• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
Brunini Law
Menu
  • About Us
      • Firm Overview
      • Diversity Matters
      • In the Community
      • Pro Bono
      • Legal Networks
      • Brunini, Grantham, Grower & Hewes, PLLC, founded over one century ago, today is one of Mississippi’s largest and most respected law firms. Our Firm’s practice is organized into three major areas of concentration: Commercial, Litigation and Regulatory law. Whether in a courtroom or the boardroom, we treat our client's business as we would our own.
    Close
  • About Us
  • People
      • Attorney Directory
      • Attorney Search
      • As one of Mississippi's oldest law firms, many of our attorneys have unmatched experience in industry sectors ranging from Energy to Telecommunications - from Litigation to Cyber Security.
    Close
  • People
  • Practices
      • Commercial
      • Litigation
      • Regulatory
      • The practice of law at Brunini is diverse, comprehensive and sophisticated. The scope of our services is coordinated across clients, industries and issues. The Brunini Firm is organized into three major areas of concentration that function optimally within the context of the law itself: Commercial, Litigation and Regulatory.
    Close
  • Practices
  • Careers
      • Recruiting
      • Summer Associates
      • Diversity
      • The Brunini Firm recruits new quality attorneys to meet its clients' increasing demands. The Firm interviews at a number of law schools and has an active summer clerkship program which is an integral part of its overall recruiting effort. We also recruit experienced attorneys with proven abilities and particular expertise to help us meet our clients' specific needs.
    Close
  • Careers
  • News
      • News
      • Blog
      • Recent Experience
      • Rankings & Awards
      • Newsletters
      • Newsletter Signup
      • Check here often for firm news, blogs, rankings and awards, and other recent developments involving Brunini and its lawyers. You can also review recent firm newsletters here and sign up to receive the newsletters by email.
    Close
  • News
  • Office
      • Jackson
      • P: 601-948-3101
        190 East Capitol Street
        The Pinnacle Building, Suite 100
        Jackson, MS 39201
    Close
  • Office
    • Jackson
    • Close

Brunini Law

OSHA’s Emergency Temporary Standard is Here (Maybe) – Now What?

November 11, 2021 by Brunini Law

By:  Chris Fontan

On November 4, 2021, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (“OSHA”) released its anticipated, or controversial, emergency temporary standard (“ETS”) aimed at curbing further spread of COVID-19. The ETS—which is a “vaccinate-or-test” workplace mandate—applies to most employers with 100 or more employees (“Employers”).  Under the ETS, Employers must either mandate COVID vaccinations or require masking combined with proof of negative COVID tests on a weekly basis as a condition of employment.

All requirements of the ETS, other than testing for unvaccinated employees, are effective 30 days after publication of the ETS in the Federal Register (i.e., Dec. 5, 2021). Thus, the ETS requires Employers to ensure all unvaccinated employees working “in person” begin wearing masks by Dec. 5, 2021, and start providing negative COVID-19 tests on a weekly basis beginning Jan. 4, 2022.

As expected, numerous legal challenges to the ETS have been and will continue to be made in the coming weeks. As we previously reported, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit recently enacted a nationwide injunction, temporarily preventing OSHA from enforcing the ETS.  While the future of the ETS remains uncertain due to this and similar legal challenges, it will take weeks of planning for employers to comply with the ETS’s deadlines. With that in mind, employers should continue preparing for the ETS as if it is going to take effect while litigation continues.  As a result, employers must continue to prepare for potential compliance with the ETS.

Overview of the ETS’ Requirements

According to a “Fact Sheet” prepared by OSHA, the ETS requires Employers to do the following:

  • Implement a mandatory, written COVID-19 vaccination policy, with or without an exception allowing employees to instead undergo weekly COVID-19 testing (beginning Jan. 4, 2022) and wear a face covering at the workplace (beginning Dec. 5, 2021).
  • Obtain proof of the vaccination status of each employee.
  • Create a roster/list showing the vaccination status of each employee.
  • Securely maintain both the proof of vaccination status and the roster/list.
  • Provide employees with up to four (4) hours of paid time off to receive each primary vaccination injection/dose.
  • Provide employees with a “reasonable amount” of paid sick leave to recover from any side effects experienced following each primary vaccination injection/dose.
  • Ensure that each employee who is not fully vaccinated is tested at least weekly for COVID-19 (if in the workplace at least once a week) or within seven days before returning to work (if away from the workplace for a week or longer).
  • Ensure that each employee who is not fully vaccinated wears a face covering when indoors or when occupying a vehicle with another person for work purposes (subject to specific, limited situations).
  • Require employees to promptly provide notice when they receive a positive COVID-19 test (or are diagnosed with COVID-19). Immediately remove any employee, regardless of vaccination status, from the workplace who receives a positive COVID-19 test/is diagnosed with COVID-19, and keep the employee out of the workplace until the return-to-work criteria are met.
  • Provide each employee with information they can understand about: the requirements of the ETS and workplace policies and procedures established to implement the ETS, the CDC document “Key Things to Know About COVID-19 Vaccines”, information about protections against retaliation and discrimination, and information about laws that provide for criminal penalties for knowingly supplying false statements or documentation.
  • Report work-related COVID-19 fatalities to OSHA within 8 hours of the employer learning about them, and work-related COVID-19 in-patient hospitalizations within 24 hours of learning about them.
  • Make certain records available to an employee or an employee representative for examination and copying.

