{"data":{"filter_options":{"titles":[{"name":"Managing Partner Atlanta Office","value":"Managing Partner Atlanta Office"},{"name":"Partner","value":"Partner"},{"name":"Partner / Head of Pro Bono","value":"Partner / Head of Pro Bono"},{"name":"Partner / Chief Operating Officer","value":"Partner / Chief Operating Officer"},{"name":"Partner / General Counsel","value":"Partner / General Counsel"},{"name":"Partner / Dir. E-Discovery Ops","value":"Partner / Dir. E-Discovery Ops"},{"name":"Partner / Chairman, Saudi Arabia Practice","value":"Partner / Chairman, Saudi Arabia Practice"},{"name":"K\u0026S Talent Partner","value":"K\u0026S Talent Partner"},{"name":"Partner / Chief Human Resources Officer","value":"Partner / Chief Human Resources Officer"},{"name":"Chairman","value":"Chairman"},{"name":"Senior Counsel","value":"Senior Counsel"},{"name":"Associate Director, E-Discovery Operations","value":"Associate Director, E-Discovery Operations"},{"name":"Counsel","value":"Counsel"},{"name":"Senior Associate","value":"Senior Associate"},{"name":"Associate","value":"Associate"},{"name":"Senior Attorney","value":"Senior Attorney"},{"name":"Senior Lawyer","value":"Senior Lawyer"},{"name":"Attorney","value":"Attorney"},{"name":"Senior Counsel and Policy Advisor","value":"Senior Counsel and Policy Advisor"},{"name":"Managing Director - Capital Solutions","value":"Managing Director - Capital Solutions"},{"name":"Senior Government Relations Advisor","value":"Senior Government Relations Advisor"},{"name":"Associate General Counsel","value":"Associate General Counsel"},{"name":"Senior Advisor","value":"Senior Advisor"},{"name":"Patent Agent","value":"Patent Agent"},{"name":"Consultant","value":"Consultant"},{"name":"Government Relations Advisor","value":"Government Relations Advisor"},{"name":"Chief of Lateral Partner Recruiting \u0026 Integration","value":"Chief of Lateral Partner Recruiting \u0026 Integration"},{"name":"Chief Financial Officer","value":"Chief Financial Officer"},{"name":"Chief Information Officer","value":"Chief Information Officer"},{"name":"Chief Revenue Officer","value":"Chief Revenue Officer"},{"name":"Chief Recruiting Officer","value":"Chief Recruiting Officer"},{"name":"Chief Lawyer Talent Development Officer","value":"Chief Lawyer Talent Development Officer"},{"name":"Chief Marketing Officer","value":"Chief Marketing Officer"},{"name":"Tax Consultant","value":"Tax Consultant"},{"name":"Director of Community Affairs","value":"Director of Community Affairs"},{"name":"Director of Facilities \u0026 Admin Operations","value":"Director of Facilities \u0026 Admin Operations"},{"name":"Senior Office Manager","value":"Senior Office Manager"},{"name":"Director of Operations","value":"Director of Operations"},{"name":"Pro Bono Deputy","value":"Pro Bono Deputy"},{"name":"Director of Office Operations","value":"Director of Office Operations"},{"name":"Director of Operations Europe","value":"Director of Operations Europe"},{"name":"Law Clerk","value":"Law Clerk"},{"name":"Deputy General Counsel","value":"Deputy General Counsel"}],"schools":[{"name":"(Commercial Law), in front of Monash University, Australia","value":3045},{"name":"Aberystwyth University","value":3004},{"name":"Albany Law School","value":2118},{"name":"American University Washington College of Law","value":3042},{"name":"American University, Washington College of Law","value":3024},{"name":"Appalachian School of Law","value":2891},{"name":"Ateneo de Manila University","value":2914},{"name":"Ave Maria School of Law","value":2892},{"name":"Baylor University School of Law","value":181},{"name":"Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law","value":2619},{"name":"Binghamton University","value":3002},{"name":"Boston College Law School","value":245},{"name":"Boston University School of Law","value":247},{"name":"BPP Law School Leeds","value":2642},{"name":"BPP Law School London","value":2782},{"name":"BPP University","value":2984},{"name":"Brooklyn Law School","value":2705},{"name":"Cairo University, Law School","value":2962},{"name":"California Western School of Law","value":315},{"name":"Capital University Law School","value":327},{"name":"Case Western Reserve University School of Law","value":345},{"name":"Cecil C. Humphreys School of Law","value":2235},{"name":"Chapman University School of Law","value":377},{"name":"Charleston School of Law","value":2910},{"name":"City Law School, London","value":2998},{"name":"City Law School","value":2857},{"name":"Clark University","value":3006},{"name":"Cleveland-Marshall College of Law","value":426},{"name":"Columbia University School of International and Public Affairs","value":3008},{"name":"Columbia University School of Law","value":485},{"name":"Columbia University","value":3126},{"name":"Columbus School of Law, Catholic University of America","value":3010},{"name":"Columbus School of Law","value":350},{"name":"Concord Law School of Kaplan University","value":1026},{"name":"Cornell Law School","value":512},{"name":"Creighton University School of Law","value":518},{"name":"Creighton University","value":3025},{"name":"Cumberland School of Law","value":1759},{"name":"CUNY School of Law","value":2893},{"name":"David A. Clarke School of Law","value":2399},{"name":"Deakin University School of Law","value":2907},{"name":"DePaul University College of Law","value":565},{"name":"DePaul University College of Law","value":3060},{"name":"Dickinson School of Law","value":2719},{"name":"Drake University Law School","value":609},{"name":"Duke University School of Law","value":613},{"name":"Duquesne University School of Law","value":614},{"name":"Dwayne O. Andreas School of Law","value":173},{"name":"Edinburgh Law School","value":3160},{"name":"Emory University School of Law","value":659},{"name":"ESADE Business and Law School – Universidad Ramon Llull","value":3215},{"name":"Fachseminare von Fürstenberg","value":2918},{"name":"Faculté Libre de Droit, Université Catholique de Lille","value":3055},{"name":"Faculty of Law, University of Zagreb","value":2983},{"name":"Faculty of Law","value":2944},{"name":"Faculty of Law","value":3039},{"name":"Federal University of Rio de Janeiro","value":3022},{"name":"Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul School of Law (Brazil)","value":3062},{"name":"Florida A\u0026M University College of Law","value":699},{"name":"Florida Coastal School of Law","value":2894},{"name":"Florida International College of Law","value":707},{"name":"Florida State University College of Law","value":720},{"name":"Fordham University School of Law","value":722},{"name":"Franklin Pierce Law Center","value":734},{"name":"Friedrich-Schiller-Universität Jena","value":3015},{"name":"George Mason University School of Law","value":752},{"name":"George Washington University Law School","value":753},{"name":"Georgetown University Law Center","value":755},{"name":"Georgia State University College of Law","value":761},{"name":"Ghent Law School","value":2793},{"name":"Golden Gate University School of Law","value":770},{"name":"Gonzaga University School of Law","value":772},{"name":"Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies, Geneva","value":2997},{"name":"Hamline University School of Law","value":811},{"name":"Harvard Law School","value":824},{"name":"Hebrew University of Jerusalem Faculty of Law","value":2994},{"name":"Hofstra University School of Law","value":858},{"name":"Howard University School of Law","value":872},{"name":"Huazhong University of Science and Technology","value":3016},{"name":"Humboldt University of Berlin","value":3012},{"name":"Indiana University School of Law","value":2711},{"name":"Indiana University School of Law","value":890},{"name":"International Association of Privacy Professionals","value":3009},{"name":"J. Reuben Clark Law School","value":262},{"name":"Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center","value":2084},{"name":"James Cook University of North Queensland","value":3034},{"name":"Jean Moulin University Lyon 3, France","value":2938},{"name":"Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health","value":2992},{"name":"Justus-Liebig-Universität Gießen Rechtswissenschaft (Germany)","value":3063},{"name":"Kansas City School of Law","value":2247},{"name":"Keio University","value":2968},{"name":"Kent College of Law","value":883},{"name":"Kline School of Law","value":611},{"name":"KU Leuven","value":3007},{"name":"Levin College of Law","value":2189},{"name":"Lewis and Clark Law School","value":1089},{"name":"Liberty University School of Law","value":1094},{"name":"Lincoln College of Law","value":2253},{"name":"LL.M. in International Crime and Justice UNICRI","value":2937},{"name":"Loyola Law School","value":2895},{"name":"Loyola University Chicago School of Law","value":1135},{"name":"Loyola University New Orleans College of Law","value":1136},{"name":"Marquette University Law School","value":1176},{"name":"McGeorge School of Law","value":2402},{"name":"McGill University","value":2659},{"name":"Melbourne Law School","value":2899},{"name":"Mercer University Walter F. George School of Law","value":1221},{"name":"Mexico Autonomous Institute of Technology","value":2996},{"name":"Michael E. Moritz College of Law","value":2728},{"name":"Michigan State University College of Law","value":1245},{"name":"Mississippi College School of Law","value":1285},{"name":"Moscow State University","value":2815},{"name":"National and Kapodistrian University of Athens","value":3032},{"name":"National Law University Jodhpur","value":3020},{"name":"National University of Singapore, Faculty of Law","value":2662},{"name":"New England School of Law","value":2886},{"name":"New York Law School","value":1403},{"name":"New York University School of Law","value":1406},{"name":"Norman Adrian Wiggins School of Law","value":323},{"name":"North Carolina Central University School of Law","value":1417},{"name":"Northeastern University School of Law","value":1430},{"name":"Northern Illinois University College of Law","value":1432},{"name":"Northwestern Pritzker School of Law","value":1451},{"name":"Notre Dame Law School","value":2278},{"name":"Ohio Northern University Law School","value":3036},{"name":"Oklahoma City University School of Law","value":1487},{"name":"Osgoode Hall Law School","value":3124},{"name":"Pace University School of Law","value":1516},{"name":"Panteion University","value":3033},{"name":"Paul M. Hebert Law Center","value":2713},{"name":"Pennsylvania State University, Dickinson School of Law","value":1562},{"name":"Pepperdine University School of Law","value":1570},{"name":"Pettit College of Law","value":1473},{"name":"Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile","value":3203},{"name":"Pontificia Universidad Catolica del Peru","value":3011},{"name":"Pontificia Universidad Javeriana","value":3013},{"name":"Pontificia Universidade Catolica de Sao Paulo","value":3095},{"name":"Prince Sultan University College of Law","value":3167},{"name":"Queens College, Cambridge","value":3003},{"name":"Quinnipiac University School of Law","value":1626},{"name":"Ralph R. Papitto School of Law","value":1686},{"name":"Regent University School of Law","value":1649},{"name":"Rice University","value":3043},{"name":"Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg","value":3049},{"name":"Rutgers University School of Law-Newark","value":1699},{"name":"Rutgers University School of Law","value":1697},{"name":"S.J. Quinney College of Law","value":2408},{"name":"Saint Louis University School of Law","value":1732},{"name":"Salmon P. Chase College of Law","value":1433},{"name":"Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law","value":103},{"name":"Santa Clara University School of Law","value":1771},{"name":"Seattle University School of Law","value":1787},{"name":"Seton Hall University School of Law","value":1790},{"name":"Shepard Broad Law Center","value":1460},{"name":"South Texas College of Law","value":2721},{"name":"Southern Illinois University School of Law","value":1849},{"name":"Southern Methodist University Dedman School of Law","value":1852},{"name":"Southern University Law Center","value":1857},{"name":"Southwestern Law School","value":1876},{"name":"St. John's University School of Law","value":2724},{"name":"St. Mary's University School of Law","value":1896},{"name":"St. Thomas University School of Law","value":1746},{"name":"Stanford Law School","value":1904},{"name":"Stetson University College of Law","value":1910},{"name":"Sturm College of Law","value":2184},{"name":"Suffolk University Law School","value":1921},{"name":"Syracuse University College of Law","value":1956},{"name":"Temple University Beasley School of Law","value":1974},{"name":"Texas A\u0026M School of Law","value":1980},{"name":"Texas Tech University School of Law","value":1994},{"name":"Texas Wesleyan University School of Law","value":1996},{"name":"The College of Law Australia","value":3091},{"name":"The College of Law, London","value":2935},{"name":"The John Marshall Law School","value":2034},{"name":"The Judge Advocate General's Legal Center and School","value":2896},{"name":"The Ohio State University Moritz College of Law","value":2990},{"name":"The University of Akron School of Law","value":2143},{"name":"The University of Alabama School of Law","value":2045},{"name":"The University of Birmingham, U.K.","value":2796},{"name":"The University of Iowa College of Law","value":2206},{"name":"The University of Texas School of Law","value":2055},{"name":"The University of Tulsa College of Law","value":2407},{"name":"Thomas Jefferson School of Law","value":685},{"name":"Thomas M. Cooley Law School","value":2729},{"name":"Thurgood Marshall School of Law","value":1992},{"name":"Tianjin University of Commerce","value":2995},{"name":"Tulane University Law School","value":2113},{"name":"UC Davis School of Law","value":2160},{"name":"UCLA School of Law","value":2162},{"name":"Universidad Católica de Honduras","value":2916},{"name":"Universidad Francisco Marroquin","value":3090},{"name":"Universidad Panamericana","value":2904},{"name":"Universidad Torcuato di Tella","value":3035},{"name":"Universidade de São Paulo, Faculdade de Direito","value":3028},{"name":"Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie","value":2977},{"name":"Università Commerciale Luigi Bocconi","value":3135},{"name":"University at Buffalo Law School","value":1928},{"name":"University College Dublin Law School","value":2900},{"name":"University of Alberta Faculty of Law","value":3088},{"name":"University of Amsterdam","value":2980},{"name":"University of Arizona, James E. Rogers College of Law","value":2149},{"name":"University of Arkansas School of Law","value":2154},{"name":"University of Baltimore School of Law","value":2156},{"name":"University of California College of the Law","value":3196},{"name":"University of California Hastings College of Law","value":2158},{"name":"University of California Irvine School of Law","value":2161},{"name":"University of California, Berkeley, School of Law","value":2159},{"name":"University of California, Davis","value":3019},{"name":"University of Cambridge, U.K","value":2991},{"name":"University of Canterbury","value":2981},{"name":"University of Central Florida","value":3027},{"name":"University of Chester Law School","value":3005},{"name":"University of Chicago Law School","value":2174},{"name":"University of Chicago","value":3038},{"name":"University of Cincinnati College of Law","value":2175},{"name":"University of Colorado School of Law","value":2177},{"name":"University of Connecticut School of Law","value":2180},{"name":"University of Dayton School of Law","value":2182},{"name":"University of Detroit Mercy School of Law","value":2185},{"name":"University of East Anglia","value":3000},{"name":"University of Florida, Levin College of Law","value":3188},{"name":"University of Georgia School of Law","value":2190},{"name":"University of Houston Law Center","value":2197},{"name":"University of Hull","value":3040},{"name":"University of Idaho College of Law","value":2201},{"name":"University of Illinois College of Law","value":2204},{"name":"University of Kansas School of Law","value":2208},{"name":"University of Kentucky College of Law","value":2210},{"name":"University of La Verne College of Law","value":2211},{"name":"University of Law, London","value":2999},{"name":"University of Lethbridge","value":3030},{"name":"University of Louisville Brandeis School of Law","value":2214},{"name":"University of Maine School of Law","value":2391},{"name":"University of Maryland School of Law","value":2224},{"name":"University of Miami School of Law","value":2236},{"name":"University of Michigan Law School","value":2237},{"name":"University