Business litigation of a civil nature and alternative dispute resolution activities, including mediation and arbitration, have constituted a considerable part of Mr. Carrow's practice. He has successfully litigated complex business disputes and has represented foreign and domestic directors, officers and employees of the client business at the administrative, trial and appellate levels of both the state and federal judicial systems.

In one of his more convoluted pieces of litigation, Mr. Carrow recently represented the Irish rock group U-2's English lighting company in defense of an action arising out of the fall by the plaintiff from rigging in the course of a U-2 concert. The accident occurred in France. U-2 is based in Ireland and its lighting company in England. The plaintiff was a California resident. The trial was conducted in San Francisco. Fortunately, the case was settled in the course of trial, thus, avoiding the many conflict of laws issues that would otherwise have been presented had the litigation continued to judgment.

An anecdotal example of Mr. Carrow's willingness to take on difficult causes, is a case recently completed. Mr. Carrow represented a corporate real estate broker and the company's agent, in a complex action in which plaintiff developer sought approximately fifty million dollars in compensatory damages, and a like amount in punitive damages from real estate agents acting for him, based on the agents' alleged breach of their fiduciary duties to plaintiff, involving purchase and sale of certain valuable Nevada property. Plaintiff contended that his agents conspired with others to sell the property to a third party, after documents required for purchase of the property had been signed by plaintiff and before the escrow on plaintiff's purchase could close.

Plaintiff was represented by one of California's largest law firms, which had over two years to prepare for trial. Pre-trial deposition transcripts alone totalled approximately 4,000 pages. Due to the court's disqualification of the defendants' attorney during the week preceding trial, and the somewhat questionable refusal of the judge presiding to allow any lawyer substituting into the the case for defendants a continuance to prepare for trial, the defendant real estate agents faced the probability of having to defend themselves at trial.

Mr. Carrow was approached by the defendants who explained their predicament to him. Against the advice of his professional colleagues, Mr. Carrow agreed on the day prior to commencement of trial to assume representation of the the real estate agent defendants. Despite the fact that Mr. Carrow was required to prepare his defense on a day to day basis in the course of trial, after a five week trial the jury found in favor of Mr. Carrow's clients, against plaintiff, and Mr. Carrow's clients were awarded their costs of suit. (See, Grand Land Investment v. Coscan/Stewart, San Francisco Superior Court No. SCV-960340).

Recognizing the ever expanding cost of business litigation, Mr. Carrow has been particularly active in the Alternative Dispute Resolution ("ADR") process as it applies to business, including negotiation, mediation and arbitration. In addition to his experience as an advocate involved in the ADR process, Mr. Carrow has acted as a private mediator and arbitrator and as a court appointed settlement conference panelist.

A third area of Mr. Carrow's business law emphasis is prosecution and defense of business torts, including fraud, deceit, and other non contractual breaches of a legal duty by a business directly resulting in damages to another. This category includes job related litigation, and related alternative dispute involvements, including wrongful termination and sexual harassment. Closely aligned to business torts are many other wrongful acts, including breach of the implied warranty of good faith and fair dealing, which arises out of certain contractual relationships.

A fourth area of emphasis of Mr. Carrow's involvement in business law extends to defense of white collar crime, an area of law with which he has had considerable experience and notable success. Assuming provable culpability, his approach is to initially make an informal effort to resolve the matter on terms satisfactory to the prosecution and his client. Only in the event this effort proves unsuccessful, will the criminal charges be brought to trial, since experience has proven that even if acquitted, the publicity accompanying trial will adversely effect, or even destroy, the involved business, the client's family relationships, and the health, well being and reputation of the client, his family and his associates.

Personal, telephone or video conferences, addressing either British or American law, are available in San Francisco, San Rafael or London. The initial personal, telephonic or email interview is without charge and can be arranged by email directed to Mr. Carrow by clicking on the community of your choice: San Francisco,  Marin County,   London, or San Rafael.