Steps for Complying with the ETS

  1. Determine if your organization is covered by the ETS.

 

  1. Determine vaccination status of your organization’s employees.

 

  1. Evaluate available options and logistics for testing—even Employer’s opting for full vaccination mandate will need testing options as a potential “reasonable accommodation” for claimed disabilities and/or religious exemptions.

 

  1. Assess potential impact of paid-time-off and other new requirements.

 

  1. Determine your organization’s approach and draft a written policy.

 

  1. Craft necessary and required employee communications.

 

  1. Establish your organization’s reporting and recordkeeping protocols.

Employers are encouraged to take these steps, to continue to monitor developments with the ETS and pending litigation involving its implementation and to contact their labor and employment counsel for additional information concerning these developments.  If you need Labor & Employment counsel, please contact any member of Brunini’s Labor & Employment Practice Group.

 

 

 

 

 

Related Attorneys

  • Christopher R. Fontan

UPDATE: Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals Issues Stay Blocking OSHA’s Vaccinate-or-Test Rule….For Now

November 8, 2021 by Brunini Law

By:  Chris Fontan

Less than 2 days after the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (“OSHA”) finally released its anticipated, and highly controversial, emergency temporary standard (“ETS”) addressing COVID-19 testing and vaccination, a federal court has thrown up a huge road block in the path of its full implementation.  The Court’s injunction temporarily prevents OSHA from enforcing its controversial new ETS.

 As we previously reported, on November 4, 2021, OSHA unveiled its controversial ETS, which essentially requires employers with 100 or more employees to either mandate COVID vaccinations or proof of negative COVID tests on a weekly basis as a condition of employment. As predicted, soon after President Biden initially instructed OSHA to begin working on plans for the proposed rule, the ETS was met with immediate legal challenges. Most notably, a number of parties, including several businesses, advocacy groups, and the states of Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina, and Utah filed a motion for a preliminary and a permanent injunction with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.

On Saturday, November 6, 2021, the Fifth Circuit granted their “emergency motion” and entered a preliminary stay barring enforcement of the ETS. Citing “grave statutory and constitutional issues,” the Court stayed the ETS until further notice by the Court. In addition, the Court ordered the parties to submit further briefing about the validity of the ETS by November 8th and 9th respectively. The stay order issued on November 6th is not a final ruling on the validity of the ETS, but will halt its implementation at least temporarily.

Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry said the action stops Democratic President Joe Biden “from moving forward with his unlawful overreach.” Louisiana was one of the states bringing the lawsuit seeking to stop enforcement of the ETS.  “This is a great victory for the American people out there. Never before has the federal government tried in such a forceful way to get between the choices of an American citizen and their doctor. To me that’s the heart of the entire issue,” he said.  Meanwhile, Solicitor of Labor Seema Nanda said the U.S. Department of Labor is “confident in its legal authority” to issue the rule, stating that the OSH Act of 1970 “explicitly gives OSHA the authority to act quickly in an emergency” and OSHA is “fully prepared to defend [the ETS] in court.”

The future of the ETS remains uncertain due to this and other pending legal challenges. While the final result is unknown, it will take weeks of planning for employers to comply with the ETS’s deadlines. With that in mind, employers should continue preparing for the ETS as if it is going to take effect while litigation continues.

