Profile

Neil Schur is a shareholder in Anderson Kill’s Philadelphia office.  He is a leading commercial litigator in state and federal courts and a frequent speaker and writer on various litigation topics.  He also serves as the co-chair of Anderson Kill’s Antitrust and Unfair Competition Group.

Neil has litigated cases at the trial court and appellate levels in several states.  He represents clients in matters involving contracts, fraud, antitrust and unfair competition, the Sherman Act, the Robinson-Patman Act, the Lanham Act, and the False Claims Act.  He has substantial experience in antitrust and unfair competition matters, franchise litigation and environmental litigation. He also has considerable experience counseling clients regarding a variety of antitrust compliance issues, such as appropriate pricing policies, including minimum advertised price (MAP) policies, resale price maintenance (RPM) policies, and Colgate policies, as well as evaluating antitrust risk of contemplated business transactions.

Among his successful prior representations, Neil recently represented a Netflix reality television star in a complex business divorce dispute regarding financial matters and a stock transfer.  He also represented a high-level official of the City of New York facing criminal charges, including bribery.  In another case, he obtained a unanimous verdict in favor of two clients on all counts brought against them, following a nine-day jury trial in Essex County, New Jersey (Fioravanti v. Ettere).  Finally, as part of a multi-firm team, he successfully represented a student loan provider accused of improper billing to the U.S. Department of Education.  (U.S. ex rel. Oberg v. Pennsylvania Higher Education Assistance Agency).

Neil has recently spoken or written on non-compete clauses, force majeure clauses, non-disclosure agreements, confidentiality, trade secrets, mechanic’s liens, and the FTC chair’s efforts to rein in Big Tech via federal antitrust law.

Neil is a member of Anderson Kill’s Financial Services and Construction Industry Groups.  He has substantial experience representing the financial services industry, having represented several banks and a lender in various matters, including lender liability, derivative actions and class actions.  He also has experience litigating a construction dispute related to a subcontractor’s construction of a "curtainwall” for a project in Princeton, New Jersey, and has co-written articles on mechanic’s liens from the perspectives of both a contractor and a property owner.

As the son of a small business owner in the manufacturing of boxed chocolates, Neil understands and appreciates the realities of manufacturing, distributor issues and competition.  He loves the excitement of making products and creating new ones.  He has represented and advised manufacturers of flooring and industrial batteries, as well as baby products, such as car seats and strollers.

Before becoming a lawyer, Neil worked as a reporter for The Philadelphia Inquirer and the Associated Press, and as a teacher for the Houston Independent School District, as part of Teach for America.

 

Memberships

Professional Memberships
American Bar Association, Antitrust Section; Pennsylvania Bar Association; Philadelphia Bar Association.

Board Memberships
Director and Member of Finance Committee of Mt. Sinai Cemetery Association (2015-present); KIPP Philadelphia Schools Leadership Council Chair (2012-2017).

Experience

  • Boris v. Vurimindi (Pa. Super. Ct. No. 1553 EDA 2020, Jan. 25, 2022) (affirming, inter alia, trial court’s order quashing subpoenas to client intervenors).
  • Numoda Corporation v. A. Boris (C.C.P. Phila. No. 210402523, Jan. 19, 2022) (overruling defendants’ preliminary objections to client’s complaint for breach of negotiable instrument); see also Numoda Corporation v. J. Boris (C.C.P. Phila. No. 210402531, Jan. 19, 2022) (reaching same result).
  • Vurimindi v. Schaheen (C.C.P. Phila. 201904001684, Sept. 3, 2019) (sustaining clients’ preliminary objections to complaint alleging defendants’ failure to comply with order in separate case that plaintiff had appealed).
  • Banks v. Owens, 2018 WL 6249709 (E.D. Pa. Dec. 6, 2018) (granting motion to dismiss claim against lawyer for science museum who allegedly played role in museum employee’s filing police report of stalking by plaintiff), affirmed (3d Cir. Dec. 13, 2019).
  • Fioravanti v. Ettere, Essex Cty. No. ESX-L-1250-17 (unanimous defense verdict dated Dec. 12, 2018, rejecting plaintiff’s effort to “pierce the corporate veil” and recover corporate debts from shareholders), motion for new trial denied, March 1, 2019.
  • United States ex rel. Oberg v. PHEAA, 912 F.3d 731 (4th Cir. Jan. 8, 2019) (affirming defense verdict rejecting plaintiff’s claim that Pennsylvania Higher Education Assistance Agency had defrauded the U.S. Department of Education and damages claim in excess of $350 million).
  • Guthrie Healthcare System v. Context Media, Inc., 826 F.3d 27 (2d Cir. 2016) (affirming district court’s liability determination of a likelihood of confusion between the parties trademarks but reversing overly narrow injunction).
  • In re Exide Technologies, 2010 WL 2163190 (3d Cir. June 1, 2010) (concluding, after years of contentious litigation, that purchaser had substantially performed contract, so it was not executory and could not be rejected under 11 U.S.C. § 365(a)). U.S. Bankr. Ct. D. Del. No. 02-11125, Adv. Proc. No. 10-52766 (Jan. 8, 2013), cert. denied, Feb. 22, 2011.
  • Tubbs v. North American Title Agency, Inc., 2010 WL 3044067 (3d Cir. Aug. 5, 2010) (reversing dismissal of plaintiff client’s complaint).
  • Shaev v. Sidhu (C.C.P. Phila., Oct. 28, 2008) (approving settlement of five consolidated class actions after fairness hearing), affirmed, Super. Ct. of Pa., 3405 EDA 2008, 3406 EDA 2008, Aug. 9, 2010, alloc. denied, Dec. 21, 2010.
  • Weiss v. Fiber Optic Designs, Inc., 2008 WL 3984166 (E.D. Pa. Aug. 27, 2008) (dismissing complaint with prejudice as a sanction for plaintiff’s “established pattern of discovery misconduct and willful inattentiveness to his own case”).

