Partner, Goldman Ismail Tomaselli Brennan & Baum LLP (2009 - present)
Partner, Bartlit Beck Herman Palenchar & Scott LLP (2000 - 2009)
Associate, Mayer, Brown & Platt (1995 - 2000)
Judicial Law Clerk, The Honorable James B. Moran, District Judge, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois (1994 - 1995)
University of Illinois College of Law (J.D., summa cum laude, 1994)
- Graduated first in the class
- Law Review
Carleton College (B.A., Economics, 1991)
- Goldman Ismail Named to The National Law Journal's Litigation Boutiques Hot List for the 2nd Consecutive Year
- The Legal 500 2012 Ranks Goldman Ismail as Top Firm for Products Liability Litigation
- Goldman Ismail Receives High Rankings Nationwide and in Illinois from Chambers USA 2011
- The Legal 500 2011 Ranks Goldman Ismail as a Top Firm for Products Liability Litigation
- Goldman Ismail Obtains Complete Defense Verdict for Merck in Vioxx Case Brought by LA Attorney General
- Chambers USA 2010 Ranks Goldman Ismail, Tarek Ismail and Joe Tomaselli
- The Legal 500 2010 Ranks Goldman Ismail as a Top Firm for Products Liability Litigation
Bar & Court Admissions
State of Illinois
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois (including Trial Bar)
“Praised for his well-rounded skill set. Clients agree that he is ‘both a talented trial lawyer and a great strategist’.” Chambers USA 2010
Tarek Ismail specializes in handling complex and high stakes litigation for major U.S. corporations. Most recently, he has achieved several key trial victories for Fortune 100 companies in significant mass tort litigation. As reported in the American Lawyer, clients have praised Tarek for his “stiletto-sharp cross examinations of plaintiffs’ experts and other witnesses,” “his encyclopedic knowledge of the facts,” and his ability to sort through complex facts and data to identify the key arguments and winning strategies for trial. Tarek also has developed a reputation for resolving large scale litigation through negotiation on extremely favorable terms for our clients.
Tarek is widely recognized as a leader among first chair trial lawyers who can handle a bet-the-company case. In 2007, The American Lawyer named him one of the “Fab Fifty Young Litigators,” citing his victory in a critical Vioxx® trial in which Tarek was selected to try the case in an unfriendly venue. The Legal 500 2010 reports that clients recommend Tarek as “a very hardworking, very skilled trial lawyer,” and Chambers USA 2008 quoted clients who observed that Tarek combines “a brilliant intellect with sound common sense.” Clients commented in Chambers USA 2009 that “it’s tremendous how much he’s achieved—he knows exactly how to conduct cases and is well positioned for success.”
- Ranked by Chambers USA 2012, 2011, 2010 and 2009 as a Leading Individual in Illinois General Commercial Litigation and nationally as a Leading Individual in Products Liability
Recognized by Chambers USA 2008 as one of the “Up and Coming” Litigators in Illinois and nationally as “Up and Coming” in Products Liability
Named by American Lawyer as one of the National “Fab 50” Top Young Litigators (January 2007)
Recognized in “The International Who’s Who of Products Liability Defence Lawyers” (2010-2012)
Listed in the “Illinois Super Lawyer” section of Chicago Magazine (2009-2011)
- DRI Drug and Medical Device Seminar, "Excluding the Plaintiff's Everything, Catch-All, Kitchen Sink Regulatory Expert" (Chicago, May 2011)
- Mass Tort Judicial Forum, "Foreign Affairs: The Globalization of Mass Torts" Panelist (Philadelphia, June 2011)
Represent Merck Sharp & Dohme, Corp. in product liability litigation concerning Fosamax®, a prescription drug used for the treatment and prevention of osteoporosis and other bone disorders. In March 2013 (Atlantic County, N.J.), co-tried Su v. Merck Sharp & Dohme, Corp., the first product liability claim based on an alleged atypical femur fracture. A mistrial was declared midway through the trial.
Plumbers and Pipefitters Local 572 Health and Welfare Fund v. Merck & Co., Inc.