 

 

Related Attorneys

  • Christopher R. Fontan

OSHA Finally Releases COVID Vaccine/Testing Mandate for Employers

November 6, 2021 by Brunini Law

By: Chris Fontan

On Thursday, November 4, 2021, the Occupational Health and Safety Administration (“OSHA”) finally released its anticipated, and already controversial, emergency temporary standard (“ETS”) addressing COVID-19 testing and vaccination. The ETS—which is a “mandate-or-test” workplace vaccine rule—applies to most employers with 100 or more employees (“Employers”).  The ETS does not apply to: (1) employers who are covered by the recently-released Executive Order mandating vaccinations for federal employees and employees of federal contractors; (2) healthcare employers covered by the prior healthcare ETS; and/or (3) employees working from home or exclusively outdoors. After weeks of speculating over what was likely to be in the proposed rule, Employers are now left with the task of navigating their way through this new mandate.

Here is a general overview of the OSHA ETS:

100-Employee Threshold. In general, the OSHA ETS applies to employers with 100 or more employees. Unlike other OSHA standards that count employees on an “establishment” basis, the ETS covers any private employer with 100 or more employees across the entire company. This broad definition is much more inclusive and will affect many more employers than many previous OSHA standards. The ETS also expressly covers part-time, full-time, and remote employees in its “100 employee” count.

Vaccination Requirement. The ETS requires Employers develop, implement, and enforce a written, mandatory COVID-19 vaccination policy.  To meet this requirement, the policy must require vaccination of all employees, other than those for whom a vaccine is medically contraindicated, for whom a medical necessity requires a delay in vaccination, or who are otherwise entitled to a reasonable accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act or Title VII of the Civil Rights Act because they have a disability or sincerely held religious beliefs that conflict with the vaccination requirement.

As part of the required policy, the ETS requires Employers determine the vaccination status of each employee, obtain acceptable proof of vaccination, maintain records of each employee’s vaccination status, and maintain a roster of each employee’s vaccination status. At the same time, Employers must remain cognizant of their obligations to maintain the confidentiality of employee medical information, since OSHA and the EEOC view vaccine-related information like all employee medical information.

Testing Alternative. Consistent with President Biden’s initial announcement, the OSHA ETS also includes an exception from the vaccine mandate for Employers that instead establish, implement, and enforce a written policy allowing employees who are not fully vaccinated to elect to undergo weekly COVID-19 testing and wear a face covering at the workplace.  Those employees who are not fully vaccinated (including those entitled to reasonable accommodations for religious or medical reasons) must be tested for COVID-19 at least weekly (if in the workplace at least once a week) or within 7 days before returning to work (if away from the workplace for a week or longer).

Employers must maintain a record of each test result. Employees who fail to provide documentation of a COVID test result must be excluded from the workplace until they provide such test result. Notably, the ETS excuses any employees who test positive or are diagnosed with COVID-19 from these testing requirements for 90 days following their positive test or diagnosis.

Face coverings. The ETS requires Employers to ensure that each employee who is not fully vaccinated (thus, those opting for the testing alternative) wears a face covering when indoors or when occupying a vehicle with another person for work purposes, except in certain limited circumstances, including: when an employee is alone in a room with floor to ceiling walls and a closed door; for a limited time while the employee is eating or drinking at the workplace, or for identification purposes in compliance with safety and security requirements; when an employee is wearing a respirator or facemask; or where the employer can show that the use of face coverings is infeasible or creates a greater hazard that would excuse compliance. In addition, employers must not prevent any employee, regardless of vaccination status, from voluntarily wearing a face covering unless it creates a serious workplace hazard (e.g., interfering with the safe operation of equipment).

Paid Leave.  As part of the ETS, Employers are required to provide employees “reasonable time”—defined as up to four hours of paid time, to receive each vaccination dose, including travel time.  Employers may not require use of accrued sick or personal time for these purposes. In addition, Employers must provide reasonable time and paid sick leave to recover from side effects experienced following each dose. Employers may require use of accrued sick or personal time for these purposes.

Positive COVID-19 tests and employee removal. The ETS also mandates that Employers require their employees to promptly provide notice when they receive a positive COVID-19 test or are diagnosed with COVID-19, regardless of vaccination status. Once such notice is provided, the Employer must immediately remove the employee from the workplace, regardless of vaccination status and the worker must remain removed from workplace until they meet specified criteria for returning to work. Importantly—the ETS does not require that Employers provide paid leave to employees who are removed from the workplace because of a COVID-19 positive result or diagnosis, though paid time may be required by other laws, or by a collective bargaining agreement.

Notice to employees. Under the ETS, Employers are required to provide employees the following (in an appropriate language and at a literacy level):

  • Information about the requirements of the ETS and workplace policies and procedures established to implement the ETS;
  • The CDC document “Key Things to Know About COVID-19 Vaccines”;
  • Information about protections against retaliation and discrimination; and
  • Information about laws that provide for criminal penalties for knowingly supplying false statements or documentation.

