loader
Page is loading...
OVERVIEW

D. Randall Brown
Partner

Fort Wayne

888 S. Harrison Street
Suite 600
Fort Wayne, IN 46802

P 260-425-4674

F 260-424-8316

OVERVIEW

D. Randall Brown
Partner

Fort Wayne

888 S. Harrison Street
Suite 600
Fort Wayne, IN 46802

P 260-425-4674

F 260-424-8316

Randy Brown is a first-chair trial attorney involved in complex commercial litigation. For over three decades, Randy has defended major class actions, tried dozens of cases throughout the country, and acted as lead counsel in multiple appeals in Indiana and before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

OVERVIEW

D. Randall Brown Partner

Fort Wayne

888 S. Harrison Street
Suite 600
Fort Wayne, IN 46802

P : 260-425-4674

Randy Brown is a first-chair trial attorney involved in complex commercial litigation. For over three decades, Randy has defended major class actions, tried dozens of cases throughout the country, and acted as lead counsel in multiple appeals in Indiana and before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

Randy is managing partner of the firm’s Fort Wayne office. Listed among The Best Lawyers in America in multiple litigation disciplines, Randy’s experience ranges from class action, shareholder and contract disputes to patent, trademark, copyright, trade secret and unfair competition claims.

Randy thrives under the constant challenge of high-stakes litigation. Appreciated for making smart choices at every turn, Randy’s common sense, intuition and multidimensional knowledge of human nature and the law, honed over decades of practice, allow him to consistently think quickly and accurately under pressure both in and out of court.

A strategist at the core, Randy analyzes what drives the behavior underlying each lawsuit in order to best leverage his client’s position. His personal commitment to preparation is supported by his proven skill in connecting with judges and juries alike. Honest, direct and able to establish immediate credibility, Randy’s personable and fact-based advocacy make him a persuasive trial attorney. Randy understands both the art and science of jury trials, and is one of the firm’s “go-to” partners in the use of trial graphics and electronically displayed evidence.

Notably, Randy also serves as national defense counsel for major companies faced with large scale class action claims. Randy knows the difficult reality of thwarting class action suits and works diligently with his clients to identify and mitigate exposure to such claims. He is valued for his aggressive defense tactics designed to resolve class actions before they snowball into significant financial and public exposure. Randy’s ability to design, manage and properly execute the right defense is relied upon by clients when seeking class settlement or dismissal of the suit at the class certification stage.

Honors

The Best Lawyers in America, 2007-2019; Lawyer of the Year, 2012

Indiana Super Lawyers, 2012-2018

Martindale-Hubbell, AV-rated

Professional and Community Involvement

Board president, Friends of the Lincoln Collection of Indiana

Former chair and board of trustees member, Manchester University

EXPERIENCE
  • A Barnes & Thornburg attorney defended a manufacturer of strollers in consumer class action alleging consumer fraud and breach of warranty. On behalf of client, we achieved a favorable non-monetary class settlement.
  • A Barnes & Thornburg attorney represented a public utility in the defense of a multi-million dollar dispute with municipality over termination of 35-year lease of electric distribution/transmission system. As part of representation, Mr. Brown guided client through state court and agency litigation while managing media relations in widely publicized dispute and successfully achieved settlement of claim once valued at over $100 million at de minimis cost to company.
  • A Barnes & Thornburg attorney represented commercial furniture products manufacturer, successfully securing a trial verdict in an action seeking to enforce contractual right of first refusal related to sale of business.
  • Affirming summary judgment holding that no fiduciary duty existed between nonvoting, preferred shareholders in closely held-corporation.
  • An Indianapolis, Indiana, jury reached a unanimous verdict in favor of firm client, a life insurance company, in a trial in which the company was accused of improperly applying an exclusion on a life insurance policy. The six-day trial included wide-ranging scientific evidence and testimony related to the insured’s activities and death. The verdict saved the company more than $1 million.
  • Barnes & Thornburg attorneys defended a class action involving bonus and executive compensation claims arising out of sale of subsidiary. On behalf of client, we used denial of class certification and partial summary judgment to drive down ultimate settlement of the case.
  • Barnes & Thornburg attorneys represented a Taiwanese manufacturer that built power supplies used in mobile homes. The plaintiff alleged that client had copied its design for the power supply devices. The firm defeated plaintiff’s preliminary injunction motion and achieved a favorable settlement shortly after the Markman hearing.
  • Barnes & Thornburg attorneys represented an adaptive technology provider in the successful defense of a patent infringement claim. On behalf of client, firm attorneys instituted reexamination proceeding at the PTO resulting in all claims being cancelled. Decision was affirmed by the Board of Patent Appeals and Federal Circuit. Freedom Scientific, Inc. v. GW Micro, Inc., No. 8:08cv1365 (M.D. Fla. 2008).
  • On behalf of client, Barnes & Thornburg attorneys successfully defended a non-compete and tortious interference claim. Through vigorous prosecution of counterclaims, we were able to secure a favorable settlement for our client.
  • On behalf of industrial equipment manufacturing client, Barnes & Thornburg attorneys received an opinion from the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals affirming summary judgment of non-infringement in favor of firm client, PHD. The precedential opinion in Welker Bearing Co. v. PHD Inc. 550 F.3d 1090 (Fed. Cir.), explains "means-plus-function" patent claim limitations while confirming that the PHD does not infringe two patents asserted by Welker Bearing. Welker Bearing Co. v. PHD, Inc., No. 2:06cv13345 (E.D Mich. 2006).
INSIGHTS & EVENTS
Trending Connect
We use cookies on this site to enhance your user experience. By clicking any link on this page you are giving your consent for us to use cookies.