• ESAB Group, Inc. v. Zurich Insurance plc, 685 F.3d 376 (4^th Cir. 2012): Adopting Richard’s statement at oral argument that in matters of foreign commerce the United States must speak with one voice, the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court’s order compelling insurance claims to arbitration in Sweden, and rejected plaintiff-appellant’s argument that the McCarran-Ferguson Act enabled a South Carolina statute prohibiting arbitration of insurance disputes to reverse-preempt the N.Y. Convention on Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards.
• API Asbestos Settlement Trust v. Zurich American Ins. Co., 2012 WL 2589086 (D. Minn. Mar. 30, 2012): Obtained summary judgment dismissing with prejudice alter ego, Respondeat superior, tortious interference and breach of contract claims of asbestos litigation trust arising out of recapitalization of insurance company that had insured plaintiffs. See also API Asbestos Settlement Trust v. Zurich American Ins. Co., 706 F. Supp. 2d 926 (D. Minn. 2010) (dismissing fraudulent transfer and tortious interference claims for plaintiffs’ lack of standing).
• In re Delphi Corp., Case No. 05-44481 (RDD) (S.D.N.Y. Bankr. Ct. 2009): Led Willkie’s litigation team in the firm’s interdisciplinary effort on behalf of a Collective of Tranche C Delphi lenders’ successful $3.25 billion credit bid to acquire a substantial portion of the Delphi business.
• In re Scor Holding (Switzerland) AG Securities Litig., 537 F. Supp. 2d 556 (S.D.N.Y. 2008): As lead counsel for Scor (f/k/a Converium) in class action securities litigation, obtained dismissal from certified class of foreign purchasers who bought Converium stock on foreign exchanges.
• General Motors Corp. v. Royal & Sun Alliance Insurance Group plc, et al., Case 05-063863 (Circuit Ct. Oakland County, Michigan) and General Motors Corp. v. Royal & Sun Alliance Insurance plc, [2007] EWHC 2206 (High Court of Justice, Commercial Court, England): Engineered Royal & Sun Alliance Insurance Group plc’s successful defense against alter ego claims brought by GM in environmental and asbestos coverage litigation in Michigan, and then assisted English counsel in obtaining an anti-suit injunction in London Commercial Court preventing GM from pursuing satellite litigation in Delaware.
• Allianz v. Kennecott Corporation, et al., High Court of Justice, Commercial Court, England (2002): Represented U.S. mining company in connection with business interruption claim resulting from catastrophic failure of copper smelter furnace and acid plant. Assisted U.K. counsel in coverage litigation in English court and in mediating successful settlement of claim.
• Salton, Inc. v. Philips Domestic Appliances & Personal Care, B.V., 391 F.2d 871 (7^th Cir. 2004): Represented Dutch appliance maker in copyright and patent litigation against U.S. electronics manufacturer. On appeal, obtained reversal of district court’s dismissal of action for failure to join Chinese original equipment manufacturing firm.
• In re Kensington International Ltd., 368 F.3d 289 (3d Cir. 2004) and 353 F.3d 211 (3d Cir. 2003): On behalf of bondholder investors in W.R. Grace bankruptcy, obtained disqualification of district judge overseeing W.R. Grace and other asbestos company bankruptcies.
• Wechsler v. Squadron, Ellenoff, Plesent & Sheinfeld, 994 F. Supp. 202 (S.D.N.Y. 1997): Represented trustee in litigation arising out of the Towers Financial Ponzi scheme and resulting bankruptcy. Persuaded district court that trustee had standing to bring malpractice claims against former SEC counsel to Towers, notwithstanding senior management’s role in the fraud.

Richard is a member of ARIAS-US, the reinsurance arbitration organization, and is certified as a reinsurance arbitrator. He is active in the New York City Bar Association where he is past chair of the Products Liability Committee and, as a former member of the Federal Courts Committee, helped write the Committee's report: "The Indefinite Detention of Enemy Combatants: Balancing Due Process and National Security in the Context of the War on Terror." He is currently a member of the Arbitration Committee.

Richard also serves as a court-appointed mediator in the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York.

Richard has been recognized by clients and his peers as a leading insurance and reinsurance law adviser in the 2002, 2004, 2006, 2013, 2015, 2017 and 2018 Guide to the World’s Leading Insurance and Reinsurance Lawyers (Legal Media Group).

Richard is also a member of the board of directors of the Friends of American Mission Hospital (2017-present) and the City Bar Fund of the New York City Bar Association (2018- ). 