Interaction with OSHA and Recordkeeping. As an OSHA requirement, the ETS requires Employers to report work-related COVID-19 fatalities to OSHA within 8 hours of learning about them, and work-related COVID-19 in-patient hospitalizations within 24 hours of the employer learning about the hospitalization. In addition, at OSHA’s request, an Employer will have four (4) business hours to provide its policy on vaccination/testing, and until the end of the next business day to provide all other records that must be maintained (i.e. proof of each employee’s vaccination status or test results as required by the ETS).  Employees also have the ability to request their own vaccination or testing records, and may submit requests for the aggregate number of fully vaccinated employees in the workplace along with the total number of employees at that workplace.

Key Dates.  Employers are required to be in compliance with the bulk of the ETS by Sunday, December 5, 2021.  Employers must begin obtaining weekly test results for employees who have not received all doses required for primary vaccination no later than Tuesday, January 4, 2022.

 

Related Attorneys

  • Christopher R. Fontan

2022 U.S. News – Best Lawyers ® “Best Law Firms” Awards Released

November 4, 2021 by Brunini Law

Jackson, MS., November 4, 2021 – Brunini Law Firm is excited to announce our inclusion in U.S. News and World Report’s “Best Law Firms” 2022 list, with the following areas achieving a Tier 1 ranking.

  • Bankruptcy and Creditor Debtor Rights/Insolvency and Reorganization Law
  • Bet-the-Company Litigation
  • Business Organizations (including LLCs and Partnerships)
  • Closely Held Companies and Family Businesses Law
  • Commercial Finance Law
  • Communications Law
  • Construction Law
  • Corporate Law
  • Energy Law
  • Environmental Law
  • Gaming Law
  • Land Use & Zoning Law
  • Legal Malpractice Law – Defendants
  • Litigation – Bankruptcy
  • Litigation – Construction
  • Litigation – Environmental
  • Litigation – ERISA
  • Litigation – Intellectual Property
  • Litigation – Labor & Employment
  • Litigation – Land Use & Zoning
  • Litigation – Real Estate
  • Litigation – Securities
  • Mass Tort Litigation/Class Actions – Defendants
  • Mergers & Acquisitions Law
  • Mortgage Banking Foreclosure Law
  • Personal Injury Litigation – Defendants
  • Professional Malpractice Law – Defendants
  • Real Estate Law
  • Tax Law
  • Trademark Law
  • Trusts and Estates Law

Firms included in the 2022 edition of U.S. News – Best Lawyers® “Best Law Firms” are recognized for professional excellence with consistently impressive ratings from clients and peers. To be eligible for a ranking, a firm must first have a lawyer recognized in The Best Lawyers in America®, which recognizes 6% of lawyers practicing in the United States.

Achieving a tiered ranking, on a national and/or metropolitan scale, signals a unique combination of quality law practice and breadth of legal expertise. This recognition reflects the high level of respect a firm has earned in the same communities and the same practice areas for their abilities, professionalism, and integrity.

Mississippi Poultry Association, Farm Bureau Win Appeal over Monroe County Poultry Farm Setback Restrictions

October 18, 2021 by Brunini Law

By John Milner, MPA Counsel – Brunini, Grantham, Grower & Hewes, PLLC

The Mississippi Poultry Association and the Mississippi Farm Bureau federation on September 23, 2021 won their case against the Monroe County Board of Supervisors (Board) over the Board’s 2017 ordinance that essentially doubled the Mississippi Commission on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulatory setbacks for poultry farms from certain property boundaries.  These CEQ regulations are administered by the staff of the MS Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ).

MPA and Farm Bureau challenged the Board decision in the Monroe County Circuit Court.  The case was first heard in 2018 by the late Judge Jim Roberts.  After his death, the appeal has been dormant on the court’s docket until it was set for oral argument before newly appointed Circuit Judge Chip Mills on September 23.

The Board adopted setbacks for poultry farms of 1200 feet for neighboring residences and 300 feet from the property line after residents in the Hamilton area objected to a planned broiler farm.  Monroe County was the only county with setbacks greater than the CEQ regulatory limits because in 2018, MPA and Farm Bureau were successful in getting a bill passed in the Mississippi Legislature to prevent cities and counties from going beyond regulatory limits.