of Minnesota Law School","value":2243},{"name":"University of Mississippi School of Law","value":2244},{"name":"University of Missouri School of Law","value":2246},{"name":"University of Montana School of Law","value":2048},{"name":"University of Nebraska College of Law","value":2744},{"name":"University of New Mexico School of Law","value":2262},{"name":"University of North Carolina School of Law","value":2266},{"name":"University of North Dakota School of Law","value":2271},{"name":"University of Oklahoma Law Center","value":2747},{"name":"University of Oregon School of Law","value":2281},{"name":"University of Pennsylvania Law School","value":2282},{"name":"University of Pittsburgh School of Law","value":2354},{"name":"University of Richmond School of Law","value":2370},{"name":"University of San Diego School of Law","value":2377},{"name":"University of San Francisco School of Law","value":2378},{"name":"University of South Carolina School of Law","value":2750},{"name":"University of South Dakota School of Law","value":2387},{"name":"University of Southern California Gould School of Law","value":3051},{"name":"University of St. Thomas School of Law","value":2751},{"name":"University of Sydney Law School","value":3031},{"name":"University of Tennessee College of Law","value":2051},{"name":"University of the West of England, Bristol","value":3001},{"name":"University of Toledo College of Law","value":2406},{"name":"University of Toronto","value":2912},{"name":"University of Utah","value":3026},{"name":"University of Virginia School of Law","value":2410},{"name":"University of Washington School of Law","value":2412},{"name":"University of Wisconsin Law School","value":2419},{"name":"University of Wyoming College of Law","value":2429},{"name":"University of Zürich","value":3037},{"name":"University Paris Dauphine","value":2976},{"name":"University Paris II Assas","value":2975},{"name":"University Paris II Assas","value":3052},{"name":"USC Gould School of Law","value":2389},{"name":"Utrecht University","value":3085},{"name":"Valparaiso University School of Law","value":2441},{"name":"Vanderbilt University School of Law","value":2442},{"name":"Vermont Law School","value":2451},{"name":"Villanova University School of Law","value":2454},{"name":"Wake Forest University School of Law","value":2471},{"name":"Washburn University School of Law","value":2482},{"name":"Washington and Lee University School of Law","value":2484},{"name":"Washington College of Law","value":61},{"name":"Washington University in St. Louis School of Law","value":2489},{"name":"Wayne State University Law School","value":2493},{"name":"West Virginia University College of Law","value":2517},{"name":"Western New England College School of Law","value":2528},{"name":"Western State College of Law","value":2897},{"name":"Wharton School of Business","value":3044},{"name":"Whittier Law School","value":2564},{"name":"Widener University Delaware Law School","value":2569},{"name":"Willamette University College of Law","value":2573},{"name":"William \u0026 Mary Law School","value":462},{"name":"William H. Bowen School of Law","value":2150},{"name":"William Mitchell College of Law","value":2758},{"name":"William S. Boyd School of Law","value":2256},{"name":"William S. Richardson School of Law","value":2195},{"name":"Wilmington University","value":2993},{"name":"Yale Law School","value":2605}],"offices":[{"name":"Abu Dhabi","value":13},{"name":"Atlanta","value":1},{"name":"Austin","value":12},{"name":"Brussels","value":23},{"name":"Charlotte","value":8},{"name":"Chicago","value":21},{"name":"Dallas","value":28},{"name":"Denver","value":22},{"name":"Dubai","value":6},{"name":"Frankfurt","value":9},{"name":"Geneva","value":15},{"name":"Houston","value":4},{"name":"London","value":5},{"name":"Los Angeles","value":19},{"name":"Miami","value":25},{"name":"New York","value":3},{"name":"Northern Virginia","value":24},{"name":"Paris","value":14},{"name":"Riyadh","value":27},{"name":"Sacramento","value":20},{"name":"San Francisco","value":10},{"name":"Silicon Valley","value":11},{"name":"Singapore","value":16},{"name":"Sydney","value":26},{"name":"Tokyo","value":18},{"name":"Washington, D.C.","value":2}],"capabilities":[{"name":"Corporate, Finance and Investments","value":"cg-1"},{"name":"Activist Defense","value":72},{"name":"Capital Markets","value":26},{"name":"Construction and Procurement","value":40},{"name":"Corporate Governance","value":27},{"name":"Emerging Companies and Venture Capital","value":80},{"name":"Employee Benefits and Executive Compensation","value":28},{"name":"Energy and Infrastructure Projects","value":35},{"name":"Financial Restructuring","value":10},{"name":"Fund Finance","value":134},{"name":"Global Human Capital and Compliance ","value":121},{"name":"Investment Funds and Asset Management","value":78},{"name":"Leveraged Finance","value":29},{"name":"Mergers and Acquisitions (M\u0026A)","value":32},{"name":"Middle East and Islamic Finance and Investment","value":31},{"name":"Private Equity","value":33},{"name":"Public Companies","value":126},{"name":"Real Estate","value":36},{"name":"Structured Finance and Securitization","value":82},{"name":"Tax","value":37},{"name":"Technology Transactions","value":115},{"name":"Government Matters","value":"cg-2"},{"name":"Antitrust","value":1},{"name":"Data, Privacy and Security","value":6},{"name":"Environmental, Health and Safety","value":71},{"name":"FDA and Life Sciences","value":21},{"name":"Government Advocacy and Public Policy","value":23},{"name":"Government Contracts","value":116},{"name":"Healthcare","value":24},{"name":"Innovation Protection","value":135},{"name":"International Trade","value":25},{"name":"National Security and Corporate Espionage","value":110},{"name":"Securities Enforcement and Regulation","value":20},{"name":"Special Matters and Government Investigations","value":11},{"name":"Trial and Global Disputes","value":"cg-3"},{"name":"Antitrust ","value":129},{"name":"Appellate, Constitutional and Administrative Law","value":2},{"name":"Bankruptcy and Insolvency Litigation","value":38},{"name":"Class Action Defense","value":3},{"name":"Commercial Litigation","value":5},{"name":"Corporate and Securities Litigation","value":19},{"name":"E-Discovery","value":7},{"name":"Global Construction and Infrastructure Disputes","value":4},{"name":"Innovation Protection","value":136},{"name":"Intellectual Property","value":13},{"name":"International Arbitration and Litigation","value":14},{"name":"Labor and Employment","value":15},{"name":"Product Liability","value":17},{"name":"Professional Liability","value":18},{"name":"Toxic \u0026 Environmental Torts","value":16},{"name":"Industries / Issues","value":"cg-4"},{"name":"Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning","value":133},{"name":"Automotive, Transportation and Mobility","value":106},{"name":"Buy American","value":124},{"name":"Crisis Management","value":111},{"name":"Doing Business in Latin America","value":132},{"name":"Energy Transition","value":131},{"name":"Energy","value":102},{"name":"Environmental Agenda","value":125},{"name":"Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG)","value":127},{"name":"Financial Services","value":107},{"name":"Focus on Women's Health","value":112},{"name":"Food and Beverage","value":105},{"name":"Higher Education","value":109},{"name":"Life Sciences and Healthcare","value":103},{"name":"Russia/Ukraine","value":128},{"name":"Special Purpose Acquisition Companies (SPACs)","value":123},{"name":"Technology","value":118}]},"title_id":null,"school_id":null,"office_id":"25","capability_id":null,"extra_filter_id":null,"extra_filter_type":null,"q":null,"starts_with":"L","per_page":12,"people":[{"id":426372,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":3032,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eKathryn Lehman is a trial lawyer in King \u0026amp; Spalding\u0026rsquo;s Atlanta office.\u0026nbsp; She is a member of the Tort Litigation and Environmental Group.\u0026nbsp; Ms. Lehman focuses her practice on high-risk cases involving punitive damages.\u0026nbsp; She has defended clients in the consumer products, medical device, professional services, food service and transportation industries.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMs. Lehman divides her time between preparing cases for trial and trying cases.\u0026nbsp; Ms. Lehman is an expert at conducting goal-driven discovery, including fact and expert discovery.\u0026nbsp; She has spent significant time studying plaintiffs' trial strategies, so that she is able to employ those same strategies on behalf of her clients.\u0026nbsp; She leverages her trial experience to help clients achieve their goals, whether their goal is an advantageous settlement, dispositive motion or trial.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMs. Lehman has worked on trial teams that have tried more than two dozen cases to verdict over the last decade.\u0026nbsp; She is skilled at developing trial strategy, including pre-trial motions practice, voir dire, opening statement, direct and cross examination, and closing argument.\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"kathryn-lehman","email":"klehman@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":["\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eGay v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company\u003c/em\u003e (three-week trial in Hillsborough County, Florida, March 2018, defense verdict).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eKogan v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company \u003c/em\u003e(three-week trial in Palm Beach County, Florida, May-June 2017, defense verdict).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eHackimer v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company\u003c/em\u003e (three-week trial in Palm Beach County, August-September 2016, defense verdict).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eShulman v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company\u003c/em\u003e (six-week trial in Palm Beach County, Florida, October-November 2015, defense verdict).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eGray v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company\u003c/em\u003e (three-week trial in Escambia County, Florida, May 2015, defense verdict).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eWebb v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company\u003c/em\u003e (two-week re-trial of amount of compensatory and punitive damages only in Levy County, Florida, November 2014, original verdict amount reduced by 98%).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eBanks v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company\u003c/em\u003e (four-week trial in Broward County, Florida, February 2014, defense verdict).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eClark v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company\u003c/em\u003e (two-week trial in Alachua County, Florida, June 2013, defense verdict).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eIn Re: Tobacco Litigation (Individual Personal Injury Cases)\u003c/em\u003e (five-week mass tort trial in West Virginia, April-May 2013).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCumbess v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company\u003c/em\u003e (three-week trial in Suwanee County, Florida, November-December 2012, defense verdict).\u003c/p\u003e"],"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[]},"expertise":[{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":764,"guid":"764.smart_tags","index":1,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":17,"guid":"17.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":16,"guid":"16.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":112,"guid":"112.capabilities","index":4,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":1202,"guid":"1202.smart_tags","index":5,"source":"smartTags"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Lehman","nick_name":"Kathryn","clerkships":[],"first_name":"Kathryn","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":101,"law_schools":[],"middle_name":"S.","name_suffix":"","recognitions":null,"linked_in_url":null,"seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eKathryn Lehman is a trial lawyer in King \u0026amp; Spalding\u0026rsquo;s Atlanta office.\u0026nbsp; She is a member of the Tort Litigation and Environmental Group.\u0026nbsp; Ms. Lehman focuses her practice on high-risk cases involving punitive damages.\u0026nbsp; She has defended clients in the consumer products, medical device, professional services, food service and transportation industries.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMs. Lehman divides her time between preparing cases for trial and trying cases.\u0026nbsp; Ms. Lehman is an expert at conducting goal-driven discovery, including fact and expert discovery.\u0026nbsp; She has spent significant time studying plaintiffs' trial strategies, so that she is able to employ those same strategies on behalf of her clients.\u0026nbsp; She leverages her trial experience to help clients achieve their goals, whether their goal is an advantageous settlement, dispositive motion or trial.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMs. Lehman has worked on trial teams that have tried more than two dozen cases to verdict over the last decade.\u0026nbsp; She is skilled at developing trial strategy, including pre-trial motions practice, voir dire, opening statement, direct and cross examination, and closing argument.\u003c/p\u003e","matters":["\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eGay v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company\u003c/em\u003e (three-week trial in Hillsborough County, Florida, March 2018, defense verdict).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eKogan v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company \u003c/em\u003e(three-week trial in Palm Beach County, Florida, May-June 2017, defense verdict).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eHackimer v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company\u003c/em\u003e (three-week trial in Palm Beach County, August-September 2016, defense verdict).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eShulman v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company\u003c/em\u003e (six-week trial in Palm Beach County, Florida, October-November 2015, defense verdict).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eGray v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company\u003c/em\u003e (three-week trial in Escambia County, Florida, May 2015, defense verdict).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eWebb v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company\u003c/em\u003e (two-week re-trial of amount of compensatory and punitive damages only in Levy County, Florida, November 2014, original verdict amount reduced by 98%).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eBanks v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company\u003c/em\u003e (four-week trial in Broward County, Florida, February 2014, defense verdict).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eClark v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company\u003c/em\u003e (two-week trial in Alachua County, Florida, June 2013, defense verdict).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eIn Re: Tobacco Litigation (Individual Personal Injury Cases)\u003c/em\u003e (five-week mass tort trial in West Virginia, April-May 2013).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCumbess v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company\u003c/em\u003e (three-week trial in Suwanee County, Florida, November-December 2012, defense verdict).\u003c/p\u003e"]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":991}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2025-05-26T04:52:01.000Z","updated_at":"2025-05-26T04:52:01.000Z","searchable_text":"Lehman{{ FIELD }}Gay v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company (three-week trial in Hillsborough County, Florida, March 2018, defense verdict).{{ FIELD }}Kogan v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company (three-week trial in Palm Beach County, Florida, May-June 2017, defense verdict).{{ FIELD }}Hackimer v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company (three-week trial in Palm Beach County, August-September 2016, defense verdict).{{ FIELD }}Shulman v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company (six-week trial in Palm Beach County, Florida, October-November 2015, defense verdict).