Listen with curiosity. Speak with honesty. Act with integrity. The greatest problem with communication is we don’t listen to understand. Roy T. Bennett

Tom Ferguson is a seasoned litigator who represents clients in commercial litigation. His experience involves diverse industries including construction, oil and gas, healthcare, media, real estate, technology, and utilities. With a track record of success spanning decades, Tom is trusted advisor looked to by clients to navigate intricate legal challenges, whether by trial advocacy or negotiated settlements. His primary focus is delivering business solutions tailored to each client’s needs. His approach is to understand the business objective and work with a client to identify and pursue solutions designed to reach that objective. This approach has served his clients well resulting in substantial judgments and settlements with successful outcomes reaching up to $100 million. He has successfully defended clients against claims of similar magnitude.

In addition to his legal practice, Tom has a long history of service in civic and charitable endeavors, providing volunteer leadership and pro bono representation. He has contributed to community education, served on advisory boards for several organizations, and been involved in providing continuing legal education by writing and speaking. Tom’s commitment to public service includes his former roles as Mayor and City Council member of Sand Springs, Oklahoma, where he served on numerous state and local boards and commissions. Tom spent over 25 years coaching several sports, including over 20 years coaching youth soccer from young beginners to high school-age players. Having retired from coaching he spends the freed-up time investigating family history, enjoying time with his adult children, spending time with his dogs – Lincoln and Charlie – and is ready to enjoy his granddaughter beginning extra-curricular activities.

  • COVID-19. The pandemic created numerous legal issues. Tom provided advice concerning rapidly changing federal and state statutes and regulations, insurance issues, and clients affected by federal and state emergency declarations. He successfully litigated breaches of contract for the supply of personal protective equipment as well as claims for breach of contract and price gouging in the building materials market.
  • Construction. Tom represents construction clients with a heavy emphasis on home builders and developers. This includes disputes involving development, drainage, restrictive covenants, easements, home building contracts, commercial construction contracts, and liens. Like many areas where small businesses are common, the construction field often involves disputes between partners and shareholders in closely owned businesses. Tom is experienced in these areas.
  • Oil and Gas. Tom represents oil and gas companies in exploration, production, midstream, and transportation areas. This includes working with clients to take and assign leasehold interests, to develop and market those interests, and in the operation of leases. Tom has experience representing clients with interests in Oklahoma, Texas, New Mexico, North Dakota, and Montana.
  • Technology. Tom represents clients involved in the development and pre-market stages for various technological innovations, and disputes that arise in connection with that development. This includes disputes among shareholders and investors as well as disputes concerning the underlying intellectual property. Tom has dealt with a broad range of manufacturing areas, including aerospace repair stations, roofing construction systems, cellular location technology and construction, plastics manufacturing, fabric manufacturing, battery rejuvenation systems, and power conversion devices.
  • Utility. Tom has deep experience in Oklahoma utility law having been involved in electric, gas, and water utility issues. Tom is experienced in the unique area of electric territory disputes in Oklahoma as well as in other utility disputes involving customer and vendor contracts. Tom participated in a lengthy regulatory proceeding seeking approval of a significant investment in Oklahoma wind power and distribution facilities. Tom has also advised clients on municipal utility service issues.
  • Florida Gas Transmission. Following a multi-week trial, a Broward County, Florida jury awarded Florida Gas Transmission $82.7 million in damages for failure by the Florida Department of Transportation to reimburse FGT for the relocation of its natural gas pipelines. After the verdict was affirmed on appeal, the judgment was satisfied with a payment from the FDOT in excess of $100 million. The trial also resulted in the trial court entering an order interpreting rights in over one hundred miles of easement.
  • Southwest Gas Merger Litigation. A decade of litigation in several jurisdictions followed the unsuccessful tender offers by two competing utilities for Nevada-based Southwest Gas Corporation. The failed tender offers spawned litigation in Oklahoma, Nevada, California, and Arizona, appeals before the Ninth and Tenth Circuits, as well as ancillary proceedings in other states and before administrative agencies. Disclosed damages claims by our client were approximately one billion dollars. The legal effort resulted in numerous settlements as well as a two-month trial in Arizona federal court that led to a jury verdict of $60.3 million against an elected member of the Arizona Corporation Commission. The verdict was recognized by the National Law Journal as a Top 100 Verdict for the year. The various cases involved depositions of hundreds of witnesses, a substantial number of whom were presented at the Arizona trial, and the production and management of millions of pages of documentary evidence and emails.
  • Bakken Royalty Litigation. This litigation involved tort claims, including fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, and conspiracy brought by class representatives of tribal members in North Dakota. The putative class sought damages in connection with a billion-dollar sale of Bakken leases that they claimed had been wrongfully obtained from the tribal members and approved by the Bureau of Indian Affairs. The action was successfully defeated by motion practice.
  • Palace Investment Litigation. This litigation involved the fallout of an almost two-billion-dollar investment in oil and gas properties throughout the United States, the Gulf of Mexico, and the North Sea. Multiple actions were filed and litigated over ten years in Oklahoma, North Dakota, Colorado, Texas, and before the United States Tax Court. The resolution ultimately involved motion practice in some forums, a privately negotiated settlement and property partition, and final resolution during a Tulsa County trial.
  • Warranty Wind Up. Thousands of warranty claims, both individual and through servicing dealers, were litigated and settled on behalf of a large national insurer. The insurer was the remaining solvent defendant after large books of warranty business were written in contravention of company policy. The effort involved litigation, administrative proceedings, and resolution of un-filed claims throughout the Midwest and Southern United States, including successfully resisting administrative efforts in several states to impose penalties and business restrictions on the insurer and to cancel licenses to do business.
  • Take or Pay Gas Contracts. Litigation and settlement of take or pay claims arising from a public utility’s gas contract portfolio. The effort involved the resolution of approximately $500 million in claims arising under thousands of contracts covering Oklahoma gas produced from approximately 5,000 wells. In addition to litigating approximately 50 cases filed in state and federal courts in Oklahoma and Texas, the effort involved administrative matters related to the ratable taking of gas under Oklahoma Statutes and Oklahoma Corporation Commission rules.
  • Re-roofing Patent Litigation. Defense of a Houston-based metal roofing manufacturer against claims that hundreds of projects throughout the United States were built in contravention of the plaintiff’s patent rights. The case involved a significant historical analysis and investigation of the re-roofing industry. After a two-week trial, the jury determined by clear and convincing evidence that the patents in issue were invalid. The result was affirmed by the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
  • Manufactured Gas Toxic Tort Litigation. Representation of New England utility in connection with claims by over two hundred plaintiffs that their property had been contaminated by toxic manufactured gas plant waste. The waste was allegedly deposited from the late 1800s to the mid 1950s. The case involved hundreds of witnesses and millions of pages of documents, the majority of which were ancient records.


  • Best Lawyers®, Tulsa, Commercial Litigation, 2009-2024
  • Super Lawyers®, Business Litigation, 2007-2023
  • AV® Preeminent™ Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Rating