Ms. Harrison has an active Supreme Court and appellate practice, including successful oral arguments in the Supreme Court and federal Courts of Appeals. Representative matters include:
- Welch v. United States, in which the Court held that the hundreds of persons serving mandatory-minimum sentences imposed under the Armed Career Criminal Act’s “residual clause” may obtain relief from their sentences following the Court’s invalidation of the residual clause as unconstitutionally vague.
- Argued before the US Supreme Court on behalf of the Petitioner in Nken v. Holder, 129 S. Ct. 1749 (2009), and obtained a 7-2 victory. The Supreme Court’s decision set the standard for temporary stays of removal in federal court.
- Represented the petitioner in the US Supreme Court in Kucana v. Holder, 130 S. Ct. 827 (2010). The firm served as co-counsel for an asylum-seeker from Albania in a case regarding the authority of federal courts to review certain immigration decisions left to the discretion of the Attorney General by statute. The Firm secured a 9-0 victory.
- Authored significant amicus briefs in a variety of Supreme Court cases, including Flores-Villar v. United States, 09-5801 (2010) (equal protection challenge to gender discrimination in U.S. citizenship laws);Kiyemba v. Obama, No. 09-581 (use of habeas corpus to challenge unlawful overseas detention); United States v. Denedo, 129 S. Ct. 2213 (2009) (availability of post-conviction relief in the military courts); Bartlett v. Strickland, 129 S. Ct. 1231 (2009) (vote dilution under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act); Kimbrough v. United States, 128 S. Ct. 558 (2007) (sentencing for crack-cocaine crimes); and Town of Castle Rock, Colorado v. Gonzales, 545 US 748 (2005) (due process challenge to non-enforcement of restraining order).
- Served as key member of appellate teams in cases involving contract claims over insurance coverage, scope of tort claims for malicious prosecution and unfair competition, rate-setting decisions of administrative boards, and numerous other commercial and constitutional litigation matters.
- City of Los Angeles v. Naranjibhai Patel: The US Supreme Court agreed with and cited an amicus brief filed by Ms. Harrison on behalf of the US Chamber of Commerce, the world's largest business organization, representing the interests of more than 3 million businesses of all sizes. The case concerns the constitutionality of a section of the Los Angeles Municipal Code that requires hotel operators to record and keep specific information about their guests on the premises for a 90-day period and to make those records available to “any officer of the Los Angeles Police Department for inspection” on demand. In a 5-4 opinion on June 22, 2015, the Court held that the section is facially unconstitutional because it fails to provide the operators with an opportunity for pre-compliance review.
Ms. Harrison also has an active commercial litigation and arbitration practice, with a specialty in matters involving the hospitality industry and recording industry. Representative matters include:
- Cityfront Hotel Associates Limited Partnership et al. v. Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide Inc.., et al.: Ms. Harrison defended the $13.6 billion merger between Marriott International and Starwood Hotels & Resorts against challenge by two hotel owners who alleged the deal violated non-compete provisions in hotel management agreements. After the owner sought a preliminary injunction, Jenner & Block persuaded the New York Supreme Court to deny the injunction bid and allow the merger to conclude. The merger completed in September 2016.
- M Waikiki LLC v. Marriott Hotel Services, Inc.: Ms. Harrison represented Marriott in litigation over The Waikiki EDITION hotel in Hawaii. The owner of the hotel filed suit in New York state court alleging that Marriott defaulted on its obligations to manage the hotel and develop a chain of EDITION-brand hotels. The complaint sought monetary damages and a declaration that the owner could terminate the management agreement for default. Several months after filing suit, the owner forcibly evicted Marriott from the hotel in a midnight raid. Within days, Marriott obtained a TRO returning Marriott to possession of the property – the first of its kind issued in a US court. In response, the owner filed for bankruptcy in Hawaii in order to stay the enforcement of the TRO. The owner claimed the right to reject the management agreement under bankruptcy law, and Marriott filed a claim for breach of the contract. After a four-day hearing in bankruptcy court, the court estimated Marriott’s claim at $21 million, and the case settled shortly thereafter.
- RC/PB Inc. v. The Ritz-Carlton Hotel Company LLC et al.: Ms. Harrison represented Ritz-Carlton and Marriott in litigation brought by owner in Florida state court. The owner’s complaint alleged breach of the hotel management agreement, breach of fiduciary duties, and fraud and misrepresentation and sought $100 million in damages. The Jenner & Block team successfully obtained summary judgment on the owner’s tort claims, including its claims for breach of fiduciary duties, fraud, and misrepresentation. Jenner also filed a counterclaim against the owner for breach of the hotel management agreement. The case settled in January 2015.
- Schittino v. Marriott International, Inc.: Ms. Harrison represented Marriott in a putative consumer class action concerning the sale of Kobe beef products at Marriott hotels throughout the United States. The putative class alleged claims including breach of contract, fraud and violation of Illinois’ consumer fraud statute. Ms. Harrison successfully won dismissal with prejudice in 2017.
- Schlessinger v. Marriott International, Inc.: Ms. Harrison successfully defended Marriott in a breach-of-contract action concerning the terms of the Marriott rewards program. After Ms. Harrison won a sanctions motion against the Plaintiff, the lawsuit was voluntarily dismissed with prejudice in 2015.
- Litigation and arbitration involving The Ritz-Carlton Rose Hall, Jamaica. Ms. Harrison represented Ritz-Carlton in litigation brought by a hotel owner. The Firm prevailed both in the international arbitration and in court, preserving Ritz-Carlton’s long-term hotel managing agreement and obtaining an award requiring the owner to pay Ritz-Carlton millions of dollars in attorneys’ fees.
- Rate-setting litigation on behalf of the recording industry. Ms. Harrison has represented the recording industry in landmark rate-making proceedings to set royalty rates for the reproduction and distribution of musical compositions under Section 115 of the Copyright Act (Mechanicals) and to set royalty rates for satellite digital audio radio service (SDARS). Ms. Harrison has extensive experience litigating before the Copyright Royalty Board, the administrative judges appointed by the Library of Congress to adjudicate rate-setting proceedings pursuant to the Copyright Royalty and Distribution Reform Act of 2004.