William D. Beil

email	Email Me
vCard

Reviewing documents in a legal case is grunt work. Thousands of pages may have to be reviewed in complex corporate litigation cases. Because it's tedious and time-consuming, this function is usually relegated to the most junior attorneys at most law firms.

So it might surprise you to know that William Beil--a shareholder at Rouse Hendricks German May PC since 1992, one of the most successful corporate litigation attorneys in the Midwest, a man whose work has resulted in verdicts, arbitration awards, or settlements on behalf of his clients exceeding $600 million--insists on personally reviewing every document in his cases.

"It's grunt work, but it's absolutely crucial in my mind that the attorney who actually stands up in a courtroom to represent their client has the most comprehensive knowledge of the documents, issues, and intricacies of their case," Beil says. "Many of the attorneys I go up against are relying on the work of others. And that's fine for them. We just do it a different way."

Mr. Beil's love of law began in 7th grade when he played the part of Dred Scott's lawyer in a classroom re-enactment of the Dred Scott v. Sandford Supreme Court case. Early on in law school at the University of Missouri-Kansas City, Beil knew that litigation work, trial work, was what he wanted to focus on.

"Tax work and mergers and acquisitions just didn't cut it for me," he says. "I just liked the idea of being able to get on my feet in a real courtroom and advocating my client's position."

After law school Beil started working with the firm of Stinson, Mag, and Fizzell in Kansas City. He was on track to make partner, but decided to join some of his colleagues at a new firm, the one that became Rouse Hendricks German May PC.

"I had a great time where I was, but this was an opportunity to do more plaintiffs' work, and to hone my skills as a litigator," Beil says. "The kinds of cases we are involved in can be very complex, and to some juries have the potential to even be boring. I enjoy the challenge of taking the boring and complex and turning it into a compelling story that will serve our clients' interests."

And you can't tell a good story unless you know it inside and out. This is why Beil and his colleagues take the time and care to personally review the documents involved in cases they work on.

"Some people may balk at the idea of a senior level attorney going over bank statements and other financial documents one at a time," Beil says. "But if I'm going to be standing in front of a jury, if I'm the one dealing with a witness, I need to know every aspect of the case. And our results speak for themselves."

Representative Cases:

• Tamko Roofing Products, Inc. v. Smith Engineering Co., et al., (U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri)
• Kansas City Power & Light Co. v. Rockwell Automation, Inc., (Circuit Court of Jackson County, Missouri)
• Kansas City Power & Light Co. v. Siemens Power Transmission & Distribution, Inc., (Circuit Court of Jackson County, Missouri)
• Excel Laminates, Inc., et al. v. Lear Corporation, (U.S. District Court for the District of Kansas)
• Fru-Con Construction Services, Inc. v. Grain Processing Corp., (U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana )
• Schaller Telephone Co. v. Golden Sky Systems, Inc., 298 F.3d 736 (Eighth Circuit 2002)
• Brooks Erection & Construction Co. v. BP Oil Co., (U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania)
• S&C Thermal Systems, Inc. v. Vandeveer Estate Holdings, (AAA Arbitration in New York)
• Jayhawk Millwright & Erectors, Inc. v. CertainTeed Corp., (AAA Arbitration in Philadelphia)
• Berec International Ltd., et al. v. Eveready Battery, (U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri)
• Sporcic v. Marshalls, Inc., (Iowa District Court of Polk County, Iowa )
• PulseCard, Inc. v. Discover Card Services, Inc., (U.S. District Court for the District of Kansas)
• Williams v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., (U.S. District Court for the District of Maine)
• Wolf v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., (Circuit Court of Jackson County, Missouri)
• Germanio v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., (U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey)
• SAFER and Union Re v. First Excess Reinsurance Co., (U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri)
• Lappin v. Hutchens Industries, Inc., (District Court of Orange County, California)
• Hastings and Westbrook v. Tri-State Motor Transit Co., (U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri)

Litigation Percentage:

100% of Practice Devoted to Litigation

Bar Admissions:

Kansas, 1997

Missouri, 1986
U.S. District Court District of Kansas, 1997
U.S. District Court Western District of Missouri, 1986
U.S. Court of Appeals 8th Circuit, 1990
U.S. Court of Appeals 5th Circuit, 1989
U.S. Court of Appeals 3rd Circuit, 1996
U.S. Court of Appeals 10th Circuit, 1997

Education:

University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Law, Kansas City,
Missouri, 1986
J.D., Doctor of Jurisprudence
Honors: National Moot Court Team
Honors: National Trial Team
Honors: Order of the Bench and Robe
Honors: With Distinction

University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri, 1983
B.J., Bachelor of Journalism

Published Works:

Note, The Missouri Supreme Court Interprets The Nursing Practice Act, Serchief v. Gonzales, UMKC
Law Review, Fall, 1984
Comment, Immunity Problems in Inmate Assault Cases UMKC Law Review, Spring, 1986