Dean Kristy
415-875-2387
dkristy@fenwick.com
Practice Area Co-Lead
Securities Litigation , Securities Enforcement
Partner
Securities Litigation
Dean S.
Kristy
Dean S.
Kristy
Partner
Securities Litigation
Practice Area Co-Lead
Securities Litigation,
Securities Enforcement
Dean advocates for many of the country’s most innovative technology companies, including Tesla, Fitbit and Symantec, in a wide variety of venues throughout the country.
Dean is a seasoned litigator who defends clients in securities class actions, fiduciary duty cases, merger challenges, corporate governance disputes, derivative litigation and executive compensation cases. He also represents clients in regulatory matters and advises companies on disclosure and other corporate governance matters.
Dean has successfully argued cases throughout the country, particularly in courts in the Ninth Circuit, Second Circuit and before the Delaware Court of Chancery. He has represented a wide range of domestic and international clients, including technology, automobile, solar energy, pharmaceutical, entertainment and healthcare companies. Dean also represents technology companies in complex licensing and other commercial disputes.
Most recently, Dean won a dismissal with prejudice of securities claims against Tesla and its officers relating to projections over early production of its Model 3 vehicle and was part of a team defeating claims against Fitbit over alleged misrepresentations in connection with its guidance.
- Wochos v. Tesla (N.D. Cal.; 9th Cir.): Motion to dismiss related to Model 3 granted with prejudice; affirmed by the Ninth Circuit.
- Inter-Local Pension Fund v. Tesla (N.D. Cal.): Representing Tesla in defense of securities litigation relating to a $1.8 billion note offering.
- In re Sunrun Sec. Litig. (N.D. Cal.): Motion to dismiss granted in securities class action.
- Shankar v. Imperva (N.D. Cal.): Motion to dismiss securities class action granted in part, case settled thereafter.
- In re King Digital Sec. Litig. (S.F. Superior): Represented King in defense of IPO litigation. Demurrer sustained in part; case settled thereafter.
- In re SolarCity Sec. Litig. (N.D. Cal.): Motion to dismiss granted, case dismissed with prejudice.
- Haque v. Tesla (Del. Chancery): Trial victory in Section 220 action alleging breach of fiduciary duty regarding statements about production and demand for Tesla vehicles.
- Olagues v. Musk, et al. (N.D. Cal.): Defending Section 16(b) case. Motion to dismiss granted with prejudice.
- Fitbit Sec. Litig. (N.D. Cal.): Motion to dismiss granted, case dismissed with prejudice.
- Las Vegas Sands Deriv. Litig. (D. Nev.): Defense of directors arising from alleged FCPA violations. Motion to dismiss granted.
- Imperva Deriv. Litig. (Del. Chancery): Represented CEO and directors in action alleging breach of fiduciary duty and unjust enrichment. Motion to dismiss granted with prejudice and affirmed on appeal.
- Symantec S’holder Litig. (Del. Chancery): Represented defendants in derivative litigation challenging executive compensation. Motion to dismiss granted with prejudice.
- Diamond Foods Deriv. Litig. (N.D. Cal.): Represented company and its directors in action challenging accounting practices and proxy disclosures. Motion to dismiss granted with prejudice and affirmed on appeal.
- Apple Deriv. Litig. (Santa Clara Sup.): Represented directors and officers in an action challenging executive compensation. Demurrer sustained and affirmed on appeal.
- Wochos v. Tesla (N.D. Cal.; 9th Cir.): Motion to dismiss related to Model 3 granted with prejudice; affirmed by the Ninth Circuit.
- Inter-Local Pension Fund v. Tesla (N.D. Cal.): Representing Tesla in defense of securities litigation relating to a $1.8 billion note offering.
- In re Sunrun Sec. Litig. (N.D. Cal.): Motion to dismiss granted in securities class action.
- Shankar v. Imperva (N.D. Cal.): Motion to dismiss securities class action granted in part, case settled thereafter.
- In re King Digital Sec. Litig. (S.F. Superior): Represented King in defense of IPO litigation. Demurrer sustained in part; case settled thereafter.
- In re SolarCity Sec. Litig. (N.D. Cal.): Motion to dismiss granted, case dismissed with prejudice.
- Haque v. Tesla (Del. Chancery): Trial victory in Section 220 action alleging breach of fiduciary duty regarding statements about production and demand for Tesla vehicles.
- Olagues v. Musk, et al. (N.D. Cal.): Defending Section 16(b) case. Motion to dismiss granted with prejudice.