Represent Merck as trial counsel in a putative class action brought by health benefit providers under civil RICO and federal antitrust statutes relating to alleged co-pay subsidy programs.
In re Hormone Therapy Litigation
Serves as trial counsel on behalf of Wyeth in product liability litigation involving Premarin and Prempro products.
Defended Merck & Co., Inc. against allegations that its anti-inflammatory medication Vioxx® caused heart attacks.
- Vioxx Governmental Action Cases Serves as national counsel and trial counsel in several actions brought by State Attorneys General against Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. relating to Vioxx®.
- State of Louisiana v. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. Served as lead trial counsel in first Attorney General case relating to Vioxx® and obtained a complete defense verdict after a two-week bench trial.
Grossberg v. Merck & Co., Inc. First chaired the first Vioxx® trial in California, which resulted in a complete defense verdict for Merck.
Mason v. Merck & Co., Inc. Co-tried a personal injury claim in federal court relating to Vioxx®. Unanimous defense verdict for Merck after less than two hours of deliberations.
Plunkett v. Merck & Co., Inc. Co-tried the first federal Vioxx® personal injury trial. Two-week jury trial in Houston Federal Court. Mistrial declared after jurors reportedly deadlocked 8-1 in favor of the defense. Two-week jury retrial in New Orleans Federal Court resulted in unanimous defense verdict for Merck on all issues, which later was overturned by the district court.
CEATS, Inc. v. Continental Airlines, Inc. et. al. (E.D. TX)
Won summary judgment of non-infringement on behalf of defendant Tickets.com in a patent infringement suit before Judge Leonard Davis. Plaintiff CEATS sued over 30 defendants relating to online ticketing patents. Tickets.com was the only defendant to win summary judgment of non-infringement.
Forrest Laboratories v. Abbott Laboratories
Co-tried on behalf of Abbott a patent case relating to neonatal surfactant. After an eight-week jury trial in Buffalo, the jury returned a unanimous verdict for Abbott on all issues, which later was overturned by the district court.
Engel v. Refco, Inc.
Co-tried National Futures Association arbitration claims brought by commodity futures investors against futures commission merchant, Refco.
Rosen v. Refco, Inc.
Co-tried AAA arbitration claims brought by commodity futures investors against futures commission merchant, Refco.
Gould v. FX Concepts, Inc.
Co-tried bench trial in Maryland state court involving claim brought by speculative foreign exchange investors against investment advisory firm.
Additional Representative Litigation
In re Magnevist® Products Liability Litigation
Represent Bayer as National Trial Counsel in federal MDL and state litigation regarding Bayer’s Magnevist® contrast dye.
Gerber v. Bayer Corp. California state court Magnevist® case alleging that Magnevist® caused plaintiff to develop nephrogenic systemic fibrosis. Settled two weeks before trial.
In re Sprint Fidelis® Leads Products Liability Litigation
Represent Medtronic as part of national trial team relating to mass tort litigation regarding Medtronic’s Sprint Fidelis® heart defibrillator lead.
In re Baycol® Products Liability Litigation
Represented Bayer as a member of the national trial team relating to mass tort litigation regarding Bayer’s Baycol® cholesterol-lowering product.
Pioneer Hi-Bred International v. DeKalb Genetics
Represented Pioneer, a subsidiary of DuPont, as plaintiff in a trade secret case involving hybrid corn genetics.
Norcross, Inc. v. Siebe, Inc.
Represented Invensys in a common law fraud case involving alleged accounting errors.
Sompo Japan Ins. Inc. v. Deloitte & Touche, LLP
Represented Deloitte & Touche against claims of accounting errors in a reinsurance pool.
In re Cendant Corporation Securities Litigation
Represented Ernst & Young in crossclaim suits against Cendant Corporation relating to alleged fraud on behalf of Cendant Corporation.
Menasha Corp. v. News America Marketing In-Store, Inc.
Represented subsidiaries of News Corp. against antitrust claims relating to in-store coupon distribution.