- Shareholder Rights & Fiduciary Duty Litigation
- Shareholder Derivative Actions
- Corporate Mergers & Acquisitions
- Securities Fraud Class Actions
- Consumer Class Actions
- Antitrust Class Actions
- ERISA Litigation
- Whistleblower Litigation
- Northwestern School of Law of Lewis & Clark College (J.D. 1992)
- University of California, Irvine (B.A. 1988)
- Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI)
- Super Lawyer (2015-2017)
- Kevin A. Seely and Michael J. Nicoud, Amex Oral Arguments Reveal Hope For Consumers, Law360, August 27, 2013
- Kevin A. Seely, Nichole T. Browning, and Gina Stassi, Reducing FCPA Exposure, The Recorder, June 25, 2012
- U.S. District Courts for the Northern, Central, and Southern Districts of California
- U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado
- U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida
- U.S. District Court of Guam
- U.S. District Courts for the Northern and Central Districts of Illinois
- U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan
- U.S. District Court for the Northern Mariana Islands
- U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas
- U.S. District Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Kevin A. Seely devotes his practice to representing whistleblowers, shareholders, and consumers in complex qui tam, derivative, and class actions throughout the U.S. A tenacious trial lawyer with more than twenty years of litigation experience in both the public and private sectors, Mr. Seely has successfully prosecuted top corporate executives, high-ranking government officials, and corporate entities for a variety of wrongdoings, including theft of government services, bribery, embezzlement, and health care fraud.
Prior to joining Robbins Arroyo LLP in 2006, Mr. Seely prosecuted white-collar crimes and public corruption cases on behalf of the U.S. government as an Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Districts of Guam and Northern Mariana Islands. In that role, Mr. Seely successfully led teams to investigate, prosecute, and negotiate the resolution of numerous complex financial fraud cases, resulting in the restoration of public trust and the return of funds to various entity and individual victims. Mr. Seely also investigated and prosecuted civil fraud cases for the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of California, resulting in the return of millions of dollars to the victims of complex accounting and contract fraud schemes. Before becoming a federal prosecutor, Mr. Seely was a partner at a prominent commercial litigation law firm in Guam.
Mr. Seely earned his Juris Doctor from Northwestern School of Law of Lewis & Clark College, where he served as associate editor of the Lewis & Clark Law Review. He graduated cum laude from the University of California, Irvine, where he was team captain of UCI’s nationally ranked men’s water polo team.
Selected Noteworthy Cases
Community Health Systems, Inc.
Mr. Seely and his litigation team on behalf of Community Health Systems, Inc. were instrumental in obtaining what is believed to be the largest shareholder derivative recovery in the Sixth Circuit to date. Mr. Seely served as plaintiff's co-lead counsel in a shareholder derivative action against the officers and directors of Community Health alleging that the fiduciaries systematically steered patients into medically unnecessary inpatient admissions when they should have been treated as outpatients. In re Community Health Systems, Inc. Shareholder Derivative Litig., No. 3:11-cv-00489 (M.D. Tenn. Jan. 20, 2017). The allegations included claims that the defendants' wrongful conduct resulted in the company being forced to pay millions to resolve federal and state investigations into its Medicare compliance practices. After five years of contentious litigation and discovery, defendants agreed to settle the case, which included a $60 million cash payment to Community Health and the implementation of extensive corporate governance reforms, including board modifications to ensure director independence, improved internal disclosure policies to allow for the confidential reporting of suspected violations of healthcare laws, and the establishment of a Trading Compliance Committee to ensure compliance with Community Health's insider stock trading policy, among others.
Alphatec Holdings, Inc.
Mr. Seely served as co-lead counsel in this shareholder derivative action on behalf of Alphatec Holdings, Inc. against Alphatec’s fiduciaries who depleted shareholder equity as a result of the company’s acquisition of Scient’x. In re Alphatec Holdings, Inc., Derivative S’holder Litig., No. 37-2010-00058586-CU-BT-NC (Cal. Super. Ct.–San Diego Cnty. Aug. 21, 2014). The complaint alleged the acquisition was initiated solely for the benefit of five Alphatec directors who were affiliated with the owner of Scient’x, and that shareholder approval was obtained through false and misleading statements. As a result of Mr. Seely’s efforts, several defendant directors and senior executives resigned from their positions, and Alphatec implemented reforms providing for director independence, greater review and oversight of related party transactions, and enhanced audit committee responsibilities regarding disclosure of company financial information.
Computer Sciences Corporation
Mr. Seely served as co-lead counsel for the Nevada plaintiffs in the consolidated shareholder derivative action on behalf of the information technology and professional services company, Computer Sciences Corporation (CSC). Bainto v. Laphen, Consolidated Case No. A-12-661695-C (Nev. Dist. Ct.-Clark Cnty. Nov. 6, 2013). Plaintiffs alleged certain members of the company’s senior management and board of directors breached their fiduciary duties by allowing false and misleading statements regarding the company’s $5.4 billion contract with the United Kingdom’s National Health Service, the adequacy of CSC’s internal controls over financial reporting, and financial and accounting irregularities primarily related to CSC’s operations in Europe’s Nordic region. After lengthy discovery, Mr. Seely helped negotiate extensive corporate governance enhancements at the company, including personnel changes, the implementation of a Global Ethics & Compliance Program, and additional finance and administration training to strengthen accounting procedures and processes, among others.
SciClone Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
Mr. Seely was instrumental in obtaining cutting edge corporate governance at SciClone Pharmaceuticals, Inc., through shareholder derivative litigation following the company’s violations of the False Claims Practices Act (FCPA) for bribing Chinese officials for business. In re SciClone Pharms., Inc. S’holder Derivative Litig., Lead Case No. CIV 499030 (Dec. 13, 2011). The settlement terms, praised by the Honorable Marie S. Weiner as “the most detailed and extensive corporate governance changes I’ve seen in a derivative settlement,” established consequences to employees for violations of the FCPA or other criminal misconduct, created the position of compliance coordinator and a compliance program and code, instituted a due diligence process pertaining to the hiring of all foreign agents and distributors and demanded employee compliance training, established policies for disclosure and clawback of incentive-based compensation for officers in the event of a material restatement of the company’s financial statements, and modified the company’s whistleblower programs.
Mr. Seely served as co-lead counsel to shareholders in a consolidated derivative action on behalf of medical device company ArthroCare Corporation against certain of its officers and directors arising from accounting improprieties, wrongful insurance practices, and lack of healthcare regulatory compliance, which resulted in the need for the company to restate its financials. In re ArthroCare Corporation Derivative Litig., Case No. D-1-GN-08-003484; Weil v. Baker, Case No. 08-CA-00787-SS (Dec. 8, 2011). Mr. Seely’s efforts resulted in a substantial monetary recovery for the company, as well as the implementation of enhanced internal controls and corporate governance reforms designed to curtail future corporate misconduct and to strengthen the company.