Joseph P. Guglielmo


  • Who’s Who in Legal Litigation: Leading Practitioner-E-Discovery (2020 and 2021)
  • The National Law Journal’s “Plaintiffs’ Hot List.”
  • Leading Plaintiff Financial Lawyers – Lawdragon 500
  • Super Lawyers – top Antitrust lawyer in the New York metro area
  • Board member: Advanced eDiscovery Institute – Georgetown University Law Center


Mr. Guglielmo is a partner in the Firm’s New York office and represents clients in consumer, antitrust and privacy litigation in federal and state courts throughout the United States.

Mr. Guglielmo was recognized for his efforts representing New York University in obtaining a monumental temporary restraining order of over $200 million from a Bernard Madoff feeder fund. Specifically, New York State Supreme Court Justice Richard B. Lowe III stated, “Scott+Scott has demonstrated a remarkable grasp and handling of the extraordinarily complex matters in this case. The extremely professional and thorough means by which NYU’s counsel has litigated this matter has not been overlooked by this Court.”

Mr. Guglielmo lectures on electronic discovery and was a member of the Steering Committee of Working Group 1 of the Sedona Conference®, an organization devoted to providing guidance and information concerning issues such as discovery and production, as well as areas focusing on antitrust law, complex litigation, and intellectual property, and a member of the drafting team responsible for the Sedona Principles, Third Edition. He is a frequent speaker on electronic discovery issues.


  • In re Foreign Exchange Benchmark Rates Antitrust Litig., No. 13-cv-7789 (S.D.N.Y.)
    ($2.3 billion settlement)
  • In re The Home Depot, Inc., Customer Data Security Breach Litig., MDL No. 2583 (N.D. Ga.) ($27.25 million settlement)
  • In re Equifax, Inc. Customer Data Security Breach Litig., No. 1:17-md-2800 (N.D. Ga.)
  • Arkansas Federal Credit Union v. Hudson Bay, No. 1:19-cv-4492-PKC (S.D.N.Y.)
  • Forth v. Walgreen Co, Inc., No. 1:17-cv-02246 (N.D. Ill.)
  • Sohmer v. UnitedHealth Group Inc., No. 18-cv-03191 (JNE/BRT) (D. Minn.)
  • Negron v. Cigna Corporation, No. 3:16-cv-1702 (WWE) (D. Conn.)
  • In re Disposable Contact Lens Antitrust Litig., No. 3:15-md-2626 (M.D. Fla.)
  • In re American Airlines Federal Credit Union v. Sonic Corp., No. CIV-19-208G (N.D. Ohio.)
  • In re American Medical Collection Agency, Inc. Customer Data Security Breach Litig., No. 19-md-2904 (D.N.J.)
  • First Choice Federal Credit Union v. The Wendy’s Co., No. 16-cv-00506 (W.D. Pa.)
    ($50 million settlement)
  • Veridian Credit Union v. Eddie Bauer LLC, No. 2:17-CV-00356-JLR (W.D. Wa.) ($9.8 million settlement)
  • In re Target Corporation Customer Data Security Breach Litig., MDL No. 2522 (D. Minn.) ($59 million settlement)
  • Winsouth Credit Union v. Mapco Express Inc., No. 3:14-cv-1573 (M.D. Tenn.) (largest dollar-per-card recovery on behalf of financial institutions involving data breach of credit and debit card information)
  • In re Managed Care Litig., MDL No. 1334 (S.D. Fla.) (settlements exceeding $1 billion)
  • Love v. Blue Cross and Blue Shield Ass’n, No. 03-cv-21296 (S.D. Fla.) ($130 million and injunctive benefits valued in excess of $2 billion)
  • In re Insurance Brokerage Antitrust Litig., MDL No. 1897 (D.N.J.) (settlements in excess of $180 million)
  • Valle v. Popular Community Bank, 653936/2012 (N.Y. Supreme Ct.) ($5.2 million settlement)
  • In re Pre-Filled Propane Tank Marketing and Sales Practices Litig., MDL No. 2086 (W.D. Mo.) (settlements in excess of $40 million)
  • Bassman v. Union Pacific Corp., No. 97-cv-02819 (N.D. Tex.) ($35.5 million settlement)
  • Garcia v. Carrion, No. CV 11-1801 (D.P.R.) (substantial corporate governance reforms)
  • Boilermakers National Annuity Trust Fund v. WaMu Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, No. 09-cv-00037 (W.D. Wash.) ($26 million settlement)
  • Murr v. Capital One Bank (USA), N.A., No. 13-cv-1091 (E.D. Va.) ($7.3 million settlement)
  • Howerton v. Cargill, Inc., No. 13-cv-00336 (D. Haw.) ($6.1 million settlement)
  • Hawaii Medical Association v. Hawaii Medical Service Association, 113 Hawaii 77 (Haw. 2006) (reversing the trial court’s dismissal)