With an eye towards minimizing the impact of litigation on clients, Andrew Reissaus specializes in the defense of all stages of complex litigation, including trial. He develops an in-depth grasp of cutting-edge scientific, engineering, and medical insights that he brings to bear in his practice, which focuses on pharmaceutical products liability cases, construction and engineering disputes, and toxic tort matters. As the day-to-day lead in the management of large litigations across multiple jurisdictions, it is not uncommon for Andrew to manage hundreds of cases at one time. His abilities to be calm under pressure and to be a voice of reason through the rigors of trial make him a great asset to clients in high-stakes disputes.
Representing clients in multiple federal multidistrict litigations and state court consolidated proceedings consisting of thousands of products liability claims associated with pharmaceutical products, Andrew has advised and represented clients at all phases of litigation from pre-litigation evaluations extending through discovery and trial. Andrew counsels clients on pharmaceutical regulatory compliance/enforcement issues arising under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, either as stand-alone projects or as an adjunct to the defense of pharmaceutical products liability litigation and corporate acquisitions/product line due diligence.
Andrew represents construction and engineering clients in complex projects and multi-party disputes and at trial. As a trial team member, he works with experts in the engineering and construction fields, defending his clients’ experts at deposition and examining such experts and opposing experts at deposition and trial.
Handling toxic tort matters associated with the industrial use of chemicals and manufacturing of consumer products, Andrew also advises clients on the risk of environmental, personal injury, and products liability litigation arising from chemical use, consumer and industrial products, proposed environmental legislation, and regulatory changes. At all phases of this work, spanning pre-litigation risk assessments to trial case preparation, he routinely consults with leading scientific and medical experts to develop and implement scientific evidence-based defenses and litigation strategies.
Supporting clients’ strategic growth plans by assessing litigation risk associated with new products and potential corporate acquisitions, both domestic and international, Andrew advises and represents U.S. and international companies on export controls, security clearances, U.S. and European economic sanctions, and requirements related to foreign direct investment, including compliance with U.S. Treasury Department Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) regulations and the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA).
Andrew’s experience as a youth journalist played a strong role in developing and honing the skills he applies as a lawyer today. As a reporter and editor for a world-wide youth journalism program, he published more than thirty articles in The Indianapolis Star. Those articles included interviews with Colin Powell, Elie Wiesel, and Dave Barry, on topics such as Hong Kong under Chinese rule, refugees, and the 1996 Republican National Convention.
Andrew’s pro bono practice includes successfully representing individual clients in immigration, family law, and landlord/tenant disputes, as well as providing legal advice to non-profit organizations. While in law school, he was a member of The George Washington International Law Review.
EducationGeorge Washington University Law School (J.D., 2009, high honors, Order of the Coif) Georgetown University (B.A., 2006, magna cum laude)
- District of Columbia and Virginia
- United States Supreme Court
- United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
- Henry R. Berger Award for Excellence in Tort Law, George Washington University Law School, 2009
- Named “Rising Star”, Washington DC edition of Super Lawyers, 2018 and 2019
- Defense Research Institute (DRI)
11th Circuit Affirms Summary Judgment in Reclast Case Based on Daubert Exclusion of Expert Testimony
Novartis Obtains Summary Judgment on Daubert Exclusion of Expert’s Testimony in Reclast Case
- Toxic Torts & Products Liability
- February 10, 2017
Insights & Events
Eight Firm Attorneys Recognized in Client’s Newsletter for Two Pro Bono Casesnews | June 20, 2022
Pro Bono Win: Hollingsworth LLP successfully represents juvenile from El Salvador in immigration proceedings.news | November 13, 2014
Kapps v. Biosense Webster: Who Is Liable When a Reprocessed Medical Device Causes Injury?publication | January 1, 2012
A Washington Legal Foundation Working Paper, co-authored by Stephen A. Klein and Andrew L. Reissaus, this article discusses one of the first cases to address the application of traditional product liability theories in the context of a reprocessed medical device, in which both the original manufacturer and the reprocessor are defendants.