- Fitbit Sec. Litig. (N.D. Cal.): Motion to dismiss granted, case dismissed with prejudice.
- Las Vegas Sands Deriv. Litig. (D. Nev.): Defense of directors arising from alleged FCPA violations. Motion to dismiss granted.
- Imperva Deriv. Litig. (Del. Chancery): Represented CEO and directors in action alleging breach of fiduciary duty and unjust enrichment. Motion to dismiss granted with prejudice and affirmed on appeal.
- Symantec S’holder Litig. (Del. Chancery): Represented defendants in derivative litigation challenging executive compensation. Motion to dismiss granted with prejudice.
- Diamond Foods Deriv. Litig. (N.D. Cal.): Represented company and its directors in action challenging accounting practices and proxy disclosures. Motion to dismiss granted with prejudice and affirmed on appeal.
- Apple Deriv. Litig. (Santa Clara Sup.): Represented directors and officers in an action challenging executive compensation. Demurrer sustained and affirmed on appeal.
- Castlight Health
- Cepheid
- Cisco Systems
- Connetics
- Diamond Foods
- DocuSign
- Fitbit
- HTC
- Imperva
- King Digital Entertainment
- Las Vegas Sands
- Lexar Media
- SolarCity
- Sunrun
- Symantec
- Tesla
- Tresalia Capital
- Tron
- Castlight Health
- Cepheid
- Cisco Systems
- Connetics
- Diamond Foods
- DocuSign
- Fitbit
- HTC
- Imperva
- King Digital Entertainment
- Las Vegas Sands
- Lexar Media
- SolarCity
- Sunrun
- Symantec
- Tesla
- Tresalia Capital
- Tron
- "Delaware Supreme Court Endorses a New Three-Part Demand Futility Test," Fenwick & West, September 2021 (co-author)
- "Delaware Supreme Court Holds That Dilution Claims Against a Controller Are Solely Derivative, Overruling Prior Precedent," Fenwick & West, September 2021 (co-author)
- "Divided 9th Circuit Panel Holds That Sections 11 and 12(a)(2) Apply to Unregistered Shares in Direct Listings," Fenwick & West, September 2021 (co-author)
- "SEC’s New Guidance on Liability Risks Likens SPACs to IPOs," Fenwick & West, April 2021 (co-author)
- Delaware Chancery Court Rules That Fiduciary’s Use of Email Account Provided by Separate Employer Destroys Privilege," Fenwick & West, December 2020 (co-author)
- "California Judge Rules That Federal Forum Provisions May Be Permitted," Fenwick & West, September 2020 (co-author)
- “Delaware Court of Chancery Rules That Companies Cannot Require Litigation of 1933 Act Claims in Federal Court,” Fenwick & West, December 2018 (co-author)
- “Supreme Court Rules That Securities Act Class Actions May Proceed in State Court,” Fenwick & West, March 2018 (co-author)
- "Delaware Supreme Court Endorses a New Three-Part Demand Futility Test," Fenwick & West, September 2021 (co-author)
- "Delaware Supreme Court Holds That Dilution Claims Against a Controller Are Solely Derivative, Overruling Prior Precedent," Fenwick & West, September 2021 (co-author)
- "Divided 9th Circuit Panel Holds That Sections 11 and 12(a)(2) Apply to Unregistered Shares in Direct Listings," Fenwick & West, September 2021 (co-author)
- "SEC’s New Guidance on Liability Risks Likens SPACs to IPOs," Fenwick & West, April 2021 (co-author)
- Delaware Chancery Court Rules That Fiduciary’s Use of Email Account Provided by Separate Employer Destroys Privilege," Fenwick & West, December 2020 (co-author)
- "California Judge Rules That Federal Forum Provisions May Be Permitted," Fenwick & West, September 2020 (co-author)
- “Delaware Court of Chancery Rules That Companies Cannot Require Litigation of 1933 Act Claims in Federal Court,” Fenwick & West, December 2018 (co-author)
- “Supreme Court Rules That Securities Act Class Actions May Proceed in State Court,” Fenwick & West, March 2018 (co-author)
Recognition Recognition Recognition
Recognition Recognition Recognition
Recognition
Chambers USA
2022 - 2023
Litigation: Securities
The Legal 500
2020 - 2022
Securities Litigation: Defense
U.S. News - Best Lawyers
2018 - 2021
Litigation—Securities
Recognition
Chambers USA
2022 - 2023
Litigation: Securities
The Legal 500
2020 - 2022
Securities Litigation: Defense
U.S. News - Best Lawyers
2018 - 2021
Litigation—Securities