Speaking Engagements

Force Majeure Clauses in Contracts: Drafting and Enforcing Provisions

Strafford Publications / April 14, 2024

Practical Guidance on Confidentiality and NDAs

August 8, 2023

FORCE MAJEURE CLAUSES IN CONTRACTS: DRAFTING AND ENFORCING PROVISIONS FOR U.S. AND INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS

Strafford Publications / March 14, 2023

Publications

Is the Robinson-Patman Act Alive and Kicking?

The Legal Intelligencer / May 29, 2024

FTC Bans Noncompetes Nationwide in Most Instances

Anderson Kill Employment Law Insider Alert / May 2, 2024

A MECHANIC’S LIEN CAN BE A POWERFUL TOOL TO HELP CONTRACTORS GET PAID

Construction Industry Advisor / June 6, 2023

Contractual Obligations in the Face of Events Beyond a Party’s Control: Force Majeure and Other Relevant Doctrines

Anderson Kill Commercial Litigation Advisor / April 24, 2023

MOVEMENT LED BY THE FTC CHAIR TO REIN IN BIG TECH MAY IMPACT BUSINESSES, CONSUMERS

The Legal Intelligencer / October 19, 2022

FORCE MAJEURE CLAIMS AMID NEW SUPPLY CHAIN DISRUPTIONS

Law360 / June 21, 2022

CONGRESS TAKES ON PRICE SETTING

The Philadelphia Business Journal / August 14, 2008

COURT RENDERS FIRST ROBINSON-PATMAN ACT RULING IN 12 YEAR

The Legal Intelligencer / March 6, 2006

3RD CIRCUIT OFFERS INSIGHT INTO SHERMAN ACT SEC. 1 CLAIM PROOFS

The Legal Intelligencer / December 21, 2004

ANTITRUST LITIGATION BEST PRACTICES: LEADING LAWYERS ON DEVELOPING A DEFENSE STRATEGY, EVALUATING SETTLEMENT OPPORTUNITIES AND AVOIDING COMMON MISTAKES

Aspatore Books / July 1, 2001

ASSESSING THE CONSTITUTIONALITY AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS OF THE 1994 FEDERAL DRUG KINGPIN DEATH PENALTY

Texas Forum on Civil Liberties & Civil Rights / June 1, 1996

News

Anderson Kill Names Neil C. Schur Co-Chair of the Firm’s Antitrust and Unfair Competition Group

March 13, 2024

Anderson Kill Snags Longtime Stevens & Lee Partner

April 17, 2022

Neil C. Schur Joins Anderson Kill’s Litigation Group as a Shareholder in Philadelphia

April 12, 2022

Anderson Kill Adds Shareholder From Stevens & Lee In Philly

April 11, 2022

images
images

Neil C. Schur

Shareholder , Philadelphia

Profile

Neil Schur is a shareholder in Anderson Kill’s Philadelphia office.  He is a leading commercial litigator in state and federal courts and a frequent speaker and writer on various litigation topics.  He also serves as the co-chair of Anderson Kill’s Antitrust and Unfair Competition Group.

