Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP, a Delaware limited liability partnership | This website contains attorney advertising.

Lawrence G. Scarborough



Larry Scarborough is a first-chair trial lawyer with a wealth of experience prosecuting and defending high-risk/high-reward matters in four principal areas:

  • Antitrust, often involving intellectual property
  • Mergers and acquisitions–related matters
  • Consumer-facing class-action defense
  • International arbitration

Larry litigates high-stakes matters in both federal and state courts and in various international venues; and his teams have amassed a track record of mitigating the risk of the toughest factual and legal circumstances while blending seamlessly into the local environments, particularly from a jury perspective. Larry and the team are often asked to undertake trials following unsuccessful summary-judgment practice or mediation/settlement efforts as additional or replacement counsel. His experience also encompasses numerous successful preliminary-injunction proceedings and similar matters conducted on an emergency basis.


Larry has extensive experience representing business clients, both plaintiffs and defendants alike, in business-to-business disputes challenging an array of horizontal and vertical arrangements in industries as varied as missile defense, semiconductors, telecommunications and musical instruments. He also represents these and other clients in DOJ/FTC investigations, including the defense of follow-on class actions and MDL proceedings where necessary, using an array of approaches honed in his cases and in his broader class action defense practice.

Representative Experience

Following the denial of pertinent motions for summary judgment, Larry joined the case pre-trial and served as lead trial counsel in a seven-month jury trial, prevailing before the jury on six of eight monopolization and tying claims involving alleged aftermarkets for service, software patches and upgrades, followed by a precedential appellate reversal on the two remaining claims in the Third Circuit.

  • Representing a universally recognized guitar and amplifier manufacturer, Larry served as lead counsel both in successfully avoiding any governmental enforcement action and then successfully defending the MDL follow-on hub-and-spoke antitrust cases, achieving a dismissal of all claims by the district court and a precedential affirmance by the Ninth Circuit.
  • Representing the largest self-move truck-rental enterprise, Larry served as lead counsel with respect to MDL cases alleging an anticompetitive pricing conspiracy between the company and its agents, also achieving dismissal in the district court and a precedential affirmance by the Eleventh Circuit.

Mergers & Acquisitions Litigation

Where parties leave material consideration to be assessed and allocated post-transaction, they also tend to diverge as to the meaning of the contractual provisions involved. The case development of evidence relating to the key provisions, course of performance and similar items becomes the focus of efforts from inception, leading either to a result during motion practice or, if necessary, at trial.

Representative Experience

  • Representing a leading homebuilder based in the Southwest accused of underpaying a seller by $13 million under an earn-out provision, Larry served as lead arbitration counsel, achieving complete rejection of the seller’s claims as well as achieving an award of all attorneys’ fees and costs in favor of the homebuilder client.
  • Representing a nationally known owner of restaurants, venues, arenas and other interests, Larry served as lead arbitration counsel in an international arbitration involving a contractual web of provisions bearing on the computation of an earn-out provision, successfully upholding the client’s construction of the contractual provisions at issue.

Class Action Defense

Larry has defended putative class actions from coast to coast in dozens of jurisdictions, both state and federal. His approach is to meld with the local environment and target the arguments most likely to lead to successful and efficient resolution, and to avoid areas of expenditure in the process. Based on his trial experience, the approach can range from dismissal, early settlement, the defeat of class certification or a successful defense on the merits of the claims.

Representative Experience

  • Representing a leading Colorado health care system facing a challenge similar to many brought throughout the country relating to pricing disclosures involving emergency room settings, Larry developed and presented the successful evidentiary and legal showing, defeating the motion to certify any of the proffered classes, resulting in the dismissal of the entire case.
  • Representing one of the nation’s three largest waste haulers, Larry developed and presented the successful evidentiary and legal showing defeating the motion to certify a 39-state class challenging a variety of pricing disclosures and various administrative fees.

International Arbitration

Because many disputes proceed in arbitration, Larry has acquired extensive experience litigating and conducting evidentiary proceedings under the auspices of various arbitral organizations around the world. Where discovery is limited and the parties' direct cases are presented in writing, a premium is placed on evidentiary development from the outset, consistent with the approach taken in all cases in which he participates.

Representative Experience

  • Spearheaded a cross-border dispute involving HKIAC arbitration on behalf of a client engaged in electronic manufacturing services (EMS), a China-based original equipment manufacturer (OEM), and a U.S.-based technology company that contended its patents had been infringed by technology provided by the OEM. The EMS client faced threats of litigation from the U.S. technology company but was subject to an arbitration provision in connection with contribution or indemnity claims against the China-based OEM.
  • In private arbitration proceedings conducted in London, New York and Washington, D.C., pursued antitrust monopolization claims on behalf of U.S.-based flat glass manufacturer against UK-based float glass manufacturer and technology licensor, resulting in substantial payment to the client shortly in advance of a merits hearing.
  • In federal court litigation and arbitration proceedings conducted under the Japan-American Trade Arbitration Agreement of 1952, successfully defended Japan-based telecommunications manufacturer against antitrust allegations launched by U.S.-based equipment provider.

Related Topics


Bar Admissions

New York

Court Admissions

U.S. Supreme Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California
U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut
U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Michigan
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin


New York University School of Law
J.D. (1981)

Stanford University
B.A. with honors and distinction (1978)

Insights & Events

Other Perspectives
  • Supreme Court Ends Saga Over Which Venezuelan Government Could Be Sued in International Investment Dispute 
    Republished by The ABA International Arbitration Committee, January 2024

Leadership & Community

Professional Associations

  • American Bar Association
  • American Intellectual Property Law Association
  • Arizona Equal Justice Foundation — Board of Directors (2008-13)


  • Benchmark Litigation — Litigation Star, Arizona (2013-17)
  • Chambers USA (2010-21)
  • Best Lawyers® — Litigation - Antitrust, 2011-24; Mass Tort Litigation/Class Actions - Defendants, 2013-24 (Lawyer of the Year - Mass Tort Litigation, 2012, 2015, 2017); Derivatives Law, 2008
  • New York Super Lawyers — 2012-23
Awards Methodology
No aspect of these recognitions has been approved by the highest court of any state.
The Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP website uses cookies to make your browsing experience as useful as possible. In order to have the full site experience, keep cookies enabled on your web browser. By browsing our site with cookies enabled, you are agreeing to their use. Review Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP's cookies information for more details.