outcome that is clearly not just,” said Brewer III. “We applaud Workplace Fairness’ important recognition and advocacy of Dr. Wells’ petition and echo their call to the Court to weigh in on this critical issue.”
Read more here:
Workplace Fairness Press Release
Brewer Client Former CFO Files Suit Alleging Corporate Valuation Fraud by CBIZ/Marcum and AmeriTex Leadership
July 1, 2025 – A high-stakes lawsuit filed yesterday in federal district court sheds light on how manipulated valuation reports can distort financial outcomes and erode trust across capital markets.
Filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, the case of former AmeriTex CFO Christopher Podlasek v. CBIZ Inc., CBIZ MAG LLC (NYSE:CBZ; formerly Marcum LLP) exposes how valuations can be used to whitewash unsavory business practices.
At the heart of this suit is an accusation that Marcum knowingly produced a backdated valuation report to justify significantly undercutting the value of Podlasek’s equity in AmeriTex — a major infrastructure supplier whose rapid rise was engineered, in large part, by his leadership. As valuation professionals, CBIZ and its predecessors are specifically charged with upholding fair valuation practices that underpin both private and public markets.
According to the complaint, “Independent valuations act as the surrogate for arm’s length negotiation in our economy. When that process is corrupted, it undermines the very confidence that underpins our financial markets. This case is not about a difference of opinion. It is about betrayal of duty, distortion of fact, and the failure of a firm that claims to stand for integrity. The public interest demands accountability.”
Podlasek’s legal counsel, William A. Brewer III of Brewer, Attorneys & Counselors, states: “When a firm like Marcum abandons that responsibility, it undermines the credibility of every arms-length transaction across public and private markets.”
With trillions in public-market assets relying on accurate valuations, each flawed report chips away at investor confidence.
The complaint alleges that Marcum, under pressure from AmeriTex leadership, rubber-stamped financial projections that violated appraisal standards — ultimately valuing the company at $789 million despite earlier internal estimates of up to $3 billion.
Brewer adds, “This case carries significant implications beyond the parties involved. It highlights broader concerns about the integrity of valuation services in private equity, public infrastructure, and capital markets at large.”
This case urges regulators, investors, and industry participants to insist on the highest standards of professional integrity.
Brewer Firm Announces that Virginia Supreme Court Sides with NRA in High-Stakes Contract Dispute, Rejects Expansion of State Contract Law
May 30, 2025 – New York, New York… In a widely watched contract clash, the Supreme Court of Virginia has delivered a decisive victory for the National Rifle Association of America (NRA) in its dispute with Under Wild Skies, Inc. (UWS).
UWS was the producer of the hunting show Under Wild Skies, which the NRA sponsored for over two decades. The dispute arose after UWS claimed NRA repudiated the contracts and sued for over $20 million. The ruling cements the NRA’s trial win over UWS and affirms longstanding principles of contractual interpretation in the Commonwealth.
The case centered around a failed television sponsorship relationship between the NRA and UWS, which for 26 years produced a hunting-focused show under the same name.
UWS alleged that the NRA’s 2019 request for business information about the success of the show – amidst an internal compliance review (and its subsequent delay in making a scheduled payment) – constituted an anticipatory breach of their agreement. UWS attempted to bolster its case by urging the trial court to instruct the jury on the “doctrine of adequate assurance,” which allows a party to demand confirmation of performance if they suspect the other side might default.
In a decision dated May 29, 2025, the trial court rejected the instruction, the Court of Appeals upheld that decision, and the Supreme Court now affirmed it – definitively stating that the doctrine of adequate assurance is not recognized under Virginia common law. The high court emphasized that the doctrine – originally rooted in the Uniform Commercial Code and later extended in the Restatement (Second) of Contracts – represents a “modern innovation” not adopted by Virginia courts or legislators for general contract disputes.
Writing for the Court, Justice Cleo E. Powell declared that any expansion of Virginia’s contract doctrine is a matter for the legislature not the judiciary. “The decision to adopt a new doctrine applicable to all contractual disputes is a policy decision that is more appropriately left to the legislature,” she wrote.
The ruling has broader implications beyond this case, reaffirming that Virginia courts will not judicially adopt evolving doctrines from other jurisdictions without express legislative direction. It also protects entities like the NRA from facing new legal standards retroactively applied in civil litigation.
“We are pleased the Court affirmed the outcome below,” says William A. Brewer III, partner at the Brewer firm, which represented the NRA in this matter and others through fall 2024.
Last year, the NRA prevailed at trial in a “dissolution lawsuit” brought by the New York Attorney General, and secured a unanimous, 9-0 decision before the U.S. Supreme Court in one of the most closely watched First Amendment cases in the country.
The Court’s refusal to expand the law ensures that contractual obligations in Virginia will continue to be interpreted under traditional principles of clear repudiation and actual breach.
Joining Brewer in representing the NRA were firm partner William A. Brewer IV and Robert H. Cox of Whiteford, Taylor & Preston LLP in Virginia.
New York Law Journal / Albany Times Union Report on Lawsuit Against Former NRA President Oliver North
May 21, 2025 — The New York Law Journal and Albany Times Union report that Brewer client Thomas King, president of the NRA Foundation, has filed a countersuit against former NRA Board President Oliver North. The suit "cites New York’s anti-SLAPP statute that protects New Yorkers from frivolous lawsuits meant to silence whistleblowers."
Filed in the state Supreme Court of Rensselaer County on May 19, 2025, King's lawsuit says he reported "allegations of serious ethics violations by North through the NRA's confidential internal disciplinary process," the Law Journal reports.
”Our client believes Col. North's action in Virginia is a clear abuse of our judicial process — a classic SLAPP lawsuit filed to punish Mr. King for exercising protected rights,” said Svetlana Eisenberg, partner at Brewer and counsel to King. “Thomas King's actions were entirely lawful, rooted in responsible governance and accountability. The lawsuit aims to demonstrate that attempts to suppress whistleblowers through retaliatory litigation violate New York law and threaten the essential principles of transparency and integrity within nonprofit organizations."
To read the Albany Times Union article, click here.
To read the New York Law Journal article, click here.