{{ FIELD }}Gray v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company (three-week trial in Escambia County, Florida, May 2015, defense verdict).{{ FIELD }}Webb v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company (two-week re-trial of amount of compensatory and punitive damages only in Levy County, Florida, November 2014, original verdict amount reduced by 98%).{{ FIELD }}Banks v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company (four-week trial in Broward County, Florida, February 2014, defense verdict).{{ FIELD }}Clark v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company (two-week trial in Alachua County, Florida, June 2013, defense verdict).{{ FIELD }}In Re: Tobacco Litigation (Individual Personal Injury Cases) (five-week mass tort trial in West Virginia, April-May 2013).{{ FIELD }}Cumbess v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company (three-week trial in Suwanee County, Florida, November-December 2012, defense verdict).{{ FIELD }}Kathryn Lehman is a trial lawyer in King \u0026amp; Spalding’s Atlanta office.  She is a member of the Tort Litigation and Environmental Group.  Ms. Lehman focuses her practice on high-risk cases involving punitive damages.  She has defended clients in the consumer products, medical device, professional services, food service and transportation industries.\nMs. Lehman divides her time between preparing cases for trial and trying cases.  Ms. Lehman is an expert at conducting goal-driven discovery, including fact and expert discovery.  She has spent significant time studying plaintiffs' trial strategies, so that she is able to employ those same strategies on behalf of her clients.  She leverages her trial experience to help clients achieve their goals, whether their goal is an advantageous settlement, dispositive motion or trial. \nMs. Lehman has worked on trial teams that have tried more than two dozen cases to verdict over the last decade.  She is skilled at developing trial strategy, including pre-trial motions practice, voir dire, opening statement, direct and cross examination, and closing argument. Partner North Carolina State University  University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill University of North Carolina School of Law Supreme Court of the United States U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina U.S. District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina U.S. District Court for the Western District of North Carolina U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida Florida Georgia Massachusetts North Carolina Nevada Gay v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company (three-week trial in Hillsborough County, Florida, March 2018, defense verdict). Kogan v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company (three-week trial in Palm Beach County, Florida, May-June 2017, defense verdict). Hackimer v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company (three-week trial in Palm Beach County, August-September 2016, defense verdict). Shulman v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company (six-week trial in Palm Beach County, Florida, October-November 2015, defense verdict). Gray v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company (three-week trial in Escambia County, Florida, May 2015, defense verdict). Webb v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company (two-week re-trial of amount of compensatory and punitive damages only in Levy County, Florida, November 2014, original verdict amount reduced by 98%). Banks v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company (four-week trial in Broward County, Florida, February 2014, defense verdict). Clark v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company (two-week trial in Alachua County, Florida, June 2013, defense verdict). In Re: Tobacco Litigation (Individual Personal Injury Cases) (five-week mass tort trial in West Virginia, April-May 2013). Cumbess v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company (three-week trial in Suwanee County, Florida, November-December 2012, defense verdict).","searchable_name":"Kathryn S. Lehman","is_active":true,"featured":null,"publish_date":null,"expiration_date":null,"blog_featured":null,"published_by":101,"capability_group_featured":null,"home_page_featured":null},{"id":446905,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":2722,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eVal Leppert is a legal strategist and first-chair appellate lawyer. Recognized by\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eChambers \u0026amp; Partners\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;as \"an accomplished appellate litigator,\" Val has obtained the reversal or vacatur of numerous adverse judgments\u0026nbsp;and has also prevailed in dozens of other matters. He has represented businesses across an array of industries, including airline, automotive, energy, healthcare, insurance, private equity, real estate, technology, and transportation. But Val\u0026nbsp;has developed particular expertise in consumer products, having worked extensively in tobacco litigation while also representing companies in matters pertaining to alcohol, construction materials, and talcum powder.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eLegal 500\u003c/em\u003e has recommended Val\u0026nbsp;for the defense of consumer products, including for \u0026ldquo;his appellate skills\" as documented by his \"string of notable appellate victories, saving [his clients] significant financial burdens.\"\u0026nbsp;[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn some matters, Val steps into the case on appeal.\u0026nbsp; But in most instances, Val works alongside the trial teams from the inception of the case, devising the legal strategy from the pleadings stage through post-trial motions and appeal.\u0026nbsp;Using this format, he frequently develops new and creative arguments and has secured a number of victories in pretrial proceedings, such as the dismissal of his clients before trial or limitations on the other side\u0026rsquo;s claims.\u0026nbsp; If a case makes it to trial, Val often serves as legal issues counsel, helping the team shape the case by obtaining favorable evidentiary rulings or jury instructions. This integrated approach, where Val is embedded with the trial team, is frequently the foundation for success in post-trial and appellate proceedings.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAlthough he is resident in the firm\u0026rsquo;s Atlanta and Miami offices, Val works on cases throughout the United States.\u0026nbsp; He has argued matters from Pittsburgh (Pa) to Portland (Or)\u0026nbsp;and from St. Paul (Minn) all the way down to the Southernmost courthouse in the Florida Keys.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eVal served as law clerk to the Honorable Frank M. Hull, United States Circuit Judge for the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals.\u0026nbsp; He graduated, magna cum laude, from Mercer University School of Law where he received the George W. Woodruff Award of Excellence as the top-ranked student in his class.\u0026nbsp; While in law school, Val served as Articles Editor of the Mercer Law Review and as Research Assistant to Professor Harold S. Lewis, Jr.\u0026nbsp; While in college, he was named the 2004 Upper Midwest Athletic Conference South Most Valuable Player on Offense after quarterbacking Westminster College (Mo) to consecutive football conference championships.\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; He was inducted into the Westminster Athletic Hall of Fame in 2019.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eVal is a native of Frankfurt, Germany, and is fluent in German.\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"valentin-leppert","email":"vleppert@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":["\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented automotive company: supported trial team in obtaining complete defense verdict in high-risk auto defect case.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eShneyer v. Volkswagen Group of America, Inc.\u003c/em\u003e, Case No. CGC-23-605454 (Superior Ct., County of San Francisco, Ca., Dec. 2025).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-product company: obtained rarely granted writ of mandamus to quash order requiring payment of sanction.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eR.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Eighth Judicial District in and for County of Clark\u003c/em\u003e, 580 P.3d 1286 (Nev. 2025).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented medical-device company: obtained dismissal with prejudice by convincing appellate court to reverse denial of motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction in Medicare Secondary Payer Act case.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eColoplast Corp. v. MSP Recovery Claims, LLC\u003c/em\u003e, 415 So. 3d 353 (Fla. 3d DCA 2025).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-products company: obtained appellate affirmance of defense verdict in product liability case over plaintiff's challenge to jury selection procedure.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eSikes v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.\u003c/em\u003e, 415 So. 3d 235 (Fla. 3d DCA 2025).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented law firm: obtained rarely granted writ of certiorari to quash adverse trial court order.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eIn re Residences at the Bath Club Condominium Association\u003c/em\u003e, 413 So. 3d 950 (Fla. 3d DCA 2025).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-products company: obtained appellate affirmance of defense victory in product liability case over plaintiff's challenge to special jury instruction.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eNeff v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co\u003c/em\u003e., 406 So. 3d 1063 (Fla. 4th DCA 2025)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented healthcare company: assisted trial team in obtaining defense verdict in consumer product trial.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eFelton v. Johnson \u0026amp; Johnson\u003c/em\u003e, No. GD 23-008055 (Pa. Ct. Comm. Pleas, Allegheny Cnty 2025) (appeal pending)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented healthcare company: obtained new trial and vacatur of $260 million jury award in light of attorney misconduct.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eLee v. Johnson \u0026amp; Johnson\u003c/em\u003e, Case No. 23-CV-40369 (Circuit Court, Multnomah County, Oregon, Nov. 25, 2024) (appeal pending).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented marketing organization: obtained 9-0 state high court victory reversing lower court decisions that had invalidated non-recruitment clause for lack of territorial term in business dispute\u003cem\u003e. North American Senior Benefits v. Wimmer\u003c/em\u003e, 319 Ga. 641, 906 S.E. 2d 373 (2024).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented pharmaceutical company: obtained dismissal with prejudice of claims of negligent marketing and negligent storage of medication.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eAnsel v. Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc, et al\u003c/em\u003e, No. CACE22014165 (Fla. 17th Cir. Ct. 2024)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented Italian car manufacturer: obtained dismissal of product liability case for lack of personal jurisdiction.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eVon Eisenberg v. Automobili Lamborghini, S.p.A\u003c/em\u003e, No. CACE-22-014881 (27) (Fla. 17th Cir. Ct. 2024).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented British car manufacturer: obtained dismissal of product liability case for lack of personal jurisdiction.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eVon Eisenberg v. Bentley Motors Limited,\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;No. CACE-22-014881 (27) (Fla. 17th Cir. Ct. 2024).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-product company: obtained appellate affirmance of trial court order denying request to add a claim for punitive damages.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eHartbauer v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co\u003c/em\u003e., 391 So. 3d 1015 (Fla. 5th DCA 2024).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented healthcare company: obtained summary judgment on claim for punitive damages and then supported trial team in obtaining complete defense verdict on remaining claims.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eMatthey v. Johnson \u0026amp; Johnson\u003c/em\u003e, No. 2018-CA-004809-NC (Fla. 12th Cir. Ct. 2024).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-product company: supported trial team in obtaining defense verdict in product case.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eHarcourt v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco,\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;No. CACE-17-20297 (08) (Fla. 17th Cir. Ct. 2024)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented US Chamber of Commerce as amicus curiae: provided amicus support for appellate reversal of certification of nationwide PFAS class in Sixth Circuit Court of Appeal.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eIn re E. I. du Pont de Nemours \u0026amp; Co. C-8 Pers. Injury Litig.\u003c/em\u003e, 87 F.4th 315 (6th Cir. 2023).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented medical-device company: obtained appellate affirmance of summary judgment in product case based on the exclusion of the plaintiff's key expert testimony.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eCantrell v. Coloplast Corp\u003c/em\u003e., 76 F.4th 1113 (8th Cir. 2023).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented medical-device company: supported trial team in obtaining a complete defense verdict in high-risk product liability case.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eCho v. Shashoua et al\u003c/em\u003e, No. D-1-GN-20-002000 (Travis County, Texas 2023).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented pharmaceutical company: obtained dismissal with prejudice of novel claim of conspiracy between drug manufacturers.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eValdes v. Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc\u003c/em\u003e., No. 2021-021945-CA-01 (Fla. 11th Cir. Ct. 2023).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented Brazilian Airline: obtained appellate affirmance of defense victory in complex business dispute. Z\u003cem\u003eGA Aircraft Leasing, Inc. v. Webjet Linhas Aereas, S.A\u003c/em\u003e., 366 So. 3d 1164 (Fla. 3d DCA 2023).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-product company: obtained summary judgment on fraud claims in product liability case.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eSikes v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.\u003c/em\u003e, No. 2008-00310-CA-27 (Fla. 11th Cir. Ct. 2023).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented multinational financial group: obtained complete appellate victory in complex business dispute involving mortgage-backed securities; secured affirmance of summary judgment on several breach of contract, fraud, and RICO claims; secured reversal of denial of summary judgment on unique fraud theory.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eOverlook Gardens Properties v. ORIX, USA\u003c/em\u003e, 884 S.E.2d 433 (Ga. App. 2023).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented medical-device company: obtained appellate affirmance of dismissal of pure bill of discovery for lack of personal jurisdiction in secondary payor claim.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eMSP Recovery Claims, Series LLC v. Coloplast Corp.\u003c/em\u003e, 353 So. 3d 705 (Fla. 3d DCA 2023).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented medical device company: obtained appellate affirmance of summary judgment based on the exclusion of the plaintiff's specific causation expert in medical device lawsuit.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eArevalo v. Mentor Worldwide LLC,\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e21-11768, --- F. App'x---, 2022 WL 16753646 (11th Cir. Nov. 8, 2022)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-product company: obtained summary judgment on all claims in product-liability case.