The key provision of the 2018 legislative bill, House Bill 1122, specifically stated as follows:

No governing authority of any municipality or of any county shall adopt or impose any ordinance, regulation, rule or policy that prohibits or restricts agricultural operation, forestry activity or traditional farm practices on agricultural land or land that is otherwise unclassified if the land is used for an agricultural operation, forestry activity or traditional farm practices.  Additionally, if the activities being conducted on the land are regulated by the Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality, the Mississippi Department of Agriculture and Commerce or the Mississippi Forestry Commission, the provisions of those agencies’ statutes or the regulations promulgated by those agencies shall govern.

House bill 1122 Section 2 (a), 2018 Session, Mississippi Legislature (as approved by Governor).

Monroe County was exempted from the 2018 law because the lawsuit over the county’s ordinance was in court at the time the law took effect.  MPA and Farm Bureau decided to continue to pursue the case after the law passed.

In court briefs, Monroe County took the position in the oral argument that the MPA and Farm Bureau did not have the standing to sue.  Sheldon Alston, with Brunini, Grantham, Grower & Hewes, representing MPA and Farm Bureau, argued that (1) the Board’s ordinance was arbitrary and capricious, (2) improperly pre-empted CEQ’s regulatory authority and (3) was also improper because it was an illegal “spot zoning” and therefore invalid since Monroe County has no county-wide zoning plan.

After the oral arguments by the lawyers, Judge Mills decided:

  1. MPA and Farm Bureau did have standing to appeal the board’s decision;
  2. The Board members who held a public hearing and conducted research in 2017 were not arbitrary and capricious in the adoption of the ordinance;
  3. The Supervisors did not pre-empt CEQ’s authority by adopting greater setbacks, but finally,
  4. The ordinance was a land use restriction and because Monroe County does not have a county-wide zoning plan, the ordinance is void and unenforceable.

The decision brings Monroe County in line with the other 81 counties and 300 municipalities which are prohibited by the 2018 legislation from developing their own environmental regulations on agriculture in place the CEQ regulations implemented by MDEQ staff.  The ruling is a significant victory for the poultry industry since it confirms that only the CEQ can promulgate environmental restrictions and requirements for poultry farms or other facilities.

If you have any questions concerning this article, feel free to contact John Milner, MPA Counsel, at jmilner@brunini.com or (601) 960-6842.

Article from Emerging Trends: A Newsletter of the Mississippi Poultry Association

Related Attorneys

  • John E. Milner
  • Sheldon G. Alston

Mississippi Environmental Quality Permit Board

October 13, 2021 by Brunini Law

Summary of Meeting Held October 12, 2021

Prepared By Brunini, Grantham, Grower & Hewes, PLLC

The Mississippi Environmental Quality Permit Board (“Board”) convened at 9:00 a.m. on October 12, 2021.  This meeting was held through a telephone conference call and the public was invited to listen to the deliberations of the Board. The Board first approved minutes from the previous meeting held on September 14, 2021 and the non-controversial actions/certifications completed by the staff since the September meeting. Then, following a prepared agenda, the Board considered items as follows:

OFFICE OF GEOLOGY

Ron Porter (MDEQ Office of Geology, Mining and Reclamation) presented the MDEQ Staff’s recommendations and Board approved the following:

Surface Mining Bond Release

Permittee County Permit Staff Recommendation
Krystal Gravel, Inc. Copiah P94-067T1 Final 50%
Krystal Gravel, Inc. Copiah P91-029T1 Final 40%
Krystal Gravel, Inc. Copiah P87-003 Final 50%
Krystal Gravel, Inc. Copiah P87-012 Final 20%

James Matheney (MDEQ Office of Geology, Mining and Reclamation) presented the MDEQ Staff’s recommendations and Board approved the following:

Surface Coal Mining Bond Release

Permittee County Permit
Liberty Fuels Kemper MS-003

Other Business

No Other Business was discussed.

The next Permit Board meeting will be held on November 9, 2021, at 9 a.m.

This Newsletter is a publication of the Environmental Practice Group of the law firm of Brunini, Grantham, Grower & Hewes located in Jackson, Mississippi. This Newsletter is not designed or intended to provide legal or professional advice, as any such advice requires the consideration of the facts of the specific situation.

If you have any questions concerning the content of a newsletter, or if you would like further information about the matters addressed in a newsletter, please contact John Milner, the Brunini Firm Environmental Practice Group leader, at jmilner@brunini.com or (601) 960-6842.

 

Leonard A. Blackwell II to Retire

September 30, 2021 by Brunini Law

Brunini Law Firm today announces that Leonard A. Blackwell II will retire effective October 1, 2021.

