Lawyers

Andrew Finn is a partner in the Firm’s Litigation Group and coordinator of the International Arbitration and Global Dispute Resolution Practice. Mr. Finn’s practice focuses on multi-jurisdictional and international disputes, both in arbitration and U.S. state and federal courts. Mr. Finn has litigated a wide variety of cases, from commercial and investor-state arbitrations, to securities class actions and other significant contractual, bankruptcy and competition cases. He has worked with clients in a wide-range of industries, including finance and banking, transportation, mining, energy, software, entertainment and health care. Mr. Finn also has advised on corporate monitorships and other large-scale government settlement compliance matters. 

Mr. Finn also devotes time to pro bono matters. As an assistant federal defender secondee in the Southern District of New York, Mr. Finn successfully defended criminal defendants at trial and in negotiations with the U.S. Attorneys’ Office. Mr. Finn also has successfully represented, and continues to represent, indigent clients seeking asylum in the United States.

Professional Activities and Community Involvement
Member, New York City Bar Arbitration Committee
Board Member, New York International Arbitration Center
Advisory Board Member, Institute for Transnational Arbitration

SELECTED REPRESENTATIONS

• Centerra Gold, Inc. and its affiliates, in a multi-jurisdictional dispute with the Kyrgyz Republic and a state owned entity arising from the government seizure of a large gold mine, including an UNCITRAL arbitration and U.S. bankruptcy proceedings.
• A Sempra Energy affiliate in obtaining a favorable award in an ICC arbitration involving a dispute with customers arising from an LNG liquefaction project and in related enforcement proceedings.
• Corporación Nacional del Cobre de Chile (CODELCO) in an ICC arbitration and ICSID arbitration against a Latin American sovereign and the state-owned mining company arising from one of the largest copper mining projects in the world. 
• A Brazilian investor, in a multi-jurisdictional dispute with a joint venture partner in an oil drillship venture. Client obtained an interim award in ICC arbitration in New York barring the consummation of the proposed restructuring plan in the adversary’s Brazilian bankruptcy proceeding.
• A major Japanese pharmaceutical company, in an ICC arbitration arising from its acquisition of a Mexican pharmaceutical business.
• A European-headquartered bank, in numerous ICDR arbitrations of claims by Latin American investors arising from private banking investments.

• Venator Materials PLC, a UK-based chemicals company, in ongoing securities class actions in state and federal courts arising from its 2017 spin off from Huntsman Corporation.
• Softbank Group, in shareholder litigation arising from the $20 billion monetization of Softbank’s interest in T-Mobile U.S.
• Anheuser-Busch Companies, in shareholder litigation arising from the company’s 2020 acquisition of Craft Brew Alliance.  
• Penn West Petroleum (now Obsidian Energy Ltd.), a Canadian oil and natural gas company, in successfully resolving a securities class action relating to the company’s financial restatement.
• Numerous investment banking firms, including Goldman Sachs, J.P. Morgan and Citi, in putative class and individual actions brought under the Securities Act of 1933 in state and federal courts around the country arising from underwriting of initial and secondary public securities offerings by numerous issuers. 
• JPMorgan Chase and other leading U.S. securities issuers and institutional investors, in responding to and litigating alleged violations of the short-swing profit rule under Section 16b of the Securities Exchange Act.
• Standard Chartered Bank, in multi-district securities litigation in the Southern District of New York arising from private banking investments. Standard Chartered obtained dismissal of two putative class actions.

• European-headquartered financial institutions, in landmark Securities Investor Protection Act and Chapter 15 adversary proceedings in the Southern District of New York arising from Bernard Madoff’s failed brokerage firm.

• Volkswagen AG and AUDI AG, in multi-district litigation centered in the Northern District of California arising out of the companies’ diesel vehicle emissions issue. Among other significant victories, VW obtained dismissal of a putative class action brought by VW dealer salespersons for failure to state any claim.

• Microsoft, in a jury trial of antitrust claims brought by software company Novell, Inc. in the District of Utah.  Novell had sought about $4 billion in damages from Microsoft for purported anticompetitive conduct in the market for PC operating systems. Ultimately, the district court granted Microsoft’s post-trial motion for judgment as a matter of law, dismissing Novell’s case in its entirety, with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit affirming the lower court’s decision.
• Saltchuk Resources, Inc., in class and individual antitrust actions brought by direct and indirect purchasers in the District of Puerto Rico and Middle District of Florida arising from alleged price-fixing in the ocean freight shipping.
• Barclays Bank, in private antitrust class actions seeking billions of dollars in damages and investigation by a multistate group of attorneys general arising from alleged manipulation of Euribor and LIBOR.

• A leading Broadway producer and theater operator, in a bench trial of breach of contract and fiduciary duty claims brought by the co-owner of a San Francisco theater business in the Delaware Court of Chancery. The trial court dismissed the principal claims and awarded no damages.  
• A former director of a Hollywood film company, in a $110 million lawsuit in New York state court brought by one of the company’s creditors alleging fraud in connection with a lending facility. The New York Appellate Division, First Department, affirmed on appeal the trial court’s dismissal of all claims, with prejudice.
• A major U.S. energy company, in a putative class action challenging a state tax exemption for a multi-billion dollar natural gas project. The trial court dismissed all claims with prejudice.