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eCamacho v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.\u003c/em\u003e, No. A-19-807650-C (Clark County, Nev., 2022).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented medical-device company: obtained summary judgment on all claims in product liability case based on exclusion of plaintiff's causation expert.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eJames v. Coloplast Corp\u003c/em\u003e., CV 20-654 (JRT/TNL), 2022 WL 4465956 (D. Minn. Sept. 26, 2022).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented US Chamber of Commerce as amicus curiae; provided amicus support for successful Rule 23(f) petition for appellate review of certification in nationwide PFAS class action.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eIn re E.I. DuPont de Nemours \u0026amp; Co. C-8 Pers. Injury Litig\u003c/em\u003e., 22-0305, 2022 WL 4149090 (6th Cir. Sept. 9, 2022).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-product company: obtained dismissal of clams for fraud, failure-to-warn, and negligent design and supported trial team in obtaining favorable result on remaining claim.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003ePhelps v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co\u003c/em\u003e., No. 2020-005579-CA-01 (Fla. 11th Cir. 2022).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented medical-device company: obtained summary judgment on all claims in product liability case.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eCantrell v. Coloplast Corp\u003c/em\u003e., 2022 WL 2806390 (D. Minn. July 18, 2022).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-product company: obtained appellate reversal of multi-million dollar judgment based on amendment of tort reform statute in product-liability case.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eR.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Kaplan Estate of Kapla\u003c/em\u003en, 336 So. 3d 309 (Fla. 4th DCA 2022) (per curiam)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-product company: obtained appellate reversal of judgment that included $20 million in punitive damages in product liability case.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eR.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Mattson Estate of Konzelman\u003c/em\u003e, 336 So. 3d 315 (Fla. 4th DCA 2022) (per curiam)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-product company: obtained appellate reversal of $42.5 million judgment in light of error during jury selection.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eR.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Gloger\u003c/em\u003e, 338 So. 3d 977 (Fla. 3d DCA 2022)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented Danish medical-device company: obtained dismissal of foreign parent company for lack of personal jurisdiction.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eRogers v. Coloplast Corp\u003c/em\u003e., 2022 WL 252420 (M.D. Fla. Jan. 27, 2022)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented pro-bono client: obtained appellate reversal of dismissal of habeas claim based on ineffective assistance of counsel.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eDavila v. United States\u003c/em\u003e, 21-11359-V, 2022 WL 1236828 (11th Cir. Jan. 5, 2022)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-product company: obtained appellate reversal of $10 million judgment in light of improper closing arguments.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eR.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Neff\u003c/em\u003e, 325 So. 3d 872 (Fla. 4th DCA 2021),\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003ereview denied\u003c/em\u003e, SC21-1603, 2022 WL 1261381 (Fla. Apr. 28, 2022)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-product company: obtained appellate reversal of $37.5 million judgment in light of improper closing arguments.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eR.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Mahfuz\u003c/em\u003e, 324 So. 3d 495 (Fla. 4th DCA 2021),\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003ereview denied\u003c/em\u003e, SC21-1551, 2022 WL 1153496 (Fla. Apr. 19, 2022)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented Danish medical-device company: obtained dismissal of foreign parent company for lack of personal jurisdiction.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eAlmond v. Coloplast A/S\u003c/em\u003e, 2021 WL 2042659 (M.D. Fla. May 21, 2021)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-product company: obtained appellate affirmance of defense verdict in high-risk trial after obtaining an adverse inference instruction.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eAdamson v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co\u003c/em\u003e., 325 So. 3d 887 (Fla. 4th DCA 2021),\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003ereview denied\u003c/em\u003e, SC21-1210, 2021 WL 6140352 (Fla. Dec. 30, 2021)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer product company: obtained appellate reversal of $16 million in light of improper jury instruction.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eR.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Bessent-Dixon\u003c/em\u003e, 313 So. 3d 173 (Fla. 1st DCA 2021)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented medical device company: obtained summary judgment on failure to warn claims and on punitive damages in product liability case.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eNunez v. Coloplast Corp\u003c/em\u003e., 461 F. Supp. 3d 1260 (S.D. Fla. 2020).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-product: obtained appellate reversal of $18.5 million judgment in light of improperly admitted evidence.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003ePhilip Morris USA, Inc. v. Gloger\u003c/em\u003e, 273 So. 3d 1046 (Fla. 3d DCA 2019)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-product company: obtained rarely granted appellate writ to disqualify the trial judge from a number of cases.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eR.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Alonso\u003c/em\u003e, 268 So. 3d 151 (Fla. 4th DCA 2019).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-product company: obtained reversal of punitive damages award in light of novel argument under tort reform statute.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003ePhilip Morris USA Inc. v. Martin\u003c/em\u003e, 262 So. 3d 769 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-product company: obtained order granting new trial and vacating multi-million judgment in light of improper arguments; obtained appellate affirmance of same order.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eOshinsky-Blacker v. Philip Morris USA Inc\u003c/em\u003e., 249 So. 3d 643 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018) (per curiam)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-product company: obtained transfer of venue from high-risk county to lower risk venue; then obtained appellate affirmance of same.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eMuro v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.\u003c/em\u003e, 245 So. 3d 1010 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018) (per curiam)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-product company: obtained summary judgment based on statute of limitations in product-liability case.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eGuarch v. Philip Morris USA Inc\u003c/em\u003e., No. 02-03308-CA-22 (Fla. 11th Cir. 2018).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-product company: supported trial team in obtaining complete defense verdict.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eGay v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co\u003c/em\u003e., No. 2007-14649 (Fla. 13th Cir. Ct. 2018)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-product company: obtained appellate affirmance of defense verdict based on statute of limitations.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eHackimer v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co\u003c/em\u003e., 244 So. 3d 270 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-product company: supported trial team in obtaining complete defense verdict.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eMobley\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003ev. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co\u003c/em\u003e., No. 2007-CA-1709-K (Fla. 16th Cir. Ct. 2018)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-product company: supported trial team in obtaining defense verdict on statute of limitations.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eOrtiz v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co\u003c/em\u003e., No. 08-00084-CA08 (Fla. 11th Cir. 2018)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessful represented consumer-product company: obtained appellate reversal of $10.5 million judgment in light of erroneously admitted government reports.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eR.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. McCoy\u003c/em\u003e, 229 So. 3d 847 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017) (per curiam)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-product company: obtained appellate reversal of $10 million judgment in light of erroneously admitted government reports.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003ePhilip Morris USA, Inc. v. Pollari\u003c/em\u003e, 228 So. 3d 115, 119 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-product company: obtained summary judgment in product liability case.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eCapone v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. et al\u003c/em\u003e., No. 2005-010312-CA-24 (Fla. 11th Cir. Ct. 2017)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-product company: obtained appellate affirmance of defense verdict based on statute of limitations.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eHaliburton v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co\u003c/em\u003e., 230 So. 3d 459 (Fla. 4th DCA Feb. 22, 2017) (per curiam)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-product company: supported trial team in obtaining complete defense verdict.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eWilkins v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co\u003c/em\u003e., No. 15-2007-CA-20 (Fla. 11th Cir. Ct. 2016)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-product company: obtained appellate reversal of seven-figure award in attorney fees.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eR.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Webb\u003c/em\u003e, 187 So. 3d 388 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-product company: supported trial team in obtaining complete defense verdict in high-risk tobacco trial.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eRobertson v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co\u003c/em\u003e., No. 2007-CV-036442 (Fla. 17th Cir. Ct. 2015)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-product company: obtained state high-court affirmance of defense victory in product liability case.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eSmith v. Brown \u0026amp; Williamson Corp.\u003c/em\u003e, 410 S.W. 3d 623 (Mo. 2013)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-product company: obtained summary judgment in product liability case.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eThompson v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co\u003c/em\u003e., 12-01326-CV-W-GAF, 2013 WL 12075967 (W.D. Mo. May 29, 2013)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented manufacturer of construction materials: obtained state high-court reversal of summary judgment on nonparty fault defense in product-liability case.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eGeorgia Pacific, LLC v. Fields\u003c/em\u003e, 293 Ga. 499, 748 S.E. 2d 407 (2013)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer product company: supported trial team in obtaining an almost complete defense verdict in common-issues phase of mass-tort trial.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eIn re: Tobacco Litigation (Individual Personal Injury Cases)\u003c/em\u003e, No. 00-CA-5000 (Kanawha County, West Va., 2013)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented beverage company: obtained dismissal of mass action against alcohol manufacturers for lack of jurisdiction.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eOglala Sioux Tribe v. Schwarting\u003c/em\u003e, 894 F. Supp. 2d 1195 (D. Neb. 2012)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented manufacturer of construction materials: obtained appellate affirmance of defense victory in product-liability case.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eToole v. Georgia-Pacific, LLC\u003c/em\u003e, 2011 WL 7938847 (Ga. App. Jan 19, 2011)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-product company: obtained rarely granted stay of state court judgment pending US Supreme Court review in product-liability class action.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003ePhilip Morris USA Inc. v. Scott\u003c/em\u003e, 131 S. Ct. 1 (2010) (Scalia, J., in chambers)\u003c/p\u003e"],"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[]},"expertise":[{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":2,"guid":"2.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":764,"guid":"764.smart_tags","index":2,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":970,"guid":"970.smart_tags","index":3,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":1303,"guid":"1303.smart_tags","index":4,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":762,"guid":"762.smart_tags","index":5,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":761,"guid":"761.smart_tags","index":6,"source":"smartTags"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Leppert","nick_name":"Val","clerkships":[{"name":"Law Clerk, Frank M. Hull, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit","years_held":"2013 - 2014"}],"first_name":"Val","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":202,"law_schools":[],"middle_name":" ","name_suffix":"","recognitions":null,"linked_in_url":null,"seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eVal Leppert is a legal strategist and first-chair appellate lawyer. Recognized by\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eChambers \u0026amp; Partners\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;as \"an accomplished appellate litigator,\" Val has obtained the reversal or vacatur of numerous adverse judgments\u0026nbsp;and has also prevailed in dozens of other matters. He has represented businesses across an array of industries, including airline, automotive, energy, healthcare, insurance, private equity, real estate, technology, and transportation. But Val\u0026nbsp;has developed particular expertise in consumer products, having worked extensively in tobacco litigation while also representing companies in matters pertaining to alcohol, construction materials, and talcum powder.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eLegal 500\u003c/em\u003e has recommended Val\u0026nbsp;for the defense of consumer products, including for \u0026ldquo;his appellate skills\" as documented by his \"string of notable appellate victories, saving [his clients] significant financial burdens.\"\u0026nbsp;[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn some matters, Val steps into the case on appeal.\u0026nbsp; But in most instances, Val works alongside the trial teams from the inception of the case, devising the legal strategy from the pleadings stage through post-trial motions and appeal.\u0026nbsp;Using this format, he frequently develops new and creative arguments and has secured a number of victories in pretrial proceedings, such as the dismissal of his clients before trial or limitations on the other side\u0026rsquo;s claims.\u0026nbsp; If a case makes it to trial, Val often serves as legal issues counsel, helping the team shape the case by obtaining favorable evidentiary rulings or jury instructions. This integrated approach, where Val is embedded with the trial team, is frequently the foundation for success in post-trial and appellate proceedings.