Source: https://www.bestlawyers.com/lawyers/david-b-weinstein/37215
Timestamp: 2019-04-26 07:50:55+00:00

Document:
David Weinstein has an active civil and criminal litigation practice, with an emphasis on environmental, toxic tort, real estate, business, health care, and other complex matters. In the civil context, David represents clients in class action, mass tort, multidistrict, and other complex litigation. In the criminal area, David represents business organizations and individuals in federal, state, and local investigations. He also has substantial experience representing clients in internal investigations involving allegations of fraud, regulatory violations, and other misconduct. In both the civil and criminal areas, David has substantial experience helping clients develop and implement crisis management and public relations strategies.
David is listed in The Best Lawyers in America in both Commercial Litigation and Environmental Law, as well as in Chambers USA (Band #1), The International Who's Who of Business Lawyers, and The International Who's Who of Environmental Lawyers. He is recognized as one of "Florida's Legal Elite" by Florida Trend magazine, which inducted him into its Florida Legal Elite Hall of Fame in 2010. Florida Super Lawyers has rated David as one of Florida's "Top 100" lawyers each year since 2009. David is rated AV® by Martindale-Hubbell Law Directory, and he was selected by the Tampa Bay Business Journal in 2005 to be included in Who's Who in Business in the Tampa Bay Area.
David has a long record of service to the legal profession and the community, including the following positions: Member, Board of Directors, WEDU, West Central Florida's primary public broadcasting station; Chair, Environmental Enforcement and Crimes Committee, ABA Section of Environment, Energy, and Resources; Chairman, City of Tampa Board of Ethics; Member, Florida Chamber Foundation's Six Pillars Caucus system and its Civic & Governance Systems Caucus; Co-Chair, Criminal Litigation and Enforcement Subcommittee, ABA Environmental Litigation Committee; Vice-Chair, Defense Research Institute (DRI) Toxic Torts and Environmental Law Mass Torts Specialized Litigation Group; and Master Lawyer, Tampa Bay Inn of Court. He is also a member of the Herbert G. Goldberg Inn of Court (Criminal Law) and the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. A fourth degree black belt, David is the senior instructor of Tampa Moo Duk Kwan, a non-profit martial arts club.
David lectures and writes on a regular basis on environmental, business, and other issues. These have included presentations for the United States Sentencing Commission, the American Bar Association, the Federal Bar Association, the National Association of Environmental Law Societies; the Florida Chamber of Commerce, and The Florida Bar, as well as publications in the Federal Bar News & Journal, The National Law Review, and in Defense Research Institute and ABA newsletters.
David is a member of The New York State Bar Association, The District of Columbia Bar, and The Florida Bar, and he is admitted to the bars of the U.S. Supreme Court, the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the Second Circuit, the District of Columbia Circuit, and the Eleventh Circuit, and the U.S. District Courts for the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York, the District of Columbia, the Northern, Middle, and Southern Districts of Florida, and the District of Puerto Rico. David received his undergraduate and law degrees from the University of Florida, where he was a member of the Trial Competition Team, Florida Blue Key, and Omicron Delta Kappa.
Interactive Retail Management, Inc., et al. v. Microsoft Online, L.P., et al. Currently defending Microsoft in a putative class action in which the class representative alleges that it and others similarly situated were damaged because Microsoft failed to prevent "fraudulent clicks," i.e., clicks on an advertiser's link that are not generated by prospective customers, which purportedly resulted in charges for advertising services that members of the putative class did not actually receive.
U.S. United Ocean Services v. Mosaic Fertilizer: Currently defending Mosaic in an arbitration proceeding before the Society of Maritime Arbitrators in which claimant is demanding approximately $50 million in damages. The claim is for deadfreight allegedly due following a force majeure event declared by Mosaic after mining was enjoined at its South Fort Meade, Hardee County Extension. Two arbitration hearings were completed in 2013, and two additional hearings are expected to occur in 2014.
Mims Properties Investments, et al. v. Mosaic Fertilizer: Currently defending Mosaic in federal court litigation in which plaintiffs filed a sixteen-count complaint alleged breach of land reclamation agreements and improper reclamation at a former phosphate mine of more than 2,000 acres. Plaintiffs sought damages in excess of $50 million. As a result of extensive motion practice and other pre-trial advocacy, Plaintiffs’ claims were reduced by more than $40 million and they proceeded to jury trial with approximately $10 million in claims. The jury returned a split verdict and awarded Plaintiffs approximately $1.5 million in damages—less than 3% of what they had originally sought. Mosaic subsequently filed post-trial motions, which remain pending, to further reduce the damages award.
Sierra Club Sierra Club, et al. v. Army Corps of Engineers: Obtained summary judgment for Mosaic Fertilizer in a federal court challenge to mining at the "Altman Tract," which was filed by the Sierra Club and other environmental advocacy groups concerning a Section 404 Clean Water Act permit issued by the US Army Corps of Engineers.
Los Angeles Unified School District v. Cronimet, et al.: Defended Cronimet and United Alloys & Metals in an action filed in the Central District of California involving allegations of offsite groundwater contamination from chlorinated solvents purportedly affecting a nearby school.
Mosaic v. Van Fleet International Airport Development Group. Obtained summary judgment in a $20 million contract action involving an option to purchase more than 20,000 acres of land. The judgment was subsequently affirmed by the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals.
U.S. v. Lee. Defended Chief Officer of foreign flagged vessel in a federal criminal prosecution under 18 U.S.C. § 1001.
Hannas v. Ashland Chemical Co. Resolved, through a mutually beneficial business transaction, a federal court action against Ashland involving alleged ground water contamination of property adjacent to a chemical distribution facility.
U.S. v. Bay Drum and Steel, et al. Defended client in prosecution for conspiracy to violate federal laws.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 § 1001
 v. 
 v.