John A. Crawford Jr

Practice Areas

Commercial Litigation; Antitrust Litigation; Bankruptcy Litigation; Banking Litigation; Financial Services Litigation; Securities Litigation and Investigations; Shareholder and Member Litigation; and Trucking Litigation

Career

As of member of the Butler Snow’s Commercial Litigation practice group, Jack routinely focuses on high-stakes commercial disputes, routinely representing businesses large and small. Jack routinely handles antitrust, bankruptcy, banking, corporate governance, and shareholder disputes. Jack frequently defends against actions brought by the Mississippi Attorney General and the Mississippi Secretary of State. Jack has represented individuals in Securities Exchange Commission and FINRA investigations. Jack has extensive experience in corporate governance and shareholder disputes.

Personal

He obtained his J.D. from the University of Mississippi and is admitted to The Mississippi Bar, the U.S. District Courts for the Northern and Southern Districts of Mississippi and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. He was awarded the Robert Dean Farley Award for graduating first in his law school class. He has two years of public accounting experience and previously passed the 1991 certified public accountant exam.

Professional Memberships

• Chambers USA, America's Leading Lawyers for Business

Litigation: General Commercial – Mississippi, 2024-2025

• Martindale-Hubbell®

AV® – Preeminent™ Peer Review Rated, 2007-2025

• Thomson Reuters Super Lawyers®

Mid-South Super Lawyers, Business Litigation, 2012-2017, 2022-2024

• BL Rankings, The Best Lawyers in America®

Commercial Litigation, 2013-2025

Litigation – Securities, 2018-2025

Lawyer of the Year, Litigation – Securities (Jackson, MS), 2023

• Mississippi Business Journal

Top 40 Under 40, 2007

• Two years of Public Accounting in Memphis, Tennessee

• Passed 1991 Certified Public Accountant Exam

Work Highlights

• Counsel for Arkansas bank in pursuing multiple corporate and individual borrowers and guarantors regarding over $65,000,000 in loans with collateral in five states with six Chapter 11 bankruptcies, two federal lawsuits, one state lawsuit and multiple foreclosure actions being filed.

• Represented investment advisor firm and investment advisor in Texas with claimant asserting over $8 million in losses. The matter was settled to the mutual satisfaction of the parties.

• State of Mississippi v. Eli Lilly and Co., et al., 25CH1:21-cv-00738, in the Chancery Court of Hinds County, Mississippi. The State of Mississippi filed suit against the manufacturers and PBMs asserting a price fixing conspiracy regarding insulin. Defendants successfully removed to federal court and filed motions to dismiss. After an MDL was subsequently formed, the case was transferred to the MDL.

• State of Mississippi v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. et al., 20-cv-35W, in the Chancery Court of Marshall County, Mississippi. Plaintiff sued Defendants under the Mississippi Antitrust Act and Mississippi Consumer Protection Act alleging that an alleged reverse payment agreement on a Lidoderm pain patch patent violated antitrust laws. Defendants moved to dismiss the lawsuit under Rules 12(b)(2) and 12(b)(6) and, after oral argument, the trial court granted the motions. The parties subsequently entered into a very favorable settlement agreement for our clients.

• Represented former controller in SEC and DOJ investigation regarding South Carolina Energy & Gas, Inc.’s financial disclosures regarding the failed construction of two AP1000 nuclear reactors at the Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station site, that led to multiple indictments and at least two guilty pleas.

• Tiger REF Highline LLC v. Ziel Feldman, Nir Meir and H F Z Capital Group LLC, et al., Index 153293 2021, in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York. Represented plaintiff investor in real estate syndicate regarding misappropriation of $13,172,400 owed on investment. Plaintiff settled with corporate defendants. The principal bad actor filed Chapter 7 bankruptcy in Florida and was later indicted in New York for an alleged $86,000,000 fraud scheme.

