Skip to main content

Kaitlyn Anne Crowe


[email protected]



Kaitlyn’s practice focuses on complex commercial litigation across a variety of areas, including contract disputes and business dissolutions. She regularly advises clients in all stages of litigation, from pre-litigation counseling and investigation, through the discovery process, through mediation and settlement, and, where necessary, through the trial and the appeals process. She is a member of the firm’s Appellate practice group and has worked on appellate briefs for the First Department, New York Court of Appeals and the United States Supreme Court. She has been a member of several successful trial and arbitration teams at Mintz and her prior firm, including co-chairing a Delaware Chancery Court trial, but has also been successful in obtaining favorable settlements for her clients long before the trial process. Kaitlyn is effective at managing large case teams in all stages of litigation to efficiently and successfully secure wins for our clients that benefit their business objectives.

She has developed and maintains a significant amount of experience with regards to Delaware litigation and its risks and significance for corporate clients and their entities. She also maintains an active Connecticut practice and has experience in managing filings and discovery in the state, appearing and arguing in the state and appellate courts situated there, giving her insight into the procedurals of the state court.

Kaitlyn is also active in the firm’s pro bono initiatives. She is lead counsel in immigration proceedings to obtain Special Immigrant Juvenile Status for two siblings, and has drafted and filed multiple amicus briefs in the Supreme Court of the United States on behalf of pro bono clients, including the National Queer Asian Pacific Islander Alliance.


  • Represented Geneius Biotechnology, Inc in a dispute with a minority shareholder that attempted to gain control of the company. In an expedited matter, we served as lead trial counsel in the Delaware Chancery Court and secured a total victory for the client.
  • Successfully arbitrated a complex partnership dispute involving claims of breach of fiduciary duties in connection with the management of 3 mixed-use buildings in midtown Manhattan. Secured a $31 million award on behalf of the client, which directed that the partnership be dissolved and that there be an open market sale of the three properties.
  • Represented SpinMaster, a leading global children's entertainment company, in a patent infringement case related to the company's Zero Gravity® Laser toy vehicle, which was named "Best Toy" by Popular Mechanics at the 2019 Toy Fair. Obtained a preliminary injunction in December 2019 enjoining the sales of the infringing toys by defendant, which was appealed. The parties settled their dispute and the case was dismissed by stipulation.
  • Conducted internal investigation of privately held company related to the termination of its CEO and negotiated favorable settlement with former executive to allow for company’s growth and additional investment.
  • Represented individual partner in a partnership dissolution action with, among others, claims for breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, accounting, and disparagement.  Obtained dismissal with prejudice of all but a single declaratory judgment action, allowing for favorable settlement only months after the commencement of the action.
Read less


Providing Sanctuary for Survivors

December 13, 2023 | Article

Sanctuary for Families is the leading provider and advocate for survivors of domestic abuse, sex trafficking, and related forms of gender violence. Last year alone, the organization provided vital support to over 7,200 adults and children facing adversity. Read more about Mintz's pro bono work with Sanctuary for Families.

Read more

In the ever-changing and divisive political climate facing our nation today, boards of directors and the companies they oversee face myriad pressures from numerous stakeholders to weigh in on specific political, cultural, and social issues. Helpfully, a recent decision by the Delaware Chancery Court determined that a board’s decision to utilize the company’s voice and speak out about the pertinent issue is a “business decision” by the Company. 