Mr. Blackwell has been with Brunini Law Firm since October 2011.  He is an active member of the Mississippi Bar and served as State Bar President and Mississippi Bar Commissioner.  He is a Fellow of the Mississippi Bar Foundation, a member of the American Board of Trial Advocates and is a former Chairman of the Mississippi Gaming Commission.  Len has been recognized by “Best Lawyers ® in America” in the field of Gaming Law and is a member of the International Masters of Gaming Law and of the International Association of Gaming Attorneys.

“Throughout his career, Len has been the picture of what a lawyer should strive to be,” said Sam Kelly, Managing Partner of Brunini.  “His professionalism, collegiality, work ethic and service to his clients and community provide examples of which we all should aspire.  We wish Len well as he begins this new phase of life in retirement.”

Brunini Welcomes Breland Parker

September 27, 2021 by Brunini Law

Brunini Law Firm welcomes Breland Parker as our newest Associate in the firm’s litigation department.  Breland received his Juris Doctor from the University of Mississippi School of Law in 2021, graduating summa cum laude.  In law school, Breland was an Executive Articles Editor for the Mississippi Law Journal and member of the Negotiation Board.  Prior to law school, he received his Bachelor of Accountancy from the University of Mississippi, where he graduated magna cum laude.

In both graduate and undergraduate studies, Breland was a member of Phi Kappa Phi which is the nation’s oldest and most selective multidisciplinary collegiate honor society.

He is admitted to the Mississippi Bar

 

For more information contact: bparker@brunini.com

Related Attorneys

  • Breland Parker

Edmund Lawrence Brunini, Jr.

September 13, 2021 by Brunini Law

April 21, 1944 – August 31, 2021

Edmund L. Brunini, Jr. a leader of Brunini Law Firm, passed away on August 31, 2021.  He began his law career in 1969 with Brunini, Grantham, Grower & Hewes where he practiced law for 45 years.  During that time he had an accomplished career focusing on litigation and regulatory law.

In his early years Mr. Brunini served clients in the oil and gas industry of Mississippi. As major petroleum producers began exiting the state, he transitioned into the practice area of healthcare.  He established a relationship with the Dominican Sisters of Springfield, Illinois and their mission of St. Dominic’s Hospital in Jackson. As the need for legal services increased, he was able to provide the counsel and resources they needed to help meet the needs of this mission.

Mr. Brunini also served a wide array of other clients in various industries which included manufacturing, healthcare, general business and local governments.

“I always admired Eddie for his keen intellect, sound judgment, compassion for his fellow man, and truly incomparable wit.  We will all miss him and what he provided to our firm,“ said David Kaufman, Partner.

Not only was Mr. Brunini a successful attorney, but he valued and was actively involved in community service.  He modeled this through the many leadership roles he held in numerous community organizations.

“Eddie Brunini was an outstanding lawyer and leader of the Brunini Firm for many years,” said Sam Kelly, Managing Partner of Brunini Law Firm.  “He reminded us all of the importance of service not only to our clients but also to our communities.  He could always be counted on to lighten a moment with his humor and wit.  He will indeed be missed, but his legacy at the Brunini Firm will continue for many years into the future.”

See obituary

 

Brunini Attorneys Recognized in the 2022 Edition of Best Lawyers

August 19, 2021 by Brunini Law

Brunini is honored to have many of our attorneys recognized in the 2022 Edition of Best Lawyers of America.  Recognition by Best Lawyers of America is based entirely on peer review.  Best Lawyers of America employs a sophisticated, conscientious, rational and transparent survey process designed to elicit meaningful and substantive evaluations of the quality of legal services.

Additional recognitions are also awarded to individual lawyers with the highest overall peer-feedback for a specific practice area and geographic region.  Only one lawyer is recognized as the “Lawyer of the Year” for each specialty and location.

Best Lawyers of America’s “Ones to Watch” category recognizes extraordinary lawyers who have been in private practice for less than 10 years in the United States.  This award is also based entirely on peer review.

We congratulate the following attorneys for their hard work, dedication and commitment to excellence.