• State of Mississippi v. Accord Healthcare, Inc., Actavis LLC and Actavis Pharma, Inc., 25CH1:18-cv-01453, in the Chancery Court of Hinds County, Mississippi. Plaintiff sued Defendants asserting claims for allegedly violating the Mississippi Consumer Protection Act regarding disclosures related to hair loss from taking docetaxel or Taxotere. Defendants moved to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction and failure to state a claim. Plaintiff voluntarily dismissed the suit without Defendants paying anything to Plaintiff.

• Counsel for major consumer products manufacturer in an antitrust and consumer protection action brought by the Mississippi Attorney General alleging an international price-fixing conspiracy in the manufacturing, production and distribution of liquid crystal display (LCD) panels. Case was appealed to the United States Supreme Court on Class Action Fairness Act removal jurisdiction issues resulting in landmark decision of Mississippi ex rel. Hood v. AU Optronics, 134 S. Ct. 736 (2014).

• Icee Distributors LLC v. Coca Cola Southwest Beverages LLC, et al., CIV 155995, 26th Judicial District Court, Bossier Parish, Louisiana (2018). Icee alleged that CCSWB along with a number of other distributors and Coca-Cola conspired to violate Louisiana’s anti-trust statute and engaged in unfair trade practices to attempt to run Icee out of business. CCSWB and the other Defendants filed a federal arbitration act lawsuit in federal court in Georgia to which the matter was compelled to arbitration. After concluding discovery, the matter was favorably resolved by the Defendants.

• Natreon Inc. v. Ixoreal Biomed Inc., CIV 3:16-cv-04736-FLW-DEA, in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey. Natreon alleged that Ixoreal violated the federal Lanham Act and a host of state law claims in its comparative advertising of KSM-66®’s ashwagandha root extract vs Natreon’s Sensoril® ashwagandha extract. Ixoreal, our client, answered and filed a counterclaim and third-party complaint based on alleged false claims relating to Natreon’s alleged family of patents and claims thereunder. The case was ultimately dismissed by the Court without either side paying any moneys.

• State of Mississippi ex rel. Lynn Fitch v. Yazaki North America, Inc., et al., 294 So. 3d 1178 (2020). Successfully obtained dismissal on 12(b)(6) grounds for major consumer products manufacturer in an antitrust and consumer protection action brought by the Mississippi Attorney General alleging an international price-fixing conspiracy in the manufacturing, production and distribution of wire harness parts used in automotive manufacturing. On appeal, a unanimous Mississippi Supreme Court affirmed the dismissal.

• Precision Spine, Inc. and Spinal USA, Inc. v. Zavation, LLC, et al., 3:15cv681-LG-RHW, In the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi. Plaintiffs, a spinal medical device manufacturer and distributor, sued Zavation, a competing spinal medical device manufacturer, for misappropriation of trade secrets, unfair competition and tortious interference. We defended Zavation, LLC and prosecuted its counterclaims. After all of the dispositive motion briefing was completed, Zavation was able to settle the matter on favorable terms.

• Delta Bay Medical, LLC, et al. v. Zimmer, Inc., et al., 3:11cv156-HTW-LRA, In the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi. Former co-distributor sued for breach of contract, tortious interference, breach of fiduciary duty and other claims seeking over $8 million. We defended the claims against Zimmer and prosecuted its counterclaims for over $2 million. The District Court granted Zimmer’s motions for summary judgment over plaintiffs’ claims, ECF Nos. 207 & 208 and denied plaintiffs’ motions for summary judgment over Zimmer’s claims. ECF No. 212. Before trial, the parties settled, without Zimmer paying any money to plaintiffs.

• Certain Borrowers v. Southern AgCredit ACA (SAC), G2014-198 S/2, in the Chancery Court for the First Judicial District of Hinds County, Mississippi. Wealthy borrowers defaulted on a large loan governed by the Farm Credit Act and Farm Credit Administration regulations and rules. SAC later received summary judgment over all of Plaintiffs’ claims against SAC, and the Court entered a $5,247,123.77 judgment in SAC’s favor against borrowers.