Elliot is an associate at Bird Marella. He represents clients at trial, in arbitration and in parallel civil and criminal investigations. His practice focuses on complex business disputes, including breach of contract and business tort cases, commercial fraud, and claims arising from the False Claims Act. He has appeared in both state and federal court and has been involved in several trials. He has represented Fortune 500 companies and large private companies in the technology, banking, healthcare, entertainment, and manufacturing industries.
Prior to joining the firm, Elliot worked at Kirkland & Ellis in New York, where he represented board members, C-suite executives, and corporations in connection with complex commercial transactions and government investigations. He has also represented defendants in several consumer protection and securities class actions.
Elliot is a graduate of Columbia Law School. While in law school, Elliot externed at the Queens County District Attorney’s Office where he prosecuted several dozen domestic violence cases. After graduation, he clerked for the Honorable Henry B. Pitman of United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.
PRO BONO EXPERIENCE
Elliot successfully represented a pro bono client unjustly committed to more than 25 years of solitary confinement in New York correctional facilities, the second-longest tenure in New York State history. After Mr. Proctor’s procedural and substantive due process claims were dismissed at summary judgment, Elliot successfully convinced the Second Circuit to overturn the decision and to set a new standard for procedural due process claims raised by inmates housed in solitary confinement. See Proctor v. LeClaire, 846 F.3d 597 (2d Cir. 2017).
Elliot has also successfully represented asylum seekers before the Department of Homeland Security, who sought refugee status in the United States on the basis of their LGBT status.
News & Events
In a case of first impression, Bird Marella successfully defended one of the largest law firms in California against claims that it violated the California False Claims Act by “fraudulently” inducing its former client, a public agency, to disburse several million dollars in funds towards a public works project. The ...