2022 – Lawyer of the Year

  • Jackson-MS
        • Norman E. Bailey – Trademark Law
        • Stephen J. Carmody – Employee Benefits (ERISA) Law
        • Lynne K. Green – Elder Law
        • Karen E. Howell – Litigation – ERISA
        • R. David Kaufman – Legal Malpractice Law – Defendants
        • Warren Ken Rogers – Corporate Governance Law
        • John E. Wade – Litigation – Health Care
  • Tupelo
        • J. Gordon Flowers – Personal Injury Litigation – Defendants

  2022 Ones to Watch

Alston F. Ludwig (2021)

        • Alternative Dispute Resolution
        • Commercial Litigation
        • Construction Law
  • Lane Bobo (2021)
        • Commercial Litigation
        • Construction Law
        • Health Care Law
  • Jacob A. Bradley (2021)
        • Construction Law
        • Litigation – Construction
        • Commercial Litigation
  • Drew C. Bigelow (2021)
        • Corporate Law
        • Real Estate Law
        • Trusts and Estates

 2022 Recognized Lawyers in the following fields by Best Lawyers in America

  • Jackson, MS
    • John M. Flynt (2011)
        • Administrative / Regulatory Law
        • Business Organizations (including LLCs and Partnerships)
        • Commercial Finance Law
        • Commercial Transactions / UCC Law
        • Corporate Law
        • Elder Law
        • Mergers and Acquisitions Law
        • Real Estate Law
  • James L. Halford (2007)
        • Administrative / Regulatory Law
        • Communications Law
        • Energy Law
        • Energy Regulatory Law
  • John E. Milner (1993)
        • Administrative / Regulatory Law
        • Environmental Law
        • Litigation – Environmental
  • Gene Wasson (2018)
        • Administrative / Regulatory Law
        • Environmental Law
        • Litigation – Environmental
        • Natural Resources Law
        • Oil and Gas Law
        • Real Estate Law
  • William Trey Jones III (2003)
        • Appellate Practice
        • Commercial Litigation
        • Litigation – Environmental
        • Litigation – Trusts and Estates
  • Patrick McDowell (2012)
        • Appellate Practice
        • Commercial Litigation
        • Litigation – Securities
        • Mass Tort Litigation / Class Actions – Defendants
        • Personal Injury Litigation – Defendants
        • Product Liability Litigation – Defendants
  • William D. Drinkwater (2020)
        • Bankruptcy and Creditor Debtor Rights / Insolvency and Reorganization Law
        • Commercial Litigation
        • Land Use and Zoning Law
        • Litigation – Banking and Finance
        • Litigation – Land Use and Zoning
        • Litigation – Real Estate
        • Mortgage Banking Foreclosure Law
  • James A. McCullough II (2012)
        • Bankruptcy and Creditor Debtor Rights / Insolvency and Reorganization Law
        • Business Organizations (including LLCs and Partnerships)
        • Commercial Litigation
        • Energy Law
        • Litigation – Bankruptcy
        • Litigation – ERISA
        • Litigation – Health Care
        • Mass Tort Litigation / Class Actions – Defendants
        • Mortgage Banking Foreclosure Law
  • David Kaufman (2003)
        • Bet-the-Company Litigation
        • Commercial Litigation
        • Legal Malpractice Law – Defendants
        • Litigation – Antitrust
        • Litigation – Securities
        • Mass Tort Litigation / Class Actions – Defendants
        • Personal Injury Litigation – Defendants
        • Product Liability Litigation – Defendants
        • Professional Malpractice Law – Defendants
  • Ken Harmon (2018)
        • Business Organizations (including LLCs and Partnerships)
        • Oil and Gas Law
        • Real Estate Law
  • William C. Penick IV (2016)
        • Business Organizations (including LLCs and Partnerships)
        • Closely Held Companies and Family Businesses Law
        • Corporate Law
        • Mergers and Acquisitions Law
        • Nonprofit / Charities Law
        • Tax Law
        • Trusts and Estates
  • Warren Ken Rogers (2015)
        • Business Organizations (including LLCs and Partnerships)
        • Commercial Finance Law
        • Commercial Transactions / UCC Law
        • Corporate Governance Law
        • Corporate Law
        • Mergers and Acquisitions Law
  • Walter S. Weems (1999)
        • Business Organizations (including LLCs and Partnerships)
        • Commercial Finance Law
        • Commercial Transactions / UCC Law
        • Corporate Law
        • Mergers and Acquisitions Law
        • Tax Law
  • Lynne K. Green (2003)
        • Closely Held Companies and Family Businesses Law
        • Commercial Litigation
        • Elder Law
        • Tax Law
        • Trusts and Estates
  • Matthew W. Allen (2016)
        • Commercial Litigation
        • Mass Tort Litigation / Class Actions – Defendants
        • Personal Injury Litigation – Defendants
        • Product Liability Litigation – Defendants
  • Sheldon G. Alston (2016)
        • Land Use and Zoning Law
        • Litigation – Labor and Employment
        • Litigation – Land Use and Zoning
        • Litigation – Real Estate
        • Personal Injury Litigation – Defendants
        • Product Liability Litigation – Defendants
        • Commercial Litigation
  • Norman E. Bailey (2016)
        • Commercial Litigation
        • Mass Tort Litigation / Class Actions – Defendants
        • Personal Injury Litigation – Defendants
        • Product Liability Litigation – Defendants
        • Trademark Law
  • Cody C. Bailey (2020)
        • Commercial Litigation
        • Construction Law
        • Litigation – Construction
  • Richard Cirilli Jr (2016)
        • Commercial Litigation
        • Health Care Law
        • Legal Malpractice Law – Defendants
        • Litigation – Health Care
        • Mass Tort Litigation / Class Actions – Defendants
        • Product Liability Litigation – Defendants
        • Professional Malpractice Law – Defendants
  • Karen E. Howell (2018)
        • Commercial Litigation
        • Corporate Law
        • Land Use and Zoning Law
        • Litigation – ERISA
        • Litigation – Land Use and Zoning
        • Personal Injury Litigation – Defendants
        • Trademark Law
  • Samuel C. Kelly (2006)
        • Commercial Litigation
        • Construction Law
        • Eminent Domain and Condemnation Law
        • Litigation – Construction
  • John E. Wade (2008)
        • Commercial Litigation
        • Land Use and Zoning Law
        • Litigation – Health Care
        • Mass Tort Litigation / Class Actions – Defendants
        • Medical Malpractice Law – Defendants
        • Personal Injury Litigation – Defendants
  • Ron A. Yarbrough (2007)
        • Construction Law
        • Litigation – Construction
  • Stephen J. Carmody (2009)
        • Employee Benefits (ERISA) Law
        • Employment Law – Management
        • Labor Law – Management
        • Litigation – ERISA
        • Litigation – Intellectual Property
        • Litigation – Labor and Employment
        • Mass Tort Litigation / Class Actions – Defendants
        • Professional Malpractice Law – Defendants
  • Christopher R. Fontan (2019)
        • Employment Law – Management
        • Litigation – Labor and Employment
        • Workers’ Compensation Law – Employers
  • Claire W. Ketner (2022)
        • Litigation – Labor and Employment
  • Joseph E. Varner III (2012)
        • Mergers and Acquisitions Law
        • Tax Law
        • Trusts and Estates
  • Columbus, MS
    • Gordon Flowers (2009)
        • Commercial Litigation
        • Environmental Law
        • Mass Tort Litigation / Class Actions – Defendants
        • Personal Injury Litigation – Defendants
        • Product Liability Litigation – Defendants
  • Scott F. Singley (2022)
        • Medical Malpractice Law – Defendants
  • Biloxi, MS
    • Leonard A. Blackwell II (2005)
        • Gaming Law
        • Land Use and Zoning Law

