Partner, King & Spalding PLLC
Will Barnette is a partner in the Atlanta office of King & Spalding, where he is a member of the firm’s business litigation practice and class action defense group. During his 30-year career, Will has consistently led clients to successful outcomes in their most sensitive and high exposure class action, MDL, and related regulatory matters. From litigating high-stakes tobacco class actions at the turn of the century, to defending massive data breach litigation in the last decade, and winning several lucrative antitrust opt-out settlements more recently, Will has played a key role in much of the leading complex litigation of the era and led clients to tremendous success on both sides of the “v.” In particular, he has deep experience in litigating consumer, products, and antitrust class actions, commercial disputes, and managing internal investigations.
Prior to rejoining King & Spalding, where he worked earlier in his career, Will served as Associate General Counsel for The Home Depot and was a member of the company’s Legal Senior Leadership Team. As leader of The Home Depot’s commercial litigation team for more than ten years, he was responsible for the company’s most significant commercial and business litigation, which frequently challenged core aspects of the company’s business. During his 21-year tenure with The Home Depot, Will led the successful defense of several hundred class actions, created and led the company’s recovery litigation program, and successfully managed multiple high-profile investigations and favorably resolved significant related regulatory matters, including with the United States Department of Justice, the United States Environmental Protection Agency, and multi-state Attorney General groups.
A recognized thought leader in complex litigation, Will argued before the U.S. Supreme Court in the 2019 term—one of the few in-house counsel to do so. He received the Atlanta Business Chronicle’s Corporate Counsel Award for Advocacy in 2016 and has authored seven law review articles. His recent works, Misunderstanding Original Jurisdiction and There Is No Conservative Case for Class Actions, ranked among the top SSRN downloads in Federal Courts and Jurisdiction. He frequently lectures on class actions, MDL litigation, and internal investigations, and teaches Complex Litigation at the University of Tennessee Winston College of Law, where he earned the Harold C. Warner Outstanding Adjunct Professor Award in 2025.
Will chairs the Board of Georgians for Lawsuit Reform, which was instrumental in passing Georgia’s 2025 tort reform legislation. He also serves as Chair of the Class Actions Section for the State Bar of Georgia and is a former President of the Atlanta Legal Aid Society. Will played varsity college basketball at Sewanee.
Partner, Jackson Walker
Arthur offers clients a winning combination of trial and appellate experience gained as a federal prosecutor and more than 20 years of experience in handling patent, copyright, trademark, and trade secrets litigation.
While his practice concentrates on intellectual property litigation, Arthur also has significant experience in internal investigations, False Claims Act suits, partnership and breach of fiduciary duty, breach of contract, and employment litigation. Arthur also has represented clients testifying before Congressional committees.
Arthur writes and speaks frequently on topics ranging from the case against Boston bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev to patent litigation reform.
Prior to joining Michael Best, Arthur served as an Assistant United States Attorney in the Southern District of New York, where he was the lead prosecutor in criminal trials, including federal intellectual property crimes. He also argued numerous appeals.
Former Solicitor General of Texas
Jonathan F. Mitchell is Principal at Mitchell Law PLLC. He received his law degree with high honors from the University of Chicago Law School, where he was an articles editor of The University of Chicago Law Review and a member of the Order of the Coif.
After graduating from law school, Mr. Mitchell clerked for Judge J. Michael Luttig of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit and for Justice Antonin Scalia of the Supreme Court of the United States. He then served as an Attorney-Adviser in the Office of Legal Counsel of the United States Department of Justice from 2003 through 2006. After leaving the Department of Justice, Mr. Mitchell served as a Visiting Researcher at Georgetown University Law Center, a Visiting Assistant Professor at the University of Chicago Law School from 2006 through 2008, and an Assistant Professor of Law at George Mason University from 2008 through 2010.
In 2010, Mr. Mitchell was appointed Solicitor General of Texas, a position he held until January 2015. After leaving the Texas Solicitor General’s office, Mr. Mitchell served as the Searle Visiting Professor of Law at the University of Texas School of Law before joining the Hoover Institution as a Visiting Fellow from 2015 to 2016. Mr. Mitchell also served as a Visiting Professor of Law at Stanford Law School before opening his own law firm in 2018.
Mr. Mitchell has published numerous works of scholarship in top-10 law journals, and he has written articles on textualism, national-security law, criminal law and procedure, judicial review and judicial federalism, and the legality of stare decisis in constitutional adjudication.
Mr. Mitchell has argued eight times before the Supreme Court of the United States, and more than 20 times in the federal courts of appeals. He has also argued before Supreme Court of Texas and in numerous trial courts. Mr. Mitchell has authored the principal merits brief in 11 Supreme Court cases, and has written and submitted more than 20 amicus curiae briefs in the Supreme Court.
Mr. Mitchell devised the novel enforcement mechanism in the Texas Heartbeat Act, also known as Senate Bill 8, which avoids pre-enforcement judicial review by prohibiting government officials from enforcing the statute and empowering private citizens to bring lawsuits against those who violate it. This produced an end-run around Roe v. Wade and allowed Texas and other states to impose pre-viability abortion bans despite the continued existence of Roe.
There Is No Conservative Case for Class Actions
William P. Barnette
A review of The Conservative Case for Class Actions, by Brian T. Fitzpatrick (Chicago), https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/C/bo43233299.html (Read...
Topics
Amendments to Federal Criminal Rule 41 Address Venue, Not Hacking Powers
A few weeks ago the Supreme Court notified Congress of this year’s proposed amendments to...
The Lawsuit Abuse Reduction Act of 2013
In a recent letter from Thomas A. Susman of the American Bar Association’s Governmental Affairs...
Local Patent Rules - Certainty and Efficiency or a Crazy Quilt of Substantive Law?
Arthur Gollwitzer
More than a decade ago, the United States District Court for the Northern District of...
Shady Grove Orthopedic Associates, P. A. v. Allstate Ins. Co. - Post-Decision SCOTUScast
Jonathan Mitchell
On March 23, 2010, the Supreme Court announced its decision in Shady Grove Orthopedic Associates,...
Bar Watch Bulletin February 2005
The American Bar Association Midyear Meetings take place from Thursday, February 10 through Tuesday, February...
Do Federal Class Actions Compete Against Overlapping State Class Actions in a Race to the Courthouse?
In June 2001, the U.S. Judicial Conference's Standing Committee on Practice and Procedure considered several...
The Federalization of Criminal Law
D Smith
It is a real honor to be invited as a participant in a Practice Group...