- American University (B.A., 1987)
- Fordham University Law School (J.D., 1993)
- New York State Bar
- United States District Court for the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York
David A. Bishop
David A. Bishop is a partner practicing out of our New York office, where he coordinates domestic client and government relations.Mr. Bishop joined the firm in 2006 following a distinguished career in local government. Mr. Bishop was elected to the Suffolk County Legislature in 1993 while still attending Fordham Law School. He served in several leadership capacities, including Democratic Party Leader, Chairman of Public Safety and Chairman of Environment. His legislative record earned him recognition from the Nature Conservancy, the Child Care Council and the Long Island Federation of Labor.
As an attorney in private practice, Mr. Bishop has litigated numerous NASD arbitrations on behalf of claimants.
Some of Mr. Bishop’s relevant experience includes:
- Representation in a shareholder derivative lawsuit against the English bank HSBC alleging that the bank ran money laundering operations out of New York City. Mr. Bishop and KM achieved a precedent-setting victory in New York’s 2nd Department permitting the lawsuit to go forward.
- Representation in a class action on behalf of homeowners in minority neighborhoods in Nassau County concerning the County’s unfair assessment practices.
- Representation of the NY State Common Retirement Fund as lead plaintiff in In re National City Corporation Securities, Derivative & ERISA Litigation, a securities class action arising from National City’s alleged misrepresentations regarding exposure to subprime mortgage-related losses. During the class period, the company’s stock fell from approximately $37 to $6. This case resulted in a settlement of $168 million.
- Lead counsel for classes of consumers harmed by price fixing in the LCD flat panel and SRAM markets.
- Co-lead counsel for a class of investors in Goldman Sachs common stock in a securities class action, Lapin v. Goldman Sachs Group, Inc., pertaining to Goldman’s alleged instruction to their research analysts to favor procurement of investment banking deals over accuracy in their research. This litigation resulted in a recovery of $29 million for the class.