Justin O. Reliford


  • Lawdragon 500 Leading Plaintiff Financial Lawyer (2021-2022)
  • Super Lawyer, Rising Star (2013-2017)


Justin Reliford is a partner in the Firm’s Corporate Governance and Shareholders Rights practice group.

Mr. Reliford is one of the nation’s leading corporate governance and M&A litigators, with extensive experience prosecuting claims in state and federal courts across the country.  Mr. Reliford is a true believer in the value of strong corporate governance, accountability, and a fair market.  Throughout his career, Mr. Reliford has helped recover nearly a billion dollars for stockholders and corporations to remedy alleged misconduct by corporate directors and officers.  Having previously worked as a labor and employment litigator, Mr. Reliford has counseled sophisticated clients through a wide range of class and collective actions in high-stakes litigation.  Mr. Reliford’s background provides a unique insight into the concerns and motivations of corporate constituents at all levels, which Mr. Reliford relies upon to secure significant litigation outcomes and sound business solutions.


  • In re Cardinal Health Inc. Derivative Litig., 2:19-cv-02491 (S.D. Ohio) ($124 million settlement of opioid-related director oversight claims)
  • In re Tesla Motors, Inc. S’holder Litig., C.A. No. 12711-VCS (Del. Ch.) ($60 million settlement of breach of fiduciary duty claims in connection with a corporate transaction)
  • Ark. Teacher Ret. Sys. v. Alon USA Energy Inc., C.A. No. 2017-0453-KSJM (Del. Ch.) ($44.75 million settlement of merger-related breach of fiduciary duty claims)
  • Weiss v. Burke, et al., C.A. No. 2020-0364-PAF (Del. Ch.) ($17.5 million settlement of stockholder claims in connection with HGGC’s acquisition of Nutraceutical Inc.)
  • In re Allergan Inc. Proxy Violation Sec. Litig., No. 8:14-cv-02004 (C.D. Cal.) ($250 million settlement of insider trading claims under the Williams Act)
  • In re Dole Food Co., Inc. S’holder Litig., C.A. No. 8703-VCL (Del. Ch.) ($148 million settlement following post-trial ruling in plaintiffs’ favor on breach of fiduciary claims in connection with a take-private transaction)