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAlthough he is resident in the firm\u0026rsquo;s Atlanta and Miami offices, Val works on cases throughout the United States.\u0026nbsp; He has argued matters from Pittsburgh (Pa) to Portland (Or)\u0026nbsp;and from St. Paul (Minn) all the way down to the Southernmost courthouse in the Florida Keys.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eVal served as law clerk to the Honorable Frank M. Hull, United States Circuit Judge for the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals.\u0026nbsp; He graduated, magna cum laude, from Mercer University School of Law where he received the George W. Woodruff Award of Excellence as the top-ranked student in his class.\u0026nbsp; While in law school, Val served as Articles Editor of the Mercer Law Review and as Research Assistant to Professor Harold S. Lewis, Jr.\u0026nbsp; While in college, he was named the 2004 Upper Midwest Athletic Conference South Most Valuable Player on Offense after quarterbacking Westminster College (Mo) to consecutive football conference championships.\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; He was inducted into the Westminster Athletic Hall of Fame in 2019.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eVal is a native of Frankfurt, Germany, and is fluent in German.\u003c/p\u003e","matters":["\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented automotive company: supported trial team in obtaining complete defense verdict in high-risk auto defect case.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eShneyer v. Volkswagen Group of America, Inc.\u003c/em\u003e, Case No. CGC-23-605454 (Superior Ct., County of San Francisco, Ca., Dec. 2025).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-product company: obtained rarely granted writ of mandamus to quash order requiring payment of sanction.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eR.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Eighth Judicial District in and for County of Clark\u003c/em\u003e, 580 P.3d 1286 (Nev. 2025).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented medical-device company: obtained dismissal with prejudice by convincing appellate court to reverse denial of motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction in Medicare Secondary Payer Act case.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eColoplast Corp. v. MSP Recovery Claims, LLC\u003c/em\u003e, 415 So. 3d 353 (Fla. 3d DCA 2025).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-products company: obtained appellate affirmance of defense verdict in product liability case over plaintiff's challenge to jury selection procedure.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eSikes v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.\u003c/em\u003e, 415 So. 3d 235 (Fla. 3d DCA 2025).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented law firm: obtained rarely granted writ of certiorari to quash adverse trial court order.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eIn re Residences at the Bath Club Condominium Association\u003c/em\u003e, 413 So. 3d 950 (Fla. 3d DCA 2025).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-products company: obtained appellate affirmance of defense victory in product liability case over plaintiff's challenge to special jury instruction.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eNeff v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co\u003c/em\u003e., 406 So. 3d 1063 (Fla. 4th DCA 2025)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented healthcare company: assisted trial team in obtaining defense verdict in consumer product trial.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eFelton v. Johnson \u0026amp; Johnson\u003c/em\u003e, No. GD 23-008055 (Pa. Ct. Comm. Pleas, Allegheny Cnty 2025) (appeal pending)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented healthcare company: obtained new trial and vacatur of $260 million jury award in light of attorney misconduct.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eLee v. Johnson \u0026amp; Johnson\u003c/em\u003e, Case No. 23-CV-40369 (Circuit Court, Multnomah County, Oregon, Nov. 25, 2024) (appeal pending).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented marketing organization: obtained 9-0 state high court victory reversing lower court decisions that had invalidated non-recruitment clause for lack of territorial term in business dispute\u003cem\u003e. North American Senior Benefits v. Wimmer\u003c/em\u003e, 319 Ga. 641, 906 S.E. 2d 373 (2024).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented pharmaceutical company: obtained dismissal with prejudice of claims of negligent marketing and negligent storage of medication.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eAnsel v. Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc, et al\u003c/em\u003e, No. CACE22014165 (Fla. 17th Cir. Ct. 2024)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented Italian car manufacturer: obtained dismissal of product liability case for lack of personal jurisdiction.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eVon Eisenberg v. Automobili Lamborghini, S.p.A\u003c/em\u003e, No. CACE-22-014881 (27) (Fla. 17th Cir. Ct. 2024).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented British car manufacturer: obtained dismissal of product liability case for lack of personal jurisdiction.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eVon Eisenberg v. Bentley Motors Limited,\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;No. CACE-22-014881 (27) (Fla. 17th Cir. Ct. 2024).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-product company: obtained appellate affirmance of trial court order denying request to add a claim for punitive damages.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eHartbauer v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co\u003c/em\u003e., 391 So. 3d 1015 (Fla. 5th DCA 2024).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented healthcare company: obtained summary judgment on claim for punitive damages and then supported trial team in obtaining complete defense verdict on remaining claims.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eMatthey v. Johnson \u0026amp; Johnson\u003c/em\u003e, No. 2018-CA-004809-NC (Fla. 12th Cir. Ct. 2024).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-product company: supported trial team in obtaining defense verdict in product case.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eHarcourt v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco,\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;No. CACE-17-20297 (08) (Fla. 17th Cir. Ct. 2024)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented US Chamber of Commerce as amicus curiae: provided amicus support for appellate reversal of certification of nationwide PFAS class in Sixth Circuit Court of Appeal.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eIn re E. I. du Pont de Nemours \u0026amp; Co. C-8 Pers. Injury Litig.\u003c/em\u003e, 87 F.4th 315 (6th Cir. 2023).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented medical-device company: obtained appellate affirmance of summary judgment in product case based on the exclusion of the plaintiff's key expert testimony.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eCantrell v. Coloplast Corp\u003c/em\u003e., 76 F.4th 1113 (8th Cir. 2023).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented medical-device company: supported trial team in obtaining a complete defense verdict in high-risk product liability case.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eCho v. Shashoua et al\u003c/em\u003e, No. D-1-GN-20-002000 (Travis County, Texas 2023).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented pharmaceutical company: obtained dismissal with prejudice of novel claim of conspiracy between drug manufacturers.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eValdes v. Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc\u003c/em\u003e., No. 2021-021945-CA-01 (Fla. 11th Cir. Ct. 2023).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented Brazilian Airline: obtained appellate affirmance of defense victory in complex business dispute. Z\u003cem\u003eGA Aircraft Leasing, Inc. v. Webjet Linhas Aereas, S.A\u003c/em\u003e., 366 So. 3d 1164 (Fla. 3d DCA 2023).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-product company: obtained summary judgment on fraud claims in product liability case.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eSikes v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.\u003c/em\u003e, No. 2008-00310-CA-27 (Fla. 11th Cir. Ct. 2023).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented multinational financial group: obtained complete appellate victory in complex business dispute involving mortgage-backed securities; secured affirmance of summary judgment on several breach of contract, fraud, and RICO claims; secured reversal of denial of summary judgment on unique fraud theory.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eOverlook Gardens Properties v. ORIX, USA\u003c/em\u003e, 884 S.E.2d 433 (Ga. App. 2023).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented medical-device company: obtained appellate affirmance of dismissal of pure bill of discovery for lack of personal jurisdiction in secondary payor claim.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eMSP Recovery Claims, Series LLC v. Coloplast Corp.\u003c/em\u003e, 353 So. 3d 705 (Fla. 3d DCA 2023).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented medical device company: obtained appellate affirmance of summary judgment based on the exclusion of the plaintiff's specific causation expert in medical device lawsuit.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eArevalo v. Mentor Worldwide LLC,\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e21-11768, --- F. App'x---, 2022 WL 16753646 (11th Cir. Nov. 8, 2022)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-product company: obtained summary judgment on all claims in product-liability case.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eCamacho v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.\u003c/em\u003e, No. A-19-807650-C (Clark County, Nev., 2022).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented medical-device company: obtained summary judgment on all claims in product liability case based on exclusion of plaintiff's causation expert.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eJames v. Coloplast Corp\u003c/em\u003e., CV 20-654 (JRT/TNL), 2022 WL 4465956 (D. Minn. Sept. 26, 2022).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented US Chamber of Commerce as amicus curiae; provided amicus support for successful Rule 23(f) petition for appellate review of certification in nationwide PFAS class action.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eIn re E.I. DuPont de Nemours \u0026amp; Co. C-8 Pers. Injury Litig\u003c/em\u003e., 22-0305, 2022 WL 4149090 (6th Cir. Sept. 9, 2022).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-product company: obtained dismissal of clams for fraud, failure-to-warn, and negligent design and supported trial team in obtaining favorable result on remaining claim.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003ePhelps v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co\u003c/em\u003e., No. 2020-005579-CA-01 (Fla. 11th Cir. 2022).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented medical-device company: obtained summary judgment on all claims in product liability case.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eCantrell v. Coloplast Corp\u003c/em\u003e., 2022 WL 2806390 (D. Minn. July 18, 2022).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-product company: obtained appellate reversal of multi-million dollar judgment based on amendment of tort reform statute in product-liability case.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eR.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Kaplan Estate of Kapla\u003c/em\u003en, 336 So. 3d 309 (Fla. 4th DCA 2022) (per curiam)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-product company: obtained appellate reversal of judgment that included $20 million in punitive damages in product liability case.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eR.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Mattson Estate of Konzelman\u003c/em\u003e, 336 So. 3d 315 (Fla. 4th DCA 2022) (per curiam)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-product company: obtained appellate reversal of $42.5 million judgment in light of error during jury selection.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eR.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Gloger\u003c/em\u003e, 338 So. 3d 977 (Fla. 3d DCA 2022)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented Danish medical-device company: obtained dismissal of foreign parent company for lack of personal jurisdiction.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eRogers v. Coloplast Corp\u003c/em\u003e., 2022 WL 252420 (M.D. Fla. Jan. 27, 2022)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented pro-bono client: obtained appellate reversal of dismissal of habeas claim based on ineffective assistance of counsel.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eDavila v. United States\u003c/em\u003e, 21-11359-V, 2022 WL 1236828 (11th Cir. Jan. 5, 2022)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-product company: obtained appellate reversal of $10 million judgment in light of improper closing arguments.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eR.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Neff\u003c/em\u003e, 325 So. 3d 872 (Fla. 4th DCA 2021),\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003ereview denied\u003c/em\u003e, SC21-1603, 2022 WL 1261381 (Fla. Apr. 28, 2022)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-product company: obtained appellate reversal of $37.5 million judgment in light of improper closing arguments.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eR.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Mahfuz\u003c/em\u003e, 324 So. 3d 495 (Fla. 4th DCA 2021),\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003ereview denied\u003c/em\u003e, SC21-1551, 2022 WL 1153496 (Fla. Apr. 19, 2022)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented Danish medical-device company: obtained dismissal of foreign parent company for lack of personal jurisdiction.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eAlmond v. Coloplast A/S\u003c/em\u003e, 2021 WL 2042659 (M.D. Fla. May 21, 2021)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-product company: obtained appellate affirmance of defense verdict in high-risk trial after obtaining an adverse inference instruction.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eAdamson v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co\u003c/em\u003e., 325 So. 3d 887 (Fla. 4th DCA 2021),\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003ereview denied\u003c/em\u003e, SC21-1210, 2021 WL 6140352 (Fla. Dec. 30, 2021)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer product company: obtained appellate reversal of $16 million in light of improper jury instruction.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eR.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Bessent-Dixon\u003c/em\u003e, 313 So. 3d 173 (Fla. 1st DCA 2021)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented medical device company: obtained summary judgment on failure to warn claims and on punitive damages in product liability case.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eNunez v. Coloplast Corp\u003c/em\u003e., 461 F. Supp. 3d 1260 (S.D. Fla. 2020).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-product: obtained appellate reversal of $18.5 million judgment in light of improperly admitted evidence.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003ePhilip Morris USA, Inc. v. Gloger\u003c/em\u003e, 273 So. 3d 1046 (Fla. 3d DCA 2019)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-product company: obtained rarely granted appellate writ to disqualify the trial judge from a number of cases.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eR.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Alonso\u003c/em\u003e, 268 So. 3d 151 (Fla. 4th DCA 2019).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-product company: obtained reversal of punitive damages award in light of novel argument under tort reform statute.