Source: https://maslon.com/mmccarthy
Timestamp: 2019-04-20 03:11:26+00:00

Document:
Mike McCarthy is a partner in the Litigation Group and chair of Maslon's Governance Committee, which manages the firm. He represents clients in complex litigation and appeals.
Mike has represented clients in the federal and state appellate courts in Minnesota and North Dakota. That work has included not only representing the parties to those appeals but also consulting on appeals and filing amicus curiae briefs in appeals to which his client is not a party.
Mike has defended putative class actions involving securities and consumer fraud, environmental claims, and antitrust and other alleged statutory violations. In addition, he has experience with and expertise in corporate trust matters, technology-related litigation (including intellectual property disputes), and medical-device liability.
Before joining Maslon, Mike served as a law clerk to Judge Gerald W. Heaney of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit and Judge Louis H. Pollak of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.
Marks v. Commissioner of Revenue, 875 N.W.2d 321 (Minn. 2016). Challenge to taxation of part-year resident.
EOG Resources, Inc. v. Soo Line R.R. Co., 867 N.W.2d 308 (N.D. 2015). Amicus brief on behalf of BNSF Railway Company in dispute involving interpretation of deeds and scope of property interests conveyed to railroad.
Marshall v. NFL, 797 F.3d 502 (8th Cir. 2015). Challenge to class-action settlement of claims related to retired players’ publicity rights.
Medical Staff v. Avera Marshall, 857 N.W.2d 695 (Minn. 2014). Amicus brief on behalf of Minnesota Hospital Association in dispute involving medical staff bylaws.
State of Minnesota v. 3M Co., 845 N.W.2d 808 (Minn. 2014). Challenge to disqualification of opposing counsel.
Triple Five of Minnesota, Inc. v. Simon, 404 F.3d 1088 (8th Cir. 2005). Reversal of order transferring ownership of substantial interest in Mall of America as remedy for fiduciary duty breach in partnership dispute between owners.
Bruggeman v. Jerry's Enterprises, Inc., 591 N.W.2d 705 (Minn. 1999). Reversal of summary judgment because merger doctrine inapplicable to option to repurchase land.
Narum v. Faxx Foods, Inc., 590 N.W.2d 454 (N.D. 1999). Affirming dismissal of securities fraud claims as barred by statute of limitations.
Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co. v. Nishika Ltd., 565 N.W.2d 16 (Minn. 1997). Obtained ruling resulting in reversal of $30 million award under UCC warranty.
In re Minnesota Asbestos Litigation, 552 N.W.2d 242 (Minn. 1996). Dismissal of claims against Australian asbestos supplier for lack of personal jurisdiction.
In re MASTR Asset Backed Securities Trusts 2006-HE3 & 2007-WMC1, No. 62-TR-CV-14-59 (Ramsey Cty. Dist. Ct.). Obtained trust instruction for corporate trustee after trial on investors' objections to requested instruction.
U.S. Hotel & Resort Mgmt. v. Onity, Inc., No. 13-1499 (D. Minn. 2014). Dismissal of putative class action alleging design defect in hotel door locks due to lack of injury and therefore no Article III standing.
Hennepin Cty. v. Fannie Mae, 933 F. Supp. 2d 1173 (D. Minn. 2013), aff’d, 742 F.3d 818 (8th Cir. 2014). Dismissal of putative class action alleging failure to pay state deed tax in connection with acquisition and sale of mortgages.
State of Minnesota v. 3M Co., No. 27-CV-10-28862 (Hennepin Cty. Dist. Ct.). Defense of claims for natural resource damages (2011 to 2016).
Braswell v. Polaris Indus., Inc., No. 09-2919 (D. Col. 2009). Defense of putative nationwide class action alleging warranty and consumer fraud claims related to snowmobile engines.
Williams v. Geithner, No. 09-1959 (D. Minn. 2009). Dismissal of putative class action alleging due process violations related to implementation of mortgage modification program.
Paulson et al. v. 3M Company, No. C2-04-6309 (Washington Cty. Dist. Ct.). Defeated motion seeking class certification of a 67,000 member putative class claiming chemical exposure via drinking water contamination (2007) and obtained a defense verdict on the merits after a seven-week jury trial (2009).
In re Canadian Import Antitrust Litig., 385 F. Supp. 2d 930 (D. Minn. 2005), aff’d, 470 F.3d 785 (8th Cir. 2006). Dismissal of putative class action alleging antitrust liability in connection with restrictions on importation of prescription pharmaceuticals purchased from Canadian pharmacies.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.