Related Attorneys

  • Alston F. Ludwig
  • Benje Bailey
  • Christopher R. Fontan
  • Claire W. Ketner
  • Cody C. Bailey
  • Drew C. Bigelow
  • Gene Wasson
  • J. Gordon Flowers
  • Jacob A. Bradley
  • James A. McCullough II
  • James L. Halford
  • John E. Milner
  • John E. Wade
  • John M. Flynt
  • Joseph E. Varner III
  • Karen E. Howell
  • Ken Harmon
  • Leonard A. Blackwell, II
  • Lynne K. Green
  • M. Patrick McDowell
  • Matthew W. Allen
  • R. David Kaufman
  • R. Lane Bobo
  • R. Richard Cirilli, Jr.
  • Ron A. Yarbrough
  • Samuel C. Kelly
  • Scott F. Singley
  • Sheldon G. Alston
  • Stephen J. Carmody
  • Walter S. Weems
  • Warren Ken Rogers
  • William C. Penick IV
  • William D. Drinkwater
  • William Trey Jones III
  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Page 1
  • Page 2
  • Page 3
  • Page 4
  • Page 5
  • Page 6
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Page 25
  • Go to Next Page »

sidebar

News

  • News
  • Blog
  • Recent Experience
  • Rankings & Awards
  • Newsletters
    • Banking
    • Brunini Update
    • Environmental Law
    • Labor and Employment
    • Health Care
  • Newsletter Signup
  • Jackson
Facebook LinkedIn Instagram
©2026 Brunini. All rights reserved. Web Site by Fishman Marketing.
  • Firm Access
  • Disclaimer
  •