Socio

Andrew S. Rosenman

Employment Litigation & Counseling, Litigation & Dispute Resolution, Employment & Benefits

“Andrew is a fantastic lawyer with a great business sense and I would work with him on the most complex employment matters.”

Chambers USA

Visión general

Andrew Rosenman is Co-Leader of Mayer Brown’s Employment Litigation & Counseling Practice. His practice particularly emphasizes labor and employment litigation and counseling on behalf of employers. He has been recognized as a leading employment lawyer by numerous publications, including Chambers USA (2022) and Benchmark Litigation (2018-2022). Legal 500 US noted that he is “an outstanding advocate. Always available, thinking outside the box to provide a variety of options to consider in terms of approach, and a true partner to his clients,” (2022) “is amazingly responsive, dedicated, and great to work with," (2021) and “an excellent lawyer at the firm… is down to earth and personable yet a fierce advocate when needed." (2020)

Experiencia

  • Hanus v. HARTING, Inc. of North America, 2024 WL 4894283 (N.D. Ill. Nov. 26, 2024). Granting summary judgment and dismissing employee’s conditionally-certified collective action under Fair Labor Standards Act, and granting summary judgment in favor of employer on counterclaim for breach of contract.
  • Grindling v. Cathay Pacific Airways, Ltd., 2024 WL 4164234 (N.D. Ill. Sept. 11, 2024). Granting motion to dismiss claims by former pilot for retaliation and failure to accommodate under Americans with Disabilities Act.
  • Home Point Fin. Corp. v. Lane, et al., No. 6:20-cv-01819 (M.D. Fla. Dec. 14, 2022). Following an in-person evidentiary hearing, granting preliminary injunction against former management employee who joined plaintiff’s competitor, extending defendant’s non-solicitation covenant for an additional 12 months, and denying new employer’s motion to dismiss.
  • Mercer Foods, LLC v. Hulme, et al., C.A. No. 2022-0155 (Del. Ch. 2022). Enjoining former sales executive from working for plaintiff’s competitor, soliciting plaintiff’s employees, or interfering or communicating with plaintiff’s customers for 12-month period following executive’s resignation.

Educación

  • University of Michigan, BA
  • Chicago-Kent College of Law, Illinois Institute of Technology, JD, with high honors
    Order of the Coif; Notes and Comments Editor, Chicago-Kent Law Review; Moot Court Honor Society; Second-best Oralist, Chicago Bar Association Moot Court Competition; Chicago-Kent Trial Advocacy Team

Admisiones

  • Illinois
  • California
  • Michigan

Courts

  • US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
  • US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
  • US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
  • US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
  • US District Court for the Central District of California
  • US District Court for the Eastern District of California
  • US District Court for the Northern District of California
  • US District Court for the Southern District of California
  • US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois
  • US District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan
  • US District Court for the Western District of Michigan
  • US District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin

Participación Profesional y Comunitaria

  • Board of Trustees, Providence-St. Mel School
  • Team Ironman Foundation athlete, and 62-time finisher of 140.6-mile Ironman®-distance triathlons
  • American Bar Association, Section on Labor and Employment Relations
  • State Bar of Michigan, Section on Labor and Employment Law
  • State Bar of California, Section on Labor and Employment Law
Share