Neil has litigated cases at the trial court and appellate levels in several states.  He represents clients in matters involving contracts, fraud, antitrust and unfair competition, the Sherman Act, the Robinson-Patman Act, the Lanham Act, and the False Claims Act.  He has substantial experience in antitrust and unfair competition matters, franchise litigation and environmental litigation. He also has considerable experience counseling clients regarding a variety of antitrust compliance issues, such as appropriate pricing policies, including minimum advertised price (MAP) policies, resale price maintenance (RPM) policies, and Colgate policies, as well as evaluating antitrust risk of contemplated business transactions.

Among his successful prior representations, Neil recently represented a Netflix reality television star in a complex business divorce dispute regarding financial matters and a stock transfer.  He also represented a high-level official of the City of New York facing criminal charges, including bribery.  In another case, he obtained a unanimous verdict in favor of two clients on all counts brought against them, following a nine-day jury trial in Essex County, New Jersey (Fioravanti v. Ettere).  Finally, as part of a multi-firm team, he successfully represented a student loan provider accused of improper billing to the U.S. Department of Education.  (U.S. ex rel. Oberg v. Pennsylvania Higher Education Assistance Agency).

Neil has recently spoken or written on non-compete clauses, force majeure clauses, non-disclosure agreements, confidentiality, trade secrets, mechanic’s liens, and the FTC chair’s efforts to rein in Big Tech via federal antitrust law.

Neil is a member of Anderson Kill’s Financial Services and Construction Industry Groups.  He has substantial experience representing the financial services industry, having represented several banks and a lender in various matters, including lender liability, derivative actions and class actions.  He also has experience litigating a construction dispute related to a subcontractor’s construction of a "curtainwall” for a project in Princeton, New Jersey, and has co-written articles on mechanic’s liens from the perspectives of both a contractor and a property owner.

As the son of a small business owner in the manufacturing of boxed chocolates, Neil understands and appreciates the realities of manufacturing, distributor issues and competition.  He loves the excitement of making products and creating new ones.  He has represented and advised manufacturers of flooring and industrial batteries, as well as baby products, such as car seats and strollers.

Before becoming a lawyer, Neil worked as a reporter for The Philadelphia Inquirer and the Associated Press, and as a teacher for the Houston Independent School District, as part of Teach for America.

 

Memberships

Professional Memberships
American Bar Association, Antitrust Section; Pennsylvania Bar Association; Philadelphia Bar Association.

Board Memberships
Director and Member of Finance Committee of Mt. Sinai Cemetery Association (2015-present); KIPP Philadelphia Schools Leadership Council Chair (2012-2017).

Experience

  • Boris v. Vurimindi (Pa. Super. Ct. No. 1553 EDA 2020, Jan. 25, 2022) (affirming, inter alia, trial court’s order quashing subpoenas to client intervenors).
  • Numoda Corporation v. A. Boris (C.C.P. Phila. No. 210402523, Jan. 19, 2022) (overruling defendants’ preliminary objections to client’s complaint for breach of negotiable instrument); see also Numoda Corporation v. J. Boris (C.C.P. Phila. No. 210402531, Jan. 19, 2022) (reaching same result).
  • Vurimindi v. Schaheen (C.C.P. Phila. 201904001684, Sept. 3, 2019) (sustaining clients’ preliminary objections to complaint alleging defendants’ failure to comply with order in separate case that plaintiff had appealed).
  • Banks v. Owens, 2018 WL 6249709 (E.D. Pa. Dec. 6, 2018) (granting motion to dismiss claim against lawyer for science museum who allegedly played role in museum employee’s filing police report of stalking by plaintiff), affirmed (3d Cir. Dec. 13, 2019).
  • Fioravanti v. Ettere, Essex Cty. No. ESX-L-1250-17 (unanimous defense verdict dated Dec. 12, 2018, rejecting plaintiff’s effort to “pierce the corporate veil” and recover corporate debts from shareholders), motion for new trial denied, March 1, 2019.
  • United States ex rel. Oberg v. PHEAA, 912 F.3d 731 (4th Cir. Jan. 8, 2019) (affirming defense verdict rejecting plaintiff’s claim that Pennsylvania Higher Education Assistance Agency had defrauded the U.S. Department of Education and damages claim in excess of $350 million).
  • Guthrie Healthcare System v. Context Media, Inc., 826 F.3d 27 (2d Cir. 2016) (affirming district court’s liability determination of a likelihood of confusion between the parties trademarks but reversing overly narrow injunction).
  • In re Exide Technologies, 2010 WL 2163190 (3d Cir. June 1, 2010) (concluding, after years of contentious litigation, that purchaser had substantially performed contract, so it was not executory and could not be rejected under 11 U.S.C. § 365(a)). U.S. Bankr. Ct. D. Del. No. 02-11125, Adv. Proc. No. 10-52766 (Jan. 8, 2013), cert. denied, Feb. 22, 2011.
  • Tubbs v. North American Title Agency, Inc., 2010 WL 3044067 (3d Cir. Aug. 5, 2010) (reversing dismissal of plaintiff client’s complaint).
  • Shaev v. Sidhu (C.C.P. Phila., Oct. 28, 2008) (approving settlement of five consolidated class actions after fairness hearing), affirmed, Super. Ct. of Pa., 3405 EDA 2008, 3406 EDA 2008, Aug. 9, 2010, alloc. denied, Dec. 21, 2010.
  • Weiss v. Fiber Optic Designs, Inc., 2008 WL 3984166 (E.D. Pa. Aug. 27, 2008) (dismissing complaint with prejudice as a sanction for plaintiff’s “established pattern of discovery misconduct and willful inattentiveness to his own case”).

