Litigation

By focusing on the big picture during litigation, we offer ongoing value and set our clients up for success today and in the future. Whether these matters require an early strategic settlement, tactical depositions and negotiations aimed at forcing the opposition to settle, ongoing motion practice, or a fierce courtroom battle waged before the bench or a jury, our team has the proven litigation experience and depth necessary to guide clients to outcomes that align with their business goals.

Our litigation department includes trial attorneys with decades of experience both in prosecution and criminal defense at the state and federal levels, as well as attorneys with a wide range of in-house experience. Clients entrust us with their most sensitive litigation matters, knowing that we deliver customized strategies to meet the national standards of excellence they require at the value they expect from a Midwest-based firm.

Creativity and agility are hallmarks of our litigation practice. We generate process efficiency where possible based on our prior experience in similar matters, but we do not simply rely on the same playbook regardless of the situation. We draw on the collective experience of our litigators and on the knowledge of our strong network of non-litigator colleagues in a variety of legal sub-specialties to find innovative solutions to even the most complicated or novel litigation issues. Our firm’s structure allows us to allocate to litigation matters the amount of resources expected from a large firm, but with a level of flexibility and willingness to pivot quickly that is uncommon among firms of our size.

Our attorneys have successfully resolved thousands of litigation matters in state and federal courts, before domestic and international arbitration tribunals, and in front of administrative agencies. Because of our substantial experience in a wide range of litigation areas, our litigators are frequently called upon locally, nationally and internationally to represent clients in highly complex disputes.

