Lead counsel representing Christopher W. Madel in a lawsuit brought against the Department of Justice and Drug Enforcement Administration related to the Government’s responses to Madel’s requests under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). In November 2012 and February 2013, Madel submitted FOIA requests seeking information on oxycodone transactions for use in establishing the extent of the ongoing prescription-drug epidemic, particularly in the Southeastern United States. After the Government’s failure to substantively respond to Madel’s requests over the course of nearly a year (and well beyond the 20-day timeframe required under FOIA), in October 2013, Madel filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota. The district court granted summary judgment to the Government, which Madel appealed. Ms. Robbins argued the case against the Government at the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals and obtained reversal of the district court’s judgment and remand for further proceedings on the issue of segregability of information not appropriate for withholding from disclosure under FOIA, as well as Madel’s claims for declaratory and injunctive relief and attorneys’ fees. Christopher W. Madel v. United States Department of Justice and Drug Enforcement Administration, 784 F.3d 448 (8th Cir. 2015)
Co-lead counsel representing one of the world’s largest debt-collection companies, Portfolio Recovery Associates (PRA), in defending against claims alleging violations of the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and alleged damages claims of $1,000,000. The case proceeded to a jury trial in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota. After deliberating less than a half day, the jury found in favor of our client on all claims.
Core investigative team member on internal investigation of former punter Chris Kluwe's release from the Minnesota Vikings. The Vikings investigation generated national news and was praised by both the Vikings and Kluwe. The Vikings described the investigation—which included more than 30 interviews, analysis of two independent experts, and review of electronically-stored information along with hard-copy documents—as “exhaustive.” And although the investigative team’s report remains confidential, Kluwe’s attorney characterized the team's report as “thorough” in the press conference related to the settlement between the Vikings and Kluwe that was covered by multiple media outlets.
Represented trustees of spendthrift trust, including former FBI Director Louis Freeh, against allegations that trustees committed certain actions disqualifying spendthrift nature of the trust. Obtained summary judgment against all such allegations.
Represented Botanic Oil Innovations, Inc. (BOI) in internal investigation and related litigation against competitor Rain Nutrition LLC and former member of BOI's Board of Directors and Medical Advisory Board. After discovering contractual agreement between BOI's then-board member/medical advisor and Rain, BOI filed a lawsuit alleging, among other claims for relief: aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duty, tortious interference with contract, misappropriation of trade secrets, copyright infringement, and violation of Minnesota's Deceptive Trade Practices Act. After months of discovery, BOI agreed to a favorable settlement with the former board member/medical advisor. BOI continued litigation against Rain, ultimately obtaining judgment against Rain and dismissal of Rain's counterclaims with prejudice. In August 2012, the Court granted BOI's motion for entry of judgment against Rain in the amount of $4,869,288.
Represented Portfolio Recovery Associates (PRA) in defending against class-action counterclaims which sought to invalidate arbitration awards in which the National Arbitration Forum (NAF) acted as the arbitration organization. After the Minnesota Attorney General sued the NAF in 2009, alleging that the NAF was secretly owned by a hedge fund that held a large stake in the debt-collection industry, the NAF settled and numerous consumers filed class actions against the NAF which were consolidated as part of multi-district litigation proceeding (MDL). PRA opted out of the MDL. NAF and other defendants in the MDL ultimately settled by dismissing pending NAF arbitrations and paying over $3 million in cash. The NAF's MDL settlement agreement confirms that the value of the consumer arbitration claims dismissed following the 2009 settlement with the Minnesota Attorney General is at least $1,090,000,000. In November 2010, PRA obtained a dismissal of Defendant/Counterclaimant Freeman's counterclaims with prejudice on the pleadings, as well as an order confirming the arbitration award. After extensive briefing and oral argument, the North Carolina Court of Appeals affirmed that decision. Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC v. Freeman, 717 S.E.2d 43 (N.C. Ct. App. 2011).
Represented client charged with three felony counts of medical-assistance fraud and theft by false representation of a total of more than $100,000. The charges were reported by Minnesota media outlets, including KSTP television, the StarTribune, and the Pioneer Press. After reviewing extensive records produced by the State and filing motions to dismiss the criminal complaints for lack of probable cause, the State of Minnesota, who was represented by the Minnesota Attorney General’s Office in this case, agreed to a continuance for dismissal with no required admission of any guilt.
Second-chaired jury trial in defense of a Fortune 100 publicly-traded company in a breach of contract case relating to registered securities. The jury found in favor of the company.
Represented defendants UnitedHealth Group, Inc. and PacifiCare, Inc. in an antitrust lawsuit involving alleged price-fixing in the national market for prescription drug reimbursement under the federal Medicare Part D program. Plaintiff Omnicare sought damages exceeding $1 billion and permanent injunctive relief. In addition to briefing and arguing discovery motions, drafted portions of the motion for summary judgment. Summary judgment on all claims was granted on January 16, 2009. Omnicare, Inc. v. UnitedHealth Group, Inc., 594 F. Supp. 2d 945 (N.D. Ill. 2009). Summary judgment was later affirmed by the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. Omnicare, Inc. v. UnitedHealth Group, Inc., 629 F.3d 697 (7th Cir. 2011).