Speaking Engagements

Force Majeure Clauses in Contracts: Drafting and Enforcing Provisions

Strafford Publications / April 4, 2024

Practical Guidance on Confidentiality and NDAs

August 8, 2023

FORCE MAJEURE CLAUSES IN CONTRACTS: DRAFTING AND ENFORCING PROVISIONS FOR U.S. AND INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS

Strafford Publications / March 14, 2023

Publications

Is the Robinson-Patman Act Alive and Kicking?

The Legal Intelligencer / May 29, 2024

FTC Bans Noncompetes Nationwide in Most Instances

Anderson Kill Employment Law Insider Alert / May 2, 2024

A MECHANIC’S LIEN CAN BE A POWERFUL TOOL TO HELP CONTRACTORS GET PAID

Construction Industry Advisor / June 6, 2023

Contractual Obligations in the Face of Events Beyond a Party’s Control: Force Majeure and Other Relevant Doctrines

Anderson Kill Commercial Litigation Advisor / April 24, 2023

MOVEMENT LED BY THE FTC CHAIR TO REIN IN BIG TECH MAY IMPACT BUSINESSES, CONSUMERS

The Legal Intelligencer / October 19, 2022

FORCE MAJEURE CLAIMS AMID NEW SUPPLY CHAIN DISRUPTIONS

Law360 / June 21, 2022

CONGRESS TAKES ON PRICE SETTING

The Philadelphia Business Journal / August 14, 2008

COURT RENDERS FIRST ROBINSON-PATMAN ACT RULING IN 12 YEAR

The Legal Intelligencer / March 6, 2006

3RD CIRCUIT OFFERS INSIGHT INTO SHERMAN ACT SEC. 1 CLAIM PROOFS

The Legal Intelligencer / December 21, 2004

ANTITRUST LITIGATION BEST PRACTICES: LEADING LAWYERS ON DEVELOPING A DEFENSE STRATEGY, EVALUATING SETTLEMENT OPPORTUNITIES AND AVOIDING COMMON MISTAKES

Aspatore Books / July 1, 2001

ASSESSING THE CONSTITUTIONALITY AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS OF THE 1994 FEDERAL DRUG KINGPIN DEATH PENALTY

Texas Forum on Civil Liberties & Civil Rights / June 1, 1996

News

Anderson Kill Names Neil C. Schur Co-Chair of the Firm’s Antitrust and Unfair Competition Group

March 13, 2024

Anderson Kill Snags Longtime Stevens & Lee Partner

April 17, 2022

Neil C. Schur Joins Anderson Kill’s Litigation Group as a Shareholder in Philadelphia

April 12, 2022

Anderson Kill Adds Shareholder From Stevens & Lee In Philly

April 11, 2022

Awards & Honors
  • Pro Bono Roll of Honor of the First Judicial District of Pennsylvania: 2010
  • Pennsylvania Super Lawyer: Rising Star 2007
  • Pennsylvania Super Lawyer: Rising Star 2006
  • The Legal Intelligencer: "Lawyer on the Fast Track” 2006
  • MS Leadership Award: National Multiple Sclerosis Society 2005
Education
  • The University of Texas School of Law, J.D.
  • University of Pennsylvania, B.A., with distinction in English Literature
  • St. Catherine's College, University of Oxford
Bar Admissions
  • Pennsylvania
  • New Jersey
  • New York
Court Admissions
  • United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
  • United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania
  • United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania
  • United States District Court for the District of New Jersey
  • United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
  • United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
  • Supreme Court of the United States

© Copyright 2024 by Anderson Kill P.C.