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003ePhilip Morris USA Inc. v. Martin\u003c/em\u003e, 262 So. 3d 769 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-product company: obtained order granting new trial and vacating multi-million judgment in light of improper arguments; obtained appellate affirmance of same order.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eOshinsky-Blacker v. Philip Morris USA Inc\u003c/em\u003e., 249 So. 3d 643 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018) (per curiam)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-product company: obtained transfer of venue from high-risk county to lower risk venue; then obtained appellate affirmance of same.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eMuro v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.\u003c/em\u003e, 245 So. 3d 1010 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018) (per curiam)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-product company: obtained summary judgment based on statute of limitations in product-liability case.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eGuarch v. Philip Morris USA Inc\u003c/em\u003e., No. 02-03308-CA-22 (Fla. 11th Cir. 2018).\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-product company: supported trial team in obtaining complete defense verdict.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eGay v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co\u003c/em\u003e., No. 2007-14649 (Fla. 13th Cir. Ct. 2018)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-product company: obtained appellate affirmance of defense verdict based on statute of limitations.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eHackimer v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co\u003c/em\u003e., 244 So. 3d 270 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-product company: supported trial team in obtaining complete defense verdict.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eMobley\u003c/em\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003ev. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co\u003c/em\u003e., No. 2007-CA-1709-K (Fla. 16th Cir. Ct. 2018)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-product company: supported trial team in obtaining defense verdict on statute of limitations.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eOrtiz v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co\u003c/em\u003e., No. 08-00084-CA08 (Fla. 11th Cir. 2018)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessful represented consumer-product company: obtained appellate reversal of $10.5 million judgment in light of erroneously admitted government reports.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eR.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. McCoy\u003c/em\u003e, 229 So. 3d 847 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017) (per curiam)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-product company: obtained appellate reversal of $10 million judgment in light of erroneously admitted government reports.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003ePhilip Morris USA, Inc. v. Pollari\u003c/em\u003e, 228 So. 3d 115, 119 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-product company: obtained summary judgment in product liability case.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eCapone v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. et al\u003c/em\u003e., No. 2005-010312-CA-24 (Fla. 11th Cir. Ct. 2017)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-product company: obtained appellate affirmance of defense verdict based on statute of limitations.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eHaliburton v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co\u003c/em\u003e., 230 So. 3d 459 (Fla. 4th DCA Feb. 22, 2017) (per curiam)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-product company: supported trial team in obtaining complete defense verdict.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eWilkins v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co\u003c/em\u003e., No. 15-2007-CA-20 (Fla. 11th Cir. Ct. 2016)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-product company: obtained appellate reversal of seven-figure award in attorney fees.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eR.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Webb\u003c/em\u003e, 187 So. 3d 388 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-product company: supported trial team in obtaining complete defense verdict in high-risk tobacco trial.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eRobertson v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co\u003c/em\u003e., No. 2007-CV-036442 (Fla. 17th Cir. Ct. 2015)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-product company: obtained state high-court affirmance of defense victory in product liability case.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eSmith v. Brown \u0026amp; Williamson Corp.\u003c/em\u003e, 410 S.W. 3d 623 (Mo. 2013)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-product company: obtained summary judgment in product liability case.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eThompson v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co\u003c/em\u003e., 12-01326-CV-W-GAF, 2013 WL 12075967 (W.D. Mo. May 29, 2013)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented manufacturer of construction materials: obtained state high-court reversal of summary judgment on nonparty fault defense in product-liability case.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eGeorgia Pacific, LLC v. Fields\u003c/em\u003e, 293 Ga. 499, 748 S.E. 2d 407 (2013)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer product company: supported trial team in obtaining an almost complete defense verdict in common-issues phase of mass-tort trial.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eIn re: Tobacco Litigation (Individual Personal Injury Cases)\u003c/em\u003e, No. 00-CA-5000 (Kanawha County, West Va., 2013)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented beverage company: obtained dismissal of mass action against alcohol manufacturers for lack of jurisdiction.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eOglala Sioux Tribe v. Schwarting\u003c/em\u003e, 894 F. Supp. 2d 1195 (D. Neb. 2012)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented manufacturer of construction materials: obtained appellate affirmance of defense victory in product-liability case.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eToole v. Georgia-Pacific, LLC\u003c/em\u003e, 2011 WL 7938847 (Ga. App. Jan 19, 2011)\u003c/p\u003e","\u003cp\u003eSuccessfully represented consumer-product company: obtained rarely granted stay of state court judgment pending US Supreme Court review in product-liability class action.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003ePhilip Morris USA Inc. v. Scott\u003c/em\u003e, 131 S. Ct. 1 (2010) (Scalia, J., in chambers)\u003c/p\u003e"]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":995}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2026-03-20T19:00:37.000Z","updated_at":"2026-03-20T19:00:37.000Z","searchable_text":"Leppert{{ FIELD }}Successfully represented automotive company: supported trial team in obtaining complete defense verdict in high-risk auto defect case. Shneyer v. Volkswagen Group of America, Inc., Case No. CGC-23-605454 (Superior Ct., County of San Francisco, Ca., Dec. 2025).{{ FIELD }}Successfully represented consumer-product company: obtained rarely granted writ of mandamus to quash order requiring payment of sanction. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Eighth Judicial District in and for County of Clark, 580 P.3d 1286 (Nev. 2025).{{ FIELD }}Successfully represented medical-device company: obtained dismissal with prejudice by convincing appellate court to reverse denial of motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction in Medicare Secondary Payer Act case. Coloplast Corp. v. MSP Recovery Claims, LLC, 415 So. 3d 353 (Fla. 3d DCA 2025).{{ FIELD }}Successfully represented consumer-products company: obtained appellate affirmance of defense verdict in product liability case over plaintiff's challenge to jury selection procedure. Sikes v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., 415 So. 3d 235 (Fla. 3d DCA 2025).{{ FIELD }}Successfully represented law firm: obtained rarely granted writ of certiorari to quash adverse trial court order. In re Residences at the Bath Club Condominium Association, 413 So. 3d 950 (Fla. 3d DCA 2025).{{ FIELD }}Successfully represented consumer-products company: obtained appellate affirmance of defense victory in product liability case over plaintiff's challenge to special jury instruction. Neff v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., 406 So. 3d 1063 (Fla. 4th DCA 2025){{ FIELD }}Successfully represented healthcare company: assisted trial team in obtaining defense verdict in consumer product trial. Felton v. Johnson \u0026amp; Johnson, No. GD 23-008055 (Pa. Ct. Comm. Pleas, Allegheny Cnty 2025) (appeal pending){{ FIELD }}Successfully represented healthcare company: obtained new trial and vacatur of $260 million jury award in light of attorney misconduct. Lee v. Johnson \u0026amp; Johnson, Case No. 23-CV-40369 (Circuit Court, Multnomah County, Oregon, Nov. 25, 2024) (appeal pending).{{ FIELD }}Successfully represented marketing organization: obtained 9-0 state high court victory reversing lower court decisions that had invalidated non-recruitment clause for lack of territorial term in business dispute. North American Senior Benefits v. Wimmer, 319 Ga. 641, 906 S.E. 2d 373 (2024).{{ FIELD }}Successfully represented pharmaceutical company: obtained dismissal with prejudice of claims of negligent marketing and negligent storage of medication. Ansel v. Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc, et al, No. CACE22014165 (Fla. 17th Cir. Ct. 2024){{ FIELD }}Successfully represented Italian car manufacturer: obtained dismissal of product liability case for lack of personal jurisdiction. Von Eisenberg v. Automobili Lamborghini, S.p.A, No. CACE-22-014881 (27) (Fla. 17th Cir. Ct. 2024).{{ FIELD }}Successfully represented British car manufacturer: obtained dismissal of product liability case for lack of personal jurisdiction. Von Eisenberg v. Bentley Motors Limited, No. CACE-22-014881 (27) (Fla. 17th Cir. Ct. 2024).{{ FIELD }}Successfully represented consumer-product company: obtained appellate affirmance of trial court order denying request to add a claim for punitive damages. Hartbauer v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., 391 So. 3d 1015 (Fla. 5th DCA 2024).{{ FIELD }}Successfully represented healthcare company: obtained summary judgment on claim for punitive damages and then supported trial team in obtaining complete defense verdict on remaining claims. Matthey v. Johnson \u0026amp; Johnson, No. 2018-CA-004809-NC (Fla. 12th Cir. Ct. 2024).{{ FIELD }}Successfully represented consumer-product company: supported trial team in obtaining defense verdict in product case. Harcourt v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco, No. CACE-17-20297 (08) (Fla. 17th Cir. Ct. 2024){{ FIELD }}Successfully represented US Chamber of Commerce as amicus curiae: provided amicus support for appellate reversal of certification of nationwide PFAS class in Sixth Circuit Court of Appeal. In re E. I. du Pont de Nemours \u0026amp; Co. C-8 Pers. Injury Litig., 87 F.4th 315 (6th Cir. 2023).{{ FIELD }}Successfully represented medical-device company: obtained appellate affirmance of summary judgment in product case based on the exclusion of the plaintiff's key expert testimony. Cantrell v. Coloplast Corp., 76 F.4th 1113 (8th Cir. 2023).{{ FIELD }}Successfully represented medical-device company: supported trial team in obtaining a complete defense verdict in high-risk product liability case. Cho v. Shashoua et al, No. D-1-GN-20-002000 (Travis County, Texas 2023).{{ FIELD }}Successfully represented pharmaceutical company: obtained dismissal with prejudice of novel claim of conspiracy between drug manufacturers. Valdes v. Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc., No. 2021-021945-CA-01 (Fla. 11th Cir. Ct. 2023).{{ FIELD }}Successfully represented Brazilian Airline: obtained appellate affirmance of defense victory in complex business dispute. ZGA Aircraft Leasing, Inc. v. Webjet Linhas Aereas, S.A., 366 So. 3d 1164 (Fla. 3d DCA 2023).{{ FIELD }}Successfully represented consumer-product company: obtained summary judgment on fraud claims in product liability case. Sikes v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., No. 2008-00310-CA-27 (Fla. 11th Cir. Ct. 2023).{{ FIELD }}Successfully represented multinational financial group: obtained complete appellate victory in complex business dispute involving mortgage-backed securities; secured affirmance of summary judgment on several breach of contract, fraud, and RICO claims; secured reversal of denial of summary judgment on unique fraud theory. Overlook Gardens Properties v. ORIX, USA, 884 S.E.2d 433 (Ga. App. 2023).{{ FIELD }}Successfully represented medical-device company: obtained appellate affirmance of dismissal of pure bill of discovery for lack of personal jurisdiction in secondary payor claim. MSP Recovery Claims, Series LLC v. Coloplast Corp., 353 So. 3d 705 (Fla. 3d DCA 2023).{{ FIELD }}Successfully represented medical device company: obtained appellate affirmance of summary judgment based on the exclusion of the plaintiff's specific causation expert in medical device lawsuit. Arevalo v. Mentor Worldwide LLC, 21-11768, --- F. App'x---, 2022 WL 16753646 (11th Cir. Nov. 8, 2022){{ FIELD }}Successfully represented consumer-product company: obtained summary judgment on all claims in product-liability case. Camacho v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., No. A-19-807650-C (Clark County, Nev., 2022).{{ FIELD }}Successfully represented medical-device company: obtained summary judgment on all claims in product liability case based on exclusion of plaintiff's causation expert. James v. Coloplast Corp., CV 20-654 (JRT/TNL), 2022 WL 4465956 (D. Minn. Sept. 26, 2022).{{ FIELD }}Successfully represented US Chamber of Commerce as amicus curiae; provided amicus support for successful Rule 23(f) petition for appellate review of certification in nationwide PFAS class action. In re E.I. DuPont de Nemours \u0026amp; Co. C-8 Pers. Injury Litig., 22-0305, 2022 WL 4149090 (6th Cir. Sept. 9, 2022).{{ FIELD }}Successfully represented consumer-product company: obtained dismissal of clams for fraud, failure-to-warn, and negligent design and supported trial team in obtaining favorable result on remaining claim. Phelps v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., No. 2020-005579-CA-01 (Fla. 11th Cir. 2022).{{ FIELD }}Successfully represented medical-device company: obtained summary judgment on all claims in product liability case. Cantrell v. Coloplast Corp., 2022 WL 2806390 (D. Minn. July 18, 2022).{{ FIELD }}Successfully represented consumer-product company: obtained appellate reversal of multi-million dollar judgment based on amendment of tort reform statute in product-liability case. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Kaplan Estate of Kaplan, 336 So. 3d 309 (Fla. 4th DCA 2022) (per curiam){{ FIELD }}Successfully represented consumer-product company: obtained appellate reversal of judgment that included $20 million in punitive damages in product liability case. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Mattson Estate of Konzelman, 336 So. 3d 315 (Fla. 4th DCA 2022) (per curiam){{ FIELD }}Successfully represented consumer-product company: obtained appellate reversal of $42.5 million judgment in light of error during jury selection. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Gloger, 338 So. 3d 977 (Fla. 3d DCA 2022){{ FIELD }}Successfully represented Danish medical-device company: obtained dismissal of foreign parent company for lack of personal jurisdiction. Rogers v. Coloplast Corp., 2022 WL 252420 (M.D. Fla. Jan. 27, 2022){{ FIELD }}Successfully represented pro-bono client: obtained appellate reversal of dismissal of habeas claim based on ineffective assistance of counsel. Davila v. United States, 21-11359-V, 2022 WL 1236828 (11th Cir. Jan. 5, 2022){{ FIELD }}Successfully represented consumer-product company: obtained appellate reversal of $10 million judgment in light of improper closing arguments. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Neff, 325 So. 3d 872 (Fla. 4th DCA 2021), review denied, SC21-1603, 2022 WL 1261381 (Fla. Apr. 28, 2022){{ FIELD }}Successfully represented consumer-product company: obtained appellate reversal of $37.5 million judgment in light of improper closing arguments. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Mahfuz, 324 So. 3d 495 (Fla. 4th DCA 2021), review denied, SC21-1551, 2022 WL 1153496 (Fla. Apr. 19, 2022){{ FIELD }}Successfully represented Danish medical-device company: obtained dismissal of foreign parent company for lack of personal jurisdiction. Almond v. Coloplast A/S, 2021 WL 2042659 (M.D. Fla. May 21, 2021){{ FIELD }}Successfully represented consumer-product company: obtained appellate affirmance of defense verdict in high-risk trial after obtaining an adverse inference instruction. Adamson v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., 325 So. 3d 887 (Fla. 4th DCA 2021), review denied, SC21-1210, 2021 WL 6140352 (Fla. Dec. 30, 2021){{ FIELD }}Successfully represented consumer product company: obtained appellate reversal of $16 million in light of improper jury instruction. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Bessent-Dixon, 313 So. 3d 173 (Fla. 1st DCA 2021){{ FIELD }}Successfully represented medical device company: obtained summary judgment on failure to warn claims and on punitive damages in product liability case. Nunez v. Coloplast Corp., 461 F. Supp. 3d 1260 (S.D. Fla. 2020).{{ FIELD }}Successfully represented consumer-product: obtained appellate reversal of $18.5 million judgment in light of improperly admitted evidence. Philip Morris USA, Inc. v. Gloger, 273 So. 3d 1046 (Fla. 3d DCA 2019){{ FIELD }}Successfully represented consumer-product company: obtained rarely granted appellate writ to disqualify the trial judge from a number of cases. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Alonso, 268 So. 3d 151 (Fla. 4th DCA 2019).{{ FIELD }}Successfully represented consumer-product company: obtained reversal of punitive damages award in light of novel argument under tort reform statute. Philip Morris USA Inc. v. Martin, 262 So. 3d 769 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018){{ FIELD }}Successfully represented consumer-product company: obtained order granting new trial and vacating multi-million judgment in light of improper arguments; obtained appellate affirmance of same order. Oshinsky-Blacker v. Philip Morris USA Inc., 249 So. 3d 643 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018) (per curiam){{ FIELD }}Successfully represented consumer-product company: obtained transfer of venue from high-risk county to lower risk venue; then obtained appellate affirmance of same. Muro v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., 245 So. 3d 1010 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018) (per curiam){{ FIELD }}Successfully represented consumer-product company: obtained summary judgment based on statute of limitations in product-liability case. Guarch v. Philip Morris USA Inc., No. 02-03308-CA-22 (Fla. 11th Cir. 2018).{{ FIELD }}Successfully represented consumer-product company: supported trial team in obtaining complete defense verdict. Gay v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., No. 2007-14649 (Fla. 13th Cir. Ct. 2018){{ FIELD }}Successfully represented consumer-product company: obtained appellate affirmance of defense verdict based on statute of limitations. Hackimer v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., 244 So. 3d 270 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018){{ FIELD }}Successfully represented consumer-product company: supported trial team in obtaining complete defense verdict. Mobley v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., No. 2007-CA-1709-K (Fla. 16th Cir. Ct. 2018){{ FIELD }}Successfully represented consumer-product company: supported trial team in obtaining defense verdict on statute of limitations. Ortiz v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., No. 08-00084-CA08 (Fla. 11th Cir. 2018){{ FIELD }}Successful represented consumer-product company: obtained appellate reversal of $10.5 million judgment in light of erroneously admitted government reports. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. McCoy, 229 So. 3d 847 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017) (per curiam){{ FIELD }}Successfully represented consumer-product company: obtained appellate reversal of $10 million judgment in light of erroneously admitted government reports. Philip Morris USA, Inc. v. Pollari, 228 So. 3d 115, 119 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017){{ FIELD }}Successfully represented consumer-product company: obtained summary judgment in product liability case. Capone v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. et al., No. 2005-010312-CA-24 (Fla. 11th Cir. Ct. 2017){{ FIELD }}Successfully represented consumer-product company: obtained appellate affirmance of defense verdict based on statute of limitations. Haliburton v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., 230 So. 3d 459 (Fla. 4th DCA Feb. 22, 2017) (per curiam){{ FIELD }}Successfully represented consumer-product company: supported trial team in obtaining complete defense verdict. Wilkins v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., No. 15-2007-CA-20 (Fla. 11th Cir. Ct. 2016){{ FIELD }}Successfully represented consumer-product company: obtained appellate reversal of seven-figure award in attorney fees. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Webb, 187 So. 3d 388 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016){{ FIELD }}Successfully represented consumer-product company: supported trial team in obtaining complete defense verdict in high-risk tobacco trial. Robertson v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., No. 2007-CV-036442 (Fla. 17th Cir. Ct. 2015){{ FIELD }}Successfully represented consumer-product company: obtained state high-court affirmance of defense victory in product liability case. Smith v. Brown \u0026amp; Williamson Corp., 410 S.W. 3d 623 (Mo. 2013){{ FIELD }}Successfully represented consumer-product company: obtained summary judgment in product liability case. Thompson v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., 12-01326-CV-W-GAF, 2013 WL 12075967 (W.D. Mo. May 29, 2013){{ FIELD }}Successfully represented manufacturer of construction materials: obtained state high-court reversal of summary judgment on nonparty fault defense in product-liability case. Georgia Pacific, LLC v. Fields, 293 Ga. 499, 748 S.E. 2d 407 (2013){{ FIELD }}Successfully represented consumer product company: supported trial team in obtaining an almost complete defense verdict in common-issues phase of mass-tort trial. In re: Tobacco Litigation (Individual Personal Injury Cases), No. 00-CA-5000 (Kanawha County, West Va., 2013){{ FIELD }}Successfully represented beverage company: obtained dismissal of mass action against alcohol manufacturers for lack of jurisdiction. Oglala Sioux Tribe v. Schwarting, 894 F. Supp. 2d 1195 (D. Neb. 2012){{ FIELD }}Successfully represented manufacturer of construction materials: obtained appellate affirmance of defense victory in product-liability case. Toole v. Georgia-Pacific, LLC, 2011 WL 7938847 (Ga. App. Jan 19, 2011){{ FIELD }}Successfully represented consumer-product company: obtained rarely granted stay of state court judgment pending US Supreme Court review in product-liability class action. Philip Morris USA Inc. v. Scott, 131 S. Ct. 1 (2010) (Scalia, J., in chambers){{ FIELD }}Val Leppert is a legal strategist and first-chair appellate lawyer. Recognized by Chambers \u0026amp; Partners as \"an accomplished appellate litigator,\" Val has obtained the reversal or vacatur of numerous adverse judgments and has also prevailed in dozens of other matters. He has represented businesses across an array of industries, including airline, automotive, energy, healthcare, insurance, private equity, real estate, technology, and transportation. But Val has developed particular expertise in consumer products, having worked extensively in tobacco litigation while also representing companies in matters pertaining to alcohol, construction materials, and talcum powder. Legal 500 has recommended Val for the defense of consumer products, including for “his appellate skills\" as documented by his \"string of notable appellate victories, saving [his clients] significant financial burdens.\" \nIn some matters, Val steps into the case on appeal.  But in most instances, Val works alongside the trial teams from the inception of the case, devising the legal strategy from the pleadings stage through post-trial motions and appeal. Using this format, he frequently develops new and creative arguments and has secured a number of victories in pretrial proceedings, such as the dismissal of his clients before trial or limitations on the other side’s claims.  If a case makes it to trial, Val often serves as legal issues counsel, helping the team shape the case by obtaining favorable evidentiary rulings or jury instructions. This integrated approach, where Val is embedded with the trial team, is frequently the foundation for success in post-trial and appellate proceedings. \nAlthough he is resident in the firm’s Atlanta and Miami offices, Val works on cases throughout the United States.  He has argued matters from Pittsburgh (Pa) to Portland (Or) and from St. Paul (Minn) all the way down to the Southernmost courthouse in the Florida Keys.\nVal served as law clerk to the Honorable Frank M. Hull, United States Circuit Judge for the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals.  He graduated, magna cum laude, from Mercer University School of Law where he received the George W. Woodruff Award of Excellence as the top-ranked student in his class.  While in law school, Val served as Articles Editor of the Mercer Law Review and as Research Assistant to Professor Harold S. Lewis, Jr.  While in college, he was named the 2004 Upper Midwest Athletic Conference South Most Valuable Player on Offense after quarterbacking Westminster College (Mo) to consecutive football conference championships.   He was inducted into the Westminster Athletic Hall of Fame in 2019. \nVal is a native of Frankfurt, Germany, and is fluent in German. Partner Westminster College  Mercer University Mercer University Walter F. George School of Law Supreme Court of the United States U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida Florida Georgia Court of Appeals of Georgia Supreme Court of Georgia Georgia Florida Law Clerk, Frank M. Hull, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit Successfully represented automotive company: supported trial team in obtaining complete defense verdict in high-risk auto defect case. Shneyer v. Volkswagen Group of America, Inc., Case No. CGC-23-605454 (Superior Ct., County of San Francisco, Ca., Dec. 2025). Successfully represented consumer-product company: obtained rarely granted writ of mandamus to quash order requiring payment of sanction. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Eighth Judicial District in and for County of Clark, 580 P.3d 1286 (Nev. 2025). Successfully represented medical-device company: obtained dismissal with prejudice by convincing appellate court to reverse denial of motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction in Medicare Secondary Payer Act case. Coloplast Corp. v. MSP Recovery Claims, LLC, 415 So. 3d 353 (Fla. 3d DCA 2025). Successfully represented consumer-products company: obtained appellate affirmance of defense verdict in product liability case over plaintiff's challenge to jury selection procedure. Sikes v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., 415 So. 3d 235 (Fla. 3d DCA 2025). Successfully represented law firm: obtained rarely granted writ of certiorari to quash adverse trial court order. In re Residences at the Bath Club Condominium Association, 413 So. 3d 950 (Fla. 3d DCA 2025). Successfully represented consumer-products company: obtained appellate affirmance of defense victory in product liability case over plaintiff's challenge to special jury instruction. Neff v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., 406 So. 3d 1063 (Fla. 4th DCA 2025) Successfully represented healthcare company: assisted trial team in obtaining defense verdict in consumer product trial. Felton v. Johnson \u0026amp; Johnson, No. GD 23-008055 (Pa. Ct. Comm. Pleas, Allegheny Cnty 2025) (appeal pending) Successfully represented healthcare company: obtained new trial and vacatur of $260 million jury award in light of attorney misconduct. Lee v. Johnson \u0026amp; Johnson, Case No. 23-CV-40369 (Circuit Court, Multnomah County, Oregon, Nov. 25, 2024) (appeal pending). Successfully represented marketing organization: obtained 9-0 state high court victory reversing lower court decisions that had invalidated non-recruitment clause for lack of territorial term in business dispute. North American Senior Benefits v. Wimmer, 319 Ga. 641, 906 S.E. 2d 373 (2024). Successfully represented pharmaceutical company: obtained dismissal with prejudice of claims of negligent marketing and negligent storage of medication. Ansel v. Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc, et al, No. CACE22014165 (Fla. 17th Cir. Ct. 2024) Successfully represented Italian car manufacturer: obtained dismissal of product liability case for lack of personal jurisdiction. Von Eisenberg v. Automobili Lamborghini, S.p.A, No. CACE-22-014881 (27) (Fla. 17th Cir. Ct. 2024). Successfully represented British car manufacturer: obtained dismissal of product liability case for lack of personal jurisdiction. Von Eisenberg v. Bentley Motors Limited, No. CACE-22-014881 (27) (Fla. 17th Cir. Ct. 2024). Successfully represented consumer-product company: obtained appellate affirmance of trial court order denying request to add a claim for punitive damages. Hartbauer v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., 391 So. 3d 1015 (Fla. 5th DCA 2024). Successfully represented healthcare company: obtained summary judgment on claim for punitive damages and then supported trial team in obtaining complete defense verdict on remaining claims. Matthey v. Johnson \u0026amp; Johnson, No. 2018-CA-004809-NC (Fla. 12th Cir. Ct. 2024). Successfully represented consumer-product company: supported trial team in obtaining defense verdict in product case. Harcourt v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco, No. CACE-17-20297 (08) (Fla. 17th Cir. Ct. 2024) Successfully represented US Chamber of Commerce as amicus curiae: provided amicus support for appellate reversal of certification of nationwide PFAS class in Sixth Circuit Court of Appeal. In re E. I. du Pont de Nemours \u0026amp; Co. C-8 Pers. Injury Litig., 87 F.4th 315 (6th Cir. 2023). Successfully represented medical-device company: obtained appellate affirmance of summary judgment in product case based on the exclusion of the plaintiff's key expert testimony. Cantrell v. Coloplast Corp., 76 F.4th 1113 (8th Cir. 2023). Successfully represented medical-device company: supported trial team in obtaining a complete defense verdict in high-risk product liability case. Cho v. Shashoua et al, No. D-1-GN-20-002000 (Travis County, Texas 2023). Successfully represented pharmaceutical company: obtained dismissal with prejudice of novel claim of conspiracy between drug manufacturers. Valdes v. Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc., No. 2021-021945-CA-01 (Fla. 11th Cir. Ct. 2023). Successfully represented Brazilian Airline: obtained appellate affirmance of defense victory in complex business dispute. ZGA Aircraft Leasing, Inc. v. Webjet Linhas Aereas, S.A., 366 So. 3d 1164 (Fla. 3d DCA 2023). Successfully represented consumer-product company: obtained summary judgment on fraud claims in product liability case. Sikes v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., No. 2008-00310-CA-27 (Fla. 11th Cir. Ct. 2023). Successfully represented multinational financial group: obtained complete appellate victory in complex business dispute involving mortgage-backed securities; secured affirmance of summary judgment on several breach of contract, fraud, and RICO claims; secured reversal of denial of summary judgment on unique fraud theory. Overlook Gardens Properties v. ORIX, USA, 884 S.E.2d 433 (Ga. App. 2023). Successfully represented medical-device company: obtained appellate affirmance of dismissal of pure bill of discovery for lack of personal jurisdiction in secondary payor claim. MSP Recovery Claims, Series LLC v. Coloplast Corp., 353 So. 3d 705 (Fla. 3d DCA 2023). Successfully represented medical device company: obtained appellate affirmance of summary judgment based on the exclusion of the plaintiff's specific causation expert in medical device lawsuit. Arevalo v. Mentor Worldwide LLC, 21-11768, --- F. App'x---, 2022 WL 16753646 (11th Cir. Nov. 8, 2022) Successfully represented consumer-product company: obtained summary judgment on all claims in product-liability case. Camacho v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., No. A-19-807650-C (Clark County, Nev., 2022). Successfully represented medical-device company: obtained summary judgment on all claims in product liability case based on exclusion of plaintiff's causation expert. James v. Coloplast Corp., CV 20-654 (JRT/TNL), 2022 WL 4465956 (D. Minn. Sept. 26, 2022). Successfully represented US Chamber of Commerce as amicus curiae; provided amicus support for successful Rule 23(f) petition for appellate review of certification in nationwide PFAS class action. In re E.I. DuPont de Nemours \u0026amp; Co. C-8 Pers. Injury Litig., 22-0305, 2022 WL 4149090 (6th Cir. Sept. 9, 2022). Successfully represented consumer-product company: obtained dismissal of clams for fraud, failure-to-warn, and negligent design and supported trial team in obtaining favorable result on remaining claim. Phelps v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., No. 2020-005579-CA-01 (Fla. 11th Cir. 2022). Successfully represented medical-device company: obtained summary judgment on all claims in product liability case. Cantrell v. Coloplast Corp., 2022 WL 2806390 (D. Minn. July 18, 2022). Successfully represented consumer-product company: obtained appellate reversal of multi-million dollar judgment based on amendment of tort reform statute in product-liability case. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Kaplan Estate of Kaplan, 336 So. 3d 309 (Fla. 4th DCA 2022) (per curiam) Successfully represented consumer-product company: obtained appellate reversal of judgment that included $20 million in punitive damages in product liability case. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Mattson Estate of Konzelman, 336 So. 3d 315 (Fla. 4th DCA 2022) (per curiam) Successfully represented consumer-product company: obtained appellate reversal of $42.5 million judgment in light of error during jury selection. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Gloger, 338 So. 3d 977 (Fla. 3d DCA 2022) Successfully represented Danish medical-device company: obtained dismissal of foreign parent company for lack of personal jurisdiction. Rogers v. Coloplast Corp., 2022 WL 252420 (M.D. Fla. Jan. 27, 2022) Successfully represented pro-bono client: obtained appellate reversal of dismissal of habeas claim based on ineffective assistance of counsel. Davila v. United States, 21-11359-V, 2022 WL 1236828 (11th Cir. Jan. 5, 2022) Successfully represented consumer-product company: obtained appellate reversal of $10 million judgment in light of improper closing arguments. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Neff, 325 So. 3d 872 (Fla. 4th DCA 2021), review denied, SC21-1603, 2022 WL 1261381 (Fla. Apr. 28, 2022) Successfully represented consumer-product company: obtained appellate reversal of $37.5 million judgment in light of improper closing arguments. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Mahfuz, 324 So. 3d 495 (Fla. 4th DCA 2021), review denied, SC21-1551, 2022 WL 1153496 (Fla. Apr. 19, 2022) Successfully represented Danish medical-device company: obtained dismissal of foreign parent company for lack of personal jurisdiction. Almond v. Coloplast A/S, 2021 WL 2042659 (M.D. Fla. May 21, 2021) Successfully represented consumer-product company: obtained appellate affirmance of defense verdict in high-risk trial after obtaining an adverse inference instruction. Adamson v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., 325 So. 3d 887 (Fla. 4th DCA 2021), review denied, SC21-1210, 2021 WL 6140352 (Fla. Dec. 30, 2021) Successfully represented consumer product company: obtained appellate reversal of $16 million in light of improper jury instruction. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Bessent-Dixon, 313 So. 3d 173 (Fla. 1st DCA 2021) Successfully represented medical device company: obtained summary judgment on failure to warn claims and on punitive damages in product liability case. Nunez v. Coloplast Corp., 461 F. Supp. 3d 1260 (S.D. Fla. 2020). Successfully represented consumer-product: obtained appellate reversal of $18.5 million judgment in light of improperly admitted evidence. Philip Morris USA, Inc. v. Gloger, 273 So. 3d 1046 (Fla. 3d DCA 2019) Successfully represented consumer-product company: obtained rarely granted appellate writ to disqualify the trial judge from a number of cases. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Alonso, 268 So. 3d 151 (Fla. 4th DCA 2019). Successfully represented consumer-product company: obtained reversal of punitive damages award in light of novel argument under tort reform statute. Philip Morris USA Inc. v. Martin, 262 So. 3d 769 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018) Successfully represented consumer-product company: obtained order granting new trial and vacating multi-million judgment in light of improper arguments; obtained appellate affirmance of same order. Oshinsky-Blacker v. Philip Morris USA Inc., 249 So. 3d 643 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018) (per curiam) Successfully represented consumer-product company: obtained transfer of venue from high-risk county to lower risk venue; then obtained appellate affirmance of same. Muro v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., 245 So. 3d 1010 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018) (per curiam) Successfully represented consumer-product company: obtained summary judgment based on statute of limitations in product-liability case. Guarch v. Philip Morris USA Inc., No. 02-03308-CA-22 (Fla. 11th Cir. 2018). Successfully represented consumer-product company: supported trial team in obtaining complete defense verdict. Gay v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., No. 2007-14649 (Fla. 13th Cir. Ct. 2018) Successfully represented consumer-product company: obtained appellate affirmance of defense verdict based on statute of limitations. Hackimer v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., 244 So. 3d 270 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018) Successfully represented consumer-product company: supported trial team in obtaining complete defense verdict. Mobley v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., No. 2007-CA-1709-K (Fla. 16th Cir. Ct. 2018) Successfully represented consumer-product company: supported trial team in obtaining defense verdict on statute of limitations. Ortiz v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., No. 08-00084-CA08 (Fla. 11th Cir. 2018) Successful represented consumer-product company: obtained appellate reversal of $10.5 million judgment in light of erroneously admitted government reports. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. McCoy, 229 So. 3d 847 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017) (per curiam) Successfully represented consumer-product company: obtained appellate reversal of $10 million judgment in light of erroneously admitted government reports. Philip Morris USA, Inc. v. Pollari, 228 So. 3d 115, 119 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017) Successfully represented consumer-product company: obtained summary judgment in product liability case. Capone v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. et al., No. 2005-010312-CA-24 (Fla. 11th Cir. Ct. 2017) Successfully represented consumer-product company: obtained appellate affirmance of defense verdict based on statute of limitations. Haliburton v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., 230 So. 3d 459 (Fla. 4th DCA Feb. 22, 2017) (per curiam) Successfully represented consumer-product company: supported trial team in obtaining complete defense verdict. Wilkins v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., No. 15-2007-CA-20 (Fla. 11th Cir. Ct. 2016) Successfully represented consumer-product company: obtained appellate reversal of seven-figure award in attorney fees. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Webb, 187 So. 3d 388 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016) Successfully represented consumer-product company: supported trial team in obtaining complete defense verdict in high-risk tobacco trial. Robertson v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., No. 2007-CV-036442 (Fla. 17th Cir. Ct. 2015) Successfully represented consumer-product company: obtained state high-court affirmance of defense victory in product liability case. Smith v. Brown \u0026amp; Williamson Corp., 410 S.W. 3d 623 (Mo. 2013) Successfully represented consumer-product company: obtained summary judgment in product liability case. Thompson v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., 12-01326-CV-W-GAF, 2013 WL 12075967 (W.D. Mo. May 29, 2013) Successfully represented manufacturer of construction materials: obtained state high-court reversal of summary judgment on nonparty fault defense in product-liability case. Georgia Pacific, LLC v. Fields, 293 Ga. 499, 748 S.E. 2d 407 (2013) Successfully represented consumer product company: supported trial team in obtaining an almost complete defense verdict in common-issues phase of mass-tort trial. In re: Tobacco Litigation (Individual Personal Injury Cases), No. 00-CA-5000 (Kanawha County, West Va., 2013) Successfully represented beverage company: obtained dismissal of mass action against alcohol manufacturers for lack of jurisdiction. Oglala Sioux Tribe v. Schwarting, 894 F. Supp. 2d 1195 (D. Neb. 2012) Successfully represented manufacturer of construction materials: obtained appellate affirmance of defense victory in product-liability case. Toole v. Georgia-Pacific, LLC, 2011 WL 7938847 (Ga. App. Jan 19, 2011) Successfully represented consumer-product company: obtained rarely granted stay of state court judgment pending US Supreme Court review in product-liability class action. Philip Morris USA Inc. v. Scott, 131 S. Ct. 1 (2010) (Scalia, J., in chambers)","searchable_name":"Val Leppert","is_active":true,"featured":null,"publish_date":null,"expiration_date":null,"blog_featured":null,"published_by":202,"capability_group_featured":null,"home_page_featured":null},{"id":443893,"version":1,"owner_type":"Person","owner_id":6260,"payload":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eRoss Linzer focuses his practice on complex commercial litigation and class action defense in state and federal courts. Ross represents corporate directors and officers in shareholder and derivative class actions involving allegations of securities fraud and breach of fiduciary duties. He also has significant experience representing insurance companies at the trial and appellate levels. Holding an M.B.A., Ross brings a diverse perspective and applies strategic considerations in helping clients to navigate their complex business challenges.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRoss has broad experience defending a variety of tort, environmental, and product liability cases in addition to his insurance defense and securities litigation experience.\u003c/p\u003e","slug":"ross-linzer","email":"rlinzer@kslaw.com","phone":null,"matters":null,"taggings":{"tags":[],"meta_tags":[]},"expertise":[{"id":74,"guid":"74.capabilities","index":0,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":19,"guid":"19.capabilities","index":1,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":5,"guid":"5.capabilities","index":2,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":107,"guid":"107.capabilities","index":3,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":699,"guid":"699.smart_tags","index":4,"source":"smartTags"},{"id":24,"guid":"24.capabilities","index":5,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":20,"guid":"20.capabilities","index":6,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":103,"guid":"103.capabilities","index":7,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":3,"guid":"3.capabilities","index":8,"source":"capabilities"},{"id":607,"guid":"607.smart_tags","index":9,"source":"smartTags"}],"is_active":true,"last_name":"Linzer","nick_name":"Ross","clerkships":[],"first_name":"Ross","title_rank":9999,"updated_by":202,"law_schools":[{"id":247,"meta":{"degree":"J.D.","honors":"","is_law_school":"1","graduation_date":"2007-01-01 00:00:00"},"order":1,"pin_order":null,"pin_expiration":null}],"middle_name":" ","name_suffix":"","recognitions":[{"title":"Named a “Rising Star” for Class Action/Mass Torts in Florida ","detail":"Super Lawyers Magazine, 2013-2022"},{"title":"Recognized as one of the “40 Under 40” Outstanding Lawyers of South Florida","detail":"Cystic Fibrosis Foundation, 2016"}],"linked_in_url":null,"seodescription":null,"primary_title_id":15,"translated_fields":{"en":{"bio":"\u003cp\u003eRoss Linzer focuses his practice on complex commercial litigation and class action defense in state and federal courts. Ross represents corporate directors and officers in shareholder and derivative class actions involving allegations of securities fraud and breach of fiduciary duties. He also has significant experience representing insurance companies at the trial and appellate levels. Holding an M.B.A., Ross brings a diverse perspective and applies strategic considerations in helping clients to navigate their complex business challenges.[[--readmore--]]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRoss has broad experience defending a variety of tort, environmental, and product liability cases in addition to his insurance defense and securities litigation experience.\u003c/p\u003e","recognitions":[{"title":"Named a “Rising Star” for Class Action/Mass Torts in Florida ","detail":"Super Lawyers Magazine, 2013-2022"},{"title":"Recognized as one of the “40 Under 40” Outstanding Lawyers of South Florida","detail":"Cystic Fibrosis Foundation, 2016"}]},"locales":["en"]},"secondary_title_id":null,"upload_assignments":{"headshot":[{"id":9671}]},"capability_group_id":3},"created_at":"2025-12-05T05:00:10.000Z","updated_at":"2025-12-05T05:00:10.000Z","searchable_text":"Linzer{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Named a “Rising Star” for Class Action/Mass Torts in Florida \", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Super Lawyers Magazine, 2013-2022\"}{{ FIELD }}{:title=\u0026gt;\"Recognized as one of the “40 Under 40” Outstanding Lawyers of South Florida\", :detail=\u0026gt;\"Cystic Fibrosis Foundation, 2016\"}{{ FIELD }}Ross Linzer focuses his practice on complex commercial litigation and class action defense in state and federal courts. Ross represents corporate directors and officers in shareholder and derivative class actions involving allegations of securities fraud and breach of fiduciary duties. He also has significant experience representing insurance companies at the trial and appellate levels. Holding an M.B.A., Ross brings a diverse perspective and applies strategic considerations in helping clients to navigate their complex business challenges.\nRoss has broad experience defending a variety of tort, environmental, and product liability cases in addition to his insurance defense and securities litigation experience. Partner Named a “Rising Star” for Class Action/Mass Torts in Florida  Super Lawyers Magazine, 2013-2022 Recognized as one of the “40 Under 40” Outstanding Lawyers of South Florida Cystic Fibrosis Foundation, 2016 Washington University in St. Louis Washington University in St. Louis School of Law Boston University Boston University School of Law Boston University Boston University School of Law U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit U.S. District Court for the Central District of Illinois U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida Florida Illinois Missouri American Bar Association, Member The Florida Bar, Member Miami Dade Bar, Member The Missouri Bar, Member The Bar Association of Metropolitan St. Louis, Member Jewish Educational Loan Fund, Board Member Washington University in St. Louis, Eliot Society, Member Greater Miami Jewish Federation, Jewish Community Relations Council Member Anti-Defamation League, Glass Leadership Institute, Alumnus","searchable_name":"Ross Linzer","is_active":true,"featured":null,"publish_date":null,"expiration_date":null,"blog_featured":null,"published_by":202,"capability_group_featured":null,"home_page_featured":null}]}}