• "Are Arbitration Clauses in International Insurance Contracts Enforceable? The Fourth Circuit Joins Debate," Insurance Coverage Law Report (August/September 2012)
• "U.S. Supreme Court to Decide Effect of Contractual Forum-Selection Clauses in Federal Courts," Willkie Client Memo (April 8, 2013)
• "Lost Horizon: International Securities Litigation in a Post-Morrison World," presented at The Knowledge Congress’s Live Webinar Legal Series: International Securities Litigation, (January 16, 2013)
• "Seventh Circuit Emphasizes Necessity for Timely Selection of Party Arbitrator," Metropolitan Corporate Counsel (2007)
• "The Doctrine of Adequate Assurances and Potential Year 2000 Litigation Risks," N.Y.L.J., Sept. 1, 1999 and Corporate Law Weekly, Sept. 23, 1999 (with Scott Rose)
• "Should Congress Try to Stop All Those Lawsuits Over Spilled Coffee and Declining Stock Prices," The Marsh & McLennan Companies Quarterly: Civil Justice in a Changing World (Fall 1995)

Pro Bono and Public Service

Richard is a committed contributor to Willkie’s pro bono program.  In February 2017, he led a Willkie team in the successful representation of a 12-year old Iranian national who, in the face of President Trump’s travel ban, sought entry into the United States for an urgent and time-sensitive surgery needed to save her vision. The case, and the child’s reunion with her mother at JFK Airport, received significant media attention (click here for the CNN video clip).

In 2015, Richard received the New York City Bar Justice Center's Jeremy G. Epstein Award for Outstanding Pro Bono Service in recognition of his work on a challenging asylum case.  In 2014, The New York Law Journal named Richard among the distinguished group of “Lawyers Who Lead by Example” for his “outstanding record of providing crucial legal services to poor or nearly poor New Yorkers,” and the New York State Bar Association recognized him as one of the Empire State Counsel® honorees for extraordinary pro bono contributions in 2014.  On December 31, 2014, he obtained an appellate victory for Great Oaks Charter School - New York in a matter against the New York City Department of Education involving obtaining much-needed rental assistance under a new law.  

Richard's pro bono work also contributed to Willkie’s selection by Law360 as “Pro Bono Firm of 2012,” in which two of his cases were singled out for special recognition.  In Favors v. Cuomo, a voting rights case, a three-judge federal panel granted judgment for Willkie’s pro bono clients on claims that New York's previously existing congressional districts were unconstitutional under the “one-person, one-vote” requirement of the U.S. Constitution and, as requested by Willkie, redrew New York's congressional districts by following neutral redistricting principles that did not favor incumbents.  See Favors v. Cuomo, 866 F. Supp. 2d 176 (E.D.N.Y. 2012) (panel upheld Willkie’s complaint against ripeness and standing challenges); No. 11-CV-5632, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 25707 (E.D.N.Y. Feb. 28, 2012) (panel granted Willkie’s clients' application to appoint special master to draw New York’s congressional districts applying neutral redistricting principles); 2012 WL 928223 (E.D.N.Y. March 19, 2012) (panel adopted Magistrate Judge’s plan and affirmed rejection of protection of incumbents as applicable redistricting factor).

In the other, Richard led a pro bono team's submission of an amicus brief on behalf of the National Center for Science Education in the Ohio Supreme Court in a case raising issues concerning a public junior high school teacher's inappropriate injection of religious beliefs and Creationism in his teaching of evolution.  NCSE argued that appellant’s teaching methods served no legitimate pedagogical purpose in a public school science class, were scientifically unsound, and “served only impermissibly to advance a sectarian purpose, namely to teach creationism in its traditional version of creation science or its modern incarnation of intelligent design.”

Richard's work on behalf of pro bono political asylum clients also led to his and his team’s recognition in 2013 by Sanctuary for Families at its 10th Annual Above & Beyond Pro Bono Achievement Awards & Benefit.  Richard and his Willkie colleagues obtained political asylum for a family that fled Mexico to escape domestic violence, in the process persuading the Department of Homeland Security to recognize a path-breaking definition of persecution on the basis of social group for juvenile domestic violence victims.  In another recent pro bono matter, Richard submitted an amicus brief on behalf of the Innocence Project urging the U.S. Supreme Court to recognize a constitutional claim of actual innocence in criminal habeas corpus cases.

Richard also represented 56 scientific organizations as amici curiae in an appeal before the Eleventh Circuit involving the constitutionality of school board’s affixing a disclaimer to biology textbooks regarding evolutionary theory.  Selman v. Cobb County School District, No. 05-11725 (11th Cir. 2006).  And he also represented pro bono a New Jersey public high school student in his successful challenge of a teacher's unconstitutional religious instruction and denigration of the science of evolution.  See “Student, 16, Finds Allies In His Fight Over Religion,” N.Y. Times (Feb. 20, 2007) (“Richard Mancino, a partner with Willkie Farr & Gallagher, which is representing the family, said he did not understand why school officials would not ‘stand up for this student, who had the guts to raise this constitutional issue.’”).