Skip to Main Content
Overview

Clients turn to Michael for high-stakes class action defense and appellate litigation.

With his skill in bet-the-company class actions, he defends a variety of challenges to companies’ practices and products, including claims based on breach of contract, warranties, product mislabeling and misrepresentation, deceptive trade practices, negligence, RICO and securities violations. Michael also has multidistrict litigation (MDL) experience.

Michael is an experienced appellate attorney and has successfully handled appeals in a variety of cases, including class actions, product defect claims, tort liability and breach of warranties. He has briefed cases in state and federal courts throughout the country and often consults with trial attorneys during trial preparation or the trial itself.

Whenever possible, Michael works toward disposing of cases early on through case-critical dispositive motions, and has obtained dismissals in complex commercial cases.

Clients seek Michael’s advice regarding claims across the spectrum of business operations, ranging from advertising and marketing practices to disputes with suppliers.

Before joining the firm, Michael was an associate in the New York office of Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP. Prior to his work at Skadden, Michael clerked for the Hon. Joseph L. Tauro, U.S. District Court, District of Massachusetts.

Industries

Services

Recognition

  • Benchmark Litigation, 40 & Under List, 2024

Education

  • J.D., Cornell Law School
    • ABA Law Student Division National Appellate Advocacy Competition
    • Cornell Law Review, Senior Articles Editor
  • B.A., Columbia University
    • Philosophy

Admissions

  • District of Columbia
  • Illinois
  • U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois
  • U.S. District Court, Southern District of Illinois
  • Maryland
  • U.S. District Court, District of Maryland
  • Missouri
  • U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Missouri
  • New York
  • U.S. Court of International Trade
  • U.S. Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit
  • U.S. Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit

Clerkships

  • The Hon. Joseph L. Tauro, U.S. District Court, District of Massachusetts

Languages

  • Russian, conversant
Experience
  • Assisted in obtaining dismissal of case against client, a leader in designing, manufacturing and retailing home furnishings, in a matter involving requests of personal information under the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act.
  • Successfully defended a Fortune 500 manufacturer of commercial and consumer goods in a putative class action against allegations of a product defect, helping secure an early dismissal.
  • Attained dismissal with prejudice for a global technology company regarding breach of contract, warranty and tort claims under California law.
  • Helped achieve settlement of putative class action involving food mislabeling claims.
  • Part of a team that obtained dismissal of a putative class action lawsuit against former subsidiary of large financial institution where plaintiffs had alleged fraud, insufficient loan loss reserves and violations of generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP).
  • Secured summary judgment for provider of educational services, defeating plaintiff’s claims of educational malpractice and deceptive trade practices.
  • Favorably defended large financial institution against claims of securities fraud.
  • Counseled pharmaceutical corporation on escheat and unclaimed property laws.
  • Represented individual criminal defendants in appeals of criminal convictions.

Representative Cases

  • Hale v. Emerson Electric Co., No. 18-1585 (8th Cir. 2019) (reversing certification of nationwide class, finding state consumer protection statute was inapplicable to claims made by out-of-state class members).
Case Studies
CSC Sugar LLC

Our team secured a first-of-its-kind decision from the U.S. Court of International Trade.

Legal Updates | June 28, 2021
Supreme Court Paves the Way for More State Court Class Actions About Federal Statutes

In reemphasizing the “concrete harm” requirement for Article III standing, the Supreme Court may have raised the hurdle to federal court but exposed defendants to more state court suits.

Community Leadership
  • Columbia University, Alumni Representative Committee