Partner, Goldman Ismail Tomaselli Brennan & Baum LLP
Partner, Bartlit Beck Herman Palenchar & Scott LLP
Associate, Bartlit Beck Herman Palenchar & Scott LLP
Northwestern University Law School (J.D., cum laude)
- Order of the Coif
- Regional Champion, National Trial Competition
- Member, National Trial Team
University of Michigan (B.A., Economics)
- Goldman Ismail Recognized Once Again in Chambers Rankings
- Goldman Ismail Tops 2015 Chambers and Legal 500 Rankings
- Goldman Ismail Lawyers Recognized for Excellence by Chambers and The Legal 500 in 2014
- Goldman Ismail Recognized for Excellence by Chambers USA 2013 and The Legal 500 2013
- Law360 Q & A With Goldman Ismail's Andy Goldman
- The Legal 500 2012 Ranks Goldman Ismail as Top Firm for Products Liability Litigation
- Goldman Ismail Wins Complete Defense Verdict for Merck in Bellwether Fosamax Trial
- The Legal 500 2011 Ranks Goldman Ismail as a Top Firm for Products Liability Litigation
Bar & Court Admissions
State of Illinois
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois (including Trial Bar)
Andrew L. Goldman
“Clients note that Andrew Goldman has an excellent demeanor and is a brilliant legal strategist.” “He is an experienced trial lawyer,” “who is able to take very complex facts and break them down to simplicity.” -Chambers USA (ranked 2015-2016)
Andrew Goldman “is a fantastic lawyer, very hard-working and smart.” -The Legal 500 (mentioned 2009-2015)
Andy Goldman has distinguished himself as a trial lawyer who has what it takes to win high-profile complex products liability and general commercial cases. From the outset, Andy litigates each case with a focus on trial in order to develop a credible and persuasive theory of the case that jurors can understand. Clients value the breadth and depth of his litigation experience and rely on his expertise to identify, prepare, defend, and examine key witnesses in depositions and at trial. Complementing his legal acumen is Andy's keen ability to connect with judges, juries, and witnesses for both his client and those testifying for the other side.
Andy has built a well-earned reputation for successfully navigating the toughest cases to win on behalf of Fortune 500 and multi-national companies. As reported by The Legal 500, “commentators have been very impressed.” Andy “receives glowing feedback from clients” who say he is a “very hardworking, very skilled trial lawyer.” Andy's trials – spanning several decades – have been covered in The American Lawyer, Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, and Law360.
Member, International Association of Defense Counsel (IADC), an invitation-only, peer reviewed professional association of leading corporate and insurance lawyers
Ranked by Chambers USA nationally as a Leading Individual in Product Liability & Mass Torts (2015-2016)
Recognized in Who’s Who Legal Product Liability Defence (2010-2016)
Ranked by Chambers USA as a Recognized Practitioner in Illinois General Commercial Litigation (2015)
Mentioned by The Legal 500 for products liability and mass tort defense work (2009-2015)
- Panelist, Jury Selection: How Today's Challenges Shape Our Approach, ABA Products Liability Committee, Women in Products Liability, 10th Annual CLE Workshop, October 15, 2009, Chicago, IL
West v. Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Inc.
Lead counsel for Bayer in litigation involving claims of infection arising from allegedly contaminated components of a self-administered Betaseron® injection kit used to treat multiple sclerosis.
Sybron Canada Holdings, Inc. et al. v. Gerald A. Niznick et al.
Lead counsel for dental implant manufacturer joint venture companies in breach of contract and fiduciary duty action pending in New York state court’s Commercial Division involving disputes with minority members in connection with various agreements. Obtained dismissal of two related cases filed in California state court.
In re Ethicon, Inc., Pelvic Repair System Products Liability Litigation
Counsel for Johnson & Johnson and Ethicon in federal MDL concerning prescription pelvic mesh products used for the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse and stress incontinence. Deposed key experts and treating physicians.
Federal Trade Commission v. Staples, Inc. and Office Depot, Inc.
Represented Staples, Inc. in its proposed $6.3 billion acquisition of Office Depot, Inc., which the Federal Trade Commission moved to enjoin in D.C. federal court. Conducted deposition of key third-party witness for FTC located outside trial subpoena range.
Trial counsel for Merck & Co., Inc. in litigation concerning Fosamax®, a prescription drug used for the treatment and prevention of osteoporosis and other bone disorders.