• Represent a global, Fortune 500 medical device company operating in over 150 countries and employing more than 100,000 people. The firm represents this client in multiple practice areas, including litigation practices such as commercial litigation and investigations. Our litigators are routinely successful resolving litigation matters to the client’s continued satisfaction. We achieve outstanding results with the highest level of service while managing efficiently to matter budgets.
• Represent a major American mass media and publishing company. The firm has handled several large matters for this client, including two significant antitrust cases and another commercial litigation / constitutional law case over the past twenty years. Both antitrust cases were ultimately settled on favorable terms – the first during the jury trial. The business tort and defamation matter was an appeal of a high-profile case that the firm took over from another law firm. We were able to settle the matter after briefing was submitted.
• Fredrikson successfully obtained a decision from the Minnesota Supreme Court clarifying what activities constitute a continuation, rather than an expansion, of a nonconforming land use in Minnesota. Represented the landfill operator in this significant nonconforming use rights case, AIM Dev. (USA), LLC v. City of Sartell, 946 N.W.2d 330 (Minn. 2020).
• Defended a natural gas pipeline company against a class action lawsuit filed by landowners along the pipeline alleging crop yield losses associated with the facility.
• Achieved complete dismissal of all claims filed against a Fortune 100 company in an environmental contamination case alleging violation of the Minnesota Environmental Response and Liability Act, trespass, nuisance, negligence, and willful and wanton conduct. The Minnesota Court of Appeals dismissed the plaintiffs’ appeal.
• Represented a prominent wind energy developer/sponsor in a complex dispute with a construction contractor arising under an Engineering, Procurement and Construction contract to construct 300 MW wind energy facility in North Dakota. The dispute involved complex claims and counterclaims in the tens of millions of dollars. We served as lead trial counsel in the confidential two-week arbitration of this dispute.
• In numerous disputes arising under Turbine Supply Agreements and related Operation and Maintenance Agreements, we represented leading international turbine manufacturer, leading to a favorable resolution negotiated between our client and the developer and asset owner of multiple wind energy facilities.
• Represented dozens of corporations and non-profit institutions in cases arising under the False Claims Act (FCA), including a recent Medicare Fraud case, against one of the largest healthcare providers in the country. The court dismissed the qui tam claims on a motion to dismiss, and the Eighth Circuit affirmed the dismissal on appeal.
• Represented major multi-specialty medical center in FCA litigation. The qui tam relator voluntarily dismissed the suit after the court’s favorable decision on motions to dismiss.
• Won dismissal of a $180 million False Claims Act high-profile lawsuit brought by a qui tam relator against a major municipality. The individual appealed and the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court’s dismissal of the action.
• Represented a physician-owned medical group in a lawsuit brought by one of its former shareholders. The shareholder unsuccessfully alleged, among other things, that the medical group’s shareholders breached their fiduciary duties to him by failing to exercise due care in negotiating contracts with its vendors. He claimed he had suffered millions of dollars in damages as a result of the alleged breaches of fiduciary duties. The Court granted summary judgment in favor of our client and dismissed all claims brought by the former shareholder.
• Represented a medical group that had terminated the employment of one of its shareholders based on fiduciary duty violations. We positioned the dispute for an early mediation by aggressively investigating his claims for relief as a minority shareholder and asserting counterclaims against him based on his conduct. The matter was settled on favorable terms to our client within four months of the service of his complaint.
• Represented a minority member of a closely held corporation following the controlling members’ attempt to seek court-ordered dissolution of the limited liability companies they jointly owned. We asserted counterclaims on behalf of our clients and opposed the dissolution of the closely held corporations. Following the controlling members’ unsuccessful effort for appointment of a receiver, we were able to negotiate a very successful mediated settlement of the dispute.
• Achieved substantial jury award on behalf of surgery center in lawsuit against former members and employees and their related entities.
• Brought breach of contract and fraudulent inducement claims on behalf of a health system against a Medicaid managed care organization and achieved a favorable settlement following discovery.
• Successfully represented a health system provider in multimillion dollar billing dispute with Blue Cross Blue Shield of Minnesota.
• Represented an ambulatory surgical center in a three-week jury trial in Iowa state court. This complex case involved ten different parties and more than a dozen claims and counterclaims, including breaches of multiple agreements, a variety of business torts, and civil conspiracy. Our client prevailed and, once the dust settled on the many claims, we obtained a seven-figure award of damages. Working with a nationally recognized expert in forensic discovery, we also obtained a six-figure sanctions award due to an opposing party’s intentional destruction of thousands of text messages.
• We represented a health care provider in a federal and state antitrust investigation seeking to challenge a proposed merger. Following nearly two dozen investigative interviews, and production of voluminous documents, we successfully negotiated with the government to allow the merger to be completed.
• In a putative class action brought against a health care provider alleging fees for copies of medical records were overcharged in violation of Wisconsin state law, we developed and implemented an aggressive discovery strategy that resulted in plaintiff’s counsel voluntarily dismissing the action with prejudice. This extraordinary outcome resolved the case without our client paying a single cent to settle the claims.
• Before the Minnesota Supreme Court, we prevailed in a case concerning the scope of jurisdiction of district and appellate courts when the dispute is properly resolved through arbitration. See Woischke v. Stursberg & Fine, 920 N.W.2d 419 (Minn. 2019). The Minnesota Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals’ decision, which was unfavorable to our client, holding that the appellate court did not have jurisdiction over the appeal and directed the district court to stay its proceedings pending completion of the arbitration that our client had initiated.
• We represented a health system in a pre-litigation investigation by state and federal authorities. The government alleged that the client’s mechanism for calculating compensation for some highly specialized physicians violated the federal Stark law. We developed several novel arguments narrowing the reach of Stark’s prohibitions and expanding the scope of the applicable exceptions, creating leverage that permitted a favorable settlement with the state and federal governments.
• Starting in 2014, we defended Hormel Foods Corporation in Minnesota Federal Court against claims that it misappropriated trade secrets and breached multiple contracts with the plaintiff related to a failed joint development program. At the center of the lawsuit was Hormel’s innovative and revolutionary new process for making a next generation of pre-cooked bacon Hormel markets under the brand Bacon1. The plaintiff sought damages in excess of $60 million. After two years of litigation, Fredrikson’s litigation team defeated each of the plaintiff’s claims on summary judgment. The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed Hormel’s victory in 2018, and the District Court subsequently awarded Hormel more than $800,000 in fees and costs in defending the lawsuit. Fredrikson is also representing Hormel in two patent infringement lawsuits filed in 2018 relating to this hybrid bacon cooking process technology, and has already defeated the infringement claims in one of those lawsuits.

Main Contacts

Show all Litigation professionals