Read more
On June 22, 2020, the Court issued its 8-1 opinion in Liu et al. v. Securities and Exchange Commission, holding that a disgorgement award is “equitable relief” permissible under 15 U. S. C. §78u(d)(5), and, as such, is relief that the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) may properly seek as “appropriate or necessary for the benefit of investors.
Read more
A federal court must of course have subject matter jurisdiction to entertain an application to confirm or enforce an arbitration award.  Fortunately, that jurisdiction is, in general, provided by statute when it comes to arbitral awards that are subject to the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (the “New York Convention”).  See Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) § 203, 9 U.S.C. § 203.  However, several federal courts have determined that they lack subject matter jurisdiction, pursuant to FAA § 203, to confirm or enforce an “interim” international arbitration award.  But just what qualifies as “interim” is not always clear. 
Read more
Here is an interesting scenario:  the parties to a cross-border commercial relationship have a dispute; they have an agreement to arbitrate; arbitration is contemplated (or perhaps even commenced); the parties settle before there are any significant arbitral proceedings; they engage an arbitrator to render an award that comprises the settlement terms; and such an award is issued “on consent”. Later, one party seeks to confirm and/or enforce the award in the United States. But -- spoiler alert -- that settlement agreement/arbitral award might not be confirmed or enforced under the New York Convention.
Read more
Under both New York and federal law, a party is entitled to seek an order to compel arbitration if it is “aggrieved” by another party’s failure to arbitrate a dispute despite being bound to do so.  But what does it mean for a party to be “aggrieved” for those purposes?  Specifically, is it necessary for a lawsuit to have been commenced by the recalcitrant counter-party?  Or is it enough that a party simply refuses to engage in arbitration voluntarily? 
Read more
Federal question subject matter jurisdiction is easy to describe:  a party can bring an action in federal court if its claim is based on federal law.  However, the determination of whether such a federal question exists is not very easy when a party is seeking to confirm, modify or vacate an arbitration award in federal court pursuant to the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) §§ 9-11.  Does the “federal question” have to be an element of the petition itself?  Or is it enough that a claim in the underlying arbitration is based on federal law?  The federal circuit courts are split on that issue.  Consequently, in the absence of diversity jurisdiction, the determination of whether a post-arbitration award motion under the FAA will have to be made in state court or federal court may depend on the jurisdiction in which the motion is to be made.
Read more
Read less

News & Press

Press Release Thumbnail

Mintz is pleased to announce that 120 firm attorneys have been recognized as leaders by Best Lawyers® in the 2024 edition of The Best Lawyers in America©.

Press Release Thumbnail

We're thrilled to announce the addition of 17 new Members to Mintz. Along with seven attorneys recently elevated to membership in the firm, we’ve welcomed ten lateral Members in 2022. They add depth to our experience and capabilities in life sciences, health care, financial services, private equity, sports & entertainment, technology, and other sectors.

Press Release Thumbnail

17 Mintz attorneys have been named New York Metro Super Lawyers and nine Mintz attorneys have been named New York Metro Rising Stars by Super Lawyers for 2022.

News Thumbnail
Mintz Member Laurence A. Schoen and Associate Kaitlyn Anne Crowe co-authored an article published by the American Bar Association’s Litigation Section examining how defendants have been able to use a “price impact” rebuttal to defeat class certification.
News Thumbnail
On November 12, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on three consolidated cases challenging the legality of President Trump’s decision to phase-out the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) policy, which protects eligible immigrant youth who came to the United States when they were children from deportation.
Fourteen Mintz attorneys have been named New York Super Lawyers for 2017 and thirteen have been named New York Rising Stars. New York Super Lawyers recognizes the top lawyers with the highest degree of peer recognition and professional achievements.  
Sixteen Mintz attorneys have been named New York Super Lawyers for 2016 and twelve have been named New York Rising Stars. The list will be published in a special advertising supplement in The New York Times Magazine and in a stand-alone magazine, New York Super Lawyers - Metro Edition.
Read less

Recognition & Awards

  • Best Lawyers in America "Ones to Watch": Commercial Litigation (2021-2022)

  • Best Lawyers in America "Ones to Watch": Litigation - Real Estate (2024)

  • New York Super Lawyers Rising Stars - Business Litigation (2016 - 2022)

  • Order of the Coif, Fordham University School of Law

  • Mary Daley Prize in Legal Ethics, Fordham University School of Law

Read less