- Secrest v. Merck & Co., Inc. Co-tried federal MDL bellwether case in New York. Plaintiff claimed she developed a bone condition known as osteonecrosis of the jaw as a result of taking Fosamax®. Three-week jury trial ended in defense verdict for Merck. Argued appeal before the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit which affirmed the judgment for Merck rejecting plaintiff’s evidentiary and jury instruction challenges.
Hester v. Merck & Co., Inc. Lead trial counsel for Merck in Fosamax® federal MDL case to be tried in New York. Plaintiff alleged she suffered jaw bone injuries from using Fosamax®. A month before trial, and days after Merck filed for summary judgment, Plaintiff voluntarily dismissed the case with prejudice.
Carballo v. Merck & Co., Inc. Lead trial counsel for Merck in Fosamax® case to be tried in Miami. Plaintiff alleged she suffered jaw bone injuries from using Fosamax®. With about a month left until trial and days after Merck filed for summary judgment and moved to exclude testimony from Plaintiff’s key experts, Plaintiff voluntarily dismissed the case without prejudice.
- Halperin et al. v. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. et al. Lead trial counsel for Merck in case to be tried in Chicago involving allegations use of Fosamax® resulted in atypical femur fractures. Shortly before trial and after Merck successfully opposed a continuance, Plaintiff voluntarily dismissed the case with waiver of right to refile in Illinois.
Trial counsel for Merck & Co., Inc. in individual and government actions claiming Merck’s withdrawn anti-inflammatory medication Vioxx® caused heart attacks and other cardiovascular problems.
- State of Louisiana v. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. Trial counsel in first Attorney General trial relating to Vioxx®. Obtained a complete defense verdict after a two-week bench trial federal multi-district litigation court in Louisiana.
- Vioxx Governmental Action CasesNational counsel and trial counsel in several actions brought by State Attorneys General against Merck.
- Smith v. Merck & Co., Inc.Co-tried a federal MDL case in Louisiana in which plaintiff claimed to have suffered a heart attack as a result of ingesting Vioxx®. Unanimous defense verdict for Merck after less than two hours of deliberations at the close of three-week jury trial.
- Barnett v. Merck & Co., Inc. Co-tried a federal MDL case in Louisiana in which plaintiff claimed to have suffered a heart attack as a result of ingesting Vioxx®. Three-week jury trial resulting in verdict against Merck, subsequently reduced to small fraction of damages award by trial court.
Magnevist Contrast Dye Litigation
Lead trial counsel for Bayer in federal MDL and state litigation regarding Bayer's Magnevist® contrast dye. Plaintiffs claim that they developed a progressive, incurable disease known as nephrogenic systemic fibrosis as a result of exposure to Bayer's gadolinium-based contrast agent Magnevist® and other contrast agents during MRI procedures.
- Gerber v. Bayer Corp. Trial counsel for Bayer in the first state court Magnevist® case set for trial. Case settled two weeks before trial after a California state court judge issued tentative motion in limine rulings favorable to Bayer.
Servcor International, Inc. v. Bayer MaterialScience LLC
Lead counsel for Bayer MaterialScience LLC in complex, multi-party commercial dispute in Florida state court. Following dissolution of the parties’ business relationship in the commercial roofing market, plaintiff sought damages over $100 million for breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, negligence, fraud, conspiracy, and other tort and contract claims. After Bayer prevailed on two motions to dismiss, plaintiff voluntarily dismissed all claims with prejudice.
Additional Representative Litigation
Trial counsel for Bayer in mass tort litigation resulting from withdrawal of Baycol®, Bayer’s cholesterol-reducing medication.
- Jensen v. Bayer Corp.Defeated class certification of medical monitoring and consumer fraud claims brought by putative class of former Baycol® users.
- DeBouse v. Bayer Corp.Defeated class certification of Illinois consumer fraud claims brought by putative class of former Baycol® users.
- Rushton v. Bayer Corp.Trial counsel for Bayer in products liability case involving Baycol®. Settled favorably after jury selection.
- Galdi v. Bayer Corp. Trial counsel for Bayer in products liability case involving Baycol®. Settled favorably after jury selection.
Trial counsel for AstraZeneca in mass tort litigation filed by plaintiffs who alleged they developed diabetes and other metabolic disorders from Seroquel®, an antipsychotic medication.
- Hopkins v. AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals, L.P. Trial counsel for AstraZeneca in the first Seroquel® case selected by plaintiffs to be tried in state court. Deposed plaintiff's case-specific causation expert who was the subject of AstraZeneca's Daubert motion. Delaware state court granted the Daubert motion and entered summary judgment for AstraZeneca.
