Firm News

Contact Us Contact Us

1.800.553.9910

Martin R. Lueck is Named Winning Attorney by National Law Journal

Jun 22, 2004

Minneapolis (June 2004) - Robins, Kaplan, Miller & Ciresi L.L.P. is pleased to announce that Martin R. Lueck has been selected as one of this year's "Winning" trial attorneys by the National Law Journal. His profile and the complete list of the 10 winners are in the June 21 issue.

"Marty Lueck's inimitable style and approach in the courtroom is an art and a gift, you either have it or you don't. Even in the most complex, high tech cases, he brings it down to a level so that the jury understands without a doubt the critical issues at hand," said Michael V. Ciresi, the firm's chairman. "We're very proud he is being honored for his trial abilities."

Lueck has chaired the firm's Business Litigation group since 1999, and has served on the firm's Executive Board since 1996. His recent string of victories in the courtroom greatly contributed to the firm's litigation department being named "IP Litigation Department of the Year" by The American Lawyer and IP Law & Business in their January 2004 issues. He was also selected as one of Minnesota Lawyer's ‘15 Attorneys of the Year' for 2003.

Lueck is a trial lawyer with experience in complex business disputes and patent litigation. His practice includes litigation in the substantive areas of patent and intellectual property, antitrust, corporate litigation, construction, contracts, industrial catastrophe, property insurance coverage, fraud, and personal injury.

In 2003, Lueck victoriously guided his litigation teams to secure two large jury awards for patent infringement lawsuits for his clients: $520.6 million for Eolas Technologies against Microsoft, and $30 million for Honeywell against JVC. The Eolas verdict was recognized as the third largest jury verdict of 2003, according to the National Law Journal, and the Honeywell verdict ranked #64 out of the top 100 for the year.

Related Links

* Past results are reported to provide the reader with an indication of the type of litigation in which we practice and do not and should not be construed to create an expectation of result in any other case as all cases are dependent upon their own unique fact situation and applicable law.

My Pages

Sign up for email updates and track your favorite web pages