- Scaife v. AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals, L.P. Trial counsel for AstraZeneca in the second Seroquel® case selected by plaintiffs to be tried in Delaware state court. Court granted AstraZeneca’s Daubert motion on plaintiff's case-specific causation expert and entered summary judgment for AstraZeneca.
- Hebert v. AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals, L.P.Trial counsel for AstraZeneca in a Seroquel® case selected by plaintiffs to be tried in Delaware state court. Deposed plaintiff's case-specific causation expert who was the subject of another AstraZeneca Daubert motion. Plaintiff voluntarily dismissed the case with prejudice within three weeks of trial and on the eve of the hearing on AstraZeneca’s Daubert motion.
- Vann v. AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals, L.P. Counsel for AstraZeneca in Seroquel® case that plaintiff voluntarily dismissed with prejudice after discovery.
Thurston v. Merck & Co., Inc.
Lead trial counsel for Merck in products liability case removed to federal court in Houston in which plaintiff alleged that he developed muscle-related injuries from Merck’s cholesterol reducing medication, Zocor®. Merck's motion to dismiss was granted and the Court dismissed the case with prejudice. On appeal, the Fifth Circuit affirmed the dismissal with prejudice.
Ketchum v. Merck & Co., Inc.
Trial counsel for Merck and Schering-Plough in products liability case in Florida state court in which plaintiff alleged that he developed rhabdomyolysis from Merck’s cholesterol-reducing medication, Vytorin®. Obtained voluntary dismissal without prejudice after Merck filed its motion to dismiss.
Acker v. Merck & Co., Inc.
Trial counsel for Merck and Schering-Plough in products liability removed to federal court in Beaumont in which plaintiff alleged that he developed rhabdomyolysis from Merck's cholesterol reducing medication, Vytorin®. Court granted Merck’s motion for summary judgment finding plaintiff’s claims barred by the learned intermediary doctrine.
In re Factor VIII or IX Concentrate Blood Products Liability Litigation
Trial counsel for Alpha Therapeutic Corporation in mass tort litigation involving allegations that a blood factor concentrate medicine marketed by Alpha and other pharmaceutical companies had caused plaintiffs with hemophilia to contract AIDS.
- W.E.A. Smith, et al. v. Alpha Therapeutic Corporation Co-tried nine products liability cases consolidated for trial in Louisiana state court. Obtained defense judgment for Alpha based on statute of limitations in eight of the nine cases after four-month bench trial.
- Doe v. Alpha Therapeutic Corporation Represented Alpha in consolidated trial in Missouri state court. Unanimous defense verdict for Alpha in all three cases after four-week jury trial. Affirmed on appeal.
- Does v. Alpha Therapeutic Corporation Represented Alpha in nine cases filed in Minnesota state court by parents of hemophiliacs. Obtained summary judgment for Alpha in all nine cases.
- Does v. Alpha Therapeutic Corporation Represented Alpha in cases filed by parents of hemophiliacs. Cases settled on favorable terms.
- Walker v. Alpha Therapeutic Corporation National counsel for Alpha in $600 million class action settlement involving 6,000 hemophiliacs allegedly infected with the HIV virus through blood factor concentrate marketed by Alpha and other fractionators and used by hemophiliacs to control bleeding. Settlement affirmed by Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals.
Bandag, Inc. v. Michelin Retread Technologies, Inc.
Trial counsel for Bandag, a leading retreader of truck tires, in claims against Michelin for raiding Bandag’s network of independent retread dealers. Successfully defeated preliminary injunction motion after an evidentiary hearing. After two-week jury trial in Iowa state court case settled favorably.
Stone Container Corporation v. Hartford Steam Boiler Inspection and Insurance Co.
Defended Hartford Steam Boiler Inspection and Insurance in insurance coverage case in which paper manufacturer sought $80 million for the explosion of a pulp digester. District court entered summary judgment for plaintiff. Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals reversed with instruction to enter judgment for Hartford Steam.
In re National Century Financial Enterprises, Inc.
Represented Deloitte & Touche LLP in accountant liability lawsuits nationwide arising out of the collapse of one of Deloitte’s audit clients, National Century Financial Enterprises, Inc. Plaintiffs sought billions of dollars in damages. Case settled on favorable terms.
Law360, Q&A with Goldman Ismail’s Andy Goldman (April 2013)
Andrew L. Goldman & J. Walter Sinclair, Advisability and Practical Considerations of Court-Imposed Time Limits on Trial, Defense Counsel Journal, Vol. 79, No. 4 (October 2012)