Andrew (“Andy”) Kleiner is a partner in the Phoenix office of Lewis Brisbois and a member of the Complex Business & Commercial Litigation, Autonomous Vehicles, Cargo and Logistics and Transportation Practices. Andy has extensive experience in all phases of litigation including trials, arbitrations, and administrative evidentiary hearings before public agencies. He practices in both state and federal courts across the United States. Andy has extensive background in areas of commercial litigation including contract disputes, fraud, defamation, and other business disputes. He devotes most of his attention to cargo and transportation litigation and employment.

Transportation

Andy works with multiple clients in the transportation and logistics industries, primarily representing brokers (3PLs) and motor carriers. He specializes in defending claims related to cargo loss or damage arising from interstate transportation, as well as intrastate and international transportation disputes. Andy has successfully defended cases involving damage or loss to household goods, cargo theft, fires, shipping delays, as well as disputes over high value items.

During litigation, Andy has consistently managed to transfer these disputes to federal court by invoking federal question jurisdiction, citing preemption by the Carmack Amendment (49 U.S.C. § 14706). He has achieved many favorable outcomes at the Motion to Dismiss stage, as courts have recognized that state law claims, such as negligence, breach of contract, emotional distress, theft, conversion, fraud, violation of state consumer protection or fraud statutes, and others, are preempted by the Carmack Amendment and/or the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act (“FAAAA”) (49 U.S.C. § 14501(c)(1)).

Andy also represents businesses prosecuting affirmative claims of breach of contract, indemnity, fraud, tortious interference, misappropriation of trade secrets and other proprietary information including misuse and theft of Standard Carrier Alpha Codes (SCAC) and equipment.

In addition to litigation, Andy also advises clients on contracts including broker carrier agreements, bills of lading, indemnity, and other risk transfer language. He also has considerable experience with the Graves Amendment in both litigation and advising clients who are engaged in the business of leasing “vehicles” and has obtained many early litigation voluntary dismissals based on the Graves Amendment.

Employment

Andy represents clients in all aspects of litigation and agency proceedings involving claims alleging discrimination based on sex, race, national origin, religion, disability, and others, as well as retaliation, failure to accommodate, violation of wage and hour laws, and breach of contract under both state and federal law. Andy defends clients in single-plaintiff, multi-plaintiff, and class and collective actions. He has represented employers in wage and hour collective actions, including California PAGA actions, which involve claims of employee misclassification, failure to pay overtime, failure to provide meal and rest breaks, pay stub violations, violation of paid sick leave laws, and other alleged violations of California, Arizona, and federal law. 

Andy leads and co-leads the defense team, develops strategy, manages discovery, directs case management, handles all related motion practice, and ultimately represents clients at trial or hearings before various government agencies. Additionally, he provides advice and counseling to clients on best practices for avoiding litigation, as well as on employee-related policies and procedures. This includes conducting handbook analysis for compliance with state and federal laws, analyzing exemption status, advising on discipline and termination decisions, non-compete and non-solicitation agreements and drafting handbooks and policies.

Published Opinions

Admissions

• State Bar Admissions
  • Arizona
  • California
• United States District Courts
  • United States District Court for the District of Arizona
  • United States District Court for the Northern District of California
  • United States District Court for the Southern District of California
• United States Bankruptcy Courts
  • United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of California
• United States Courts of Appeals
  • United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Admissions

AZ

CA

UT

USDC District of Arizona

USDC Southern District of California

USDC Northern District of California

USDC District of Utah

Bankruptcy Northern District of California

• United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Associations

• Board of Directors for the Federal Bar Association, Phoenix Chapter
• Sandra Day O'Connor Inn of Court

Awards & Honors

“Ones to Watch," Commercial Litigation, Best Lawyers, 2023—2024

Education

California Western School of Law, San Diego, CA

Juris Doctor

Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ

Bachelor of Arts, Communications, magna cum laude

Representative Matters

• Andy recently achieved a favorable outcome at an arbitration hearing conducted by the AAA. He represented a leading nationwide solar installation company against one of its sales and marketing partners and its owner. During the arbitration, Andy successfully managed to have the counterclaims filed by the respondent dismissed. These counterclaims included allegations of breach of contract, fraud, tortious interference, and unjust enrichment. Through his efforts, Andy obtained the dismissal of these counterclaims with prejudice. Subsequently, Andy succeeded in proving his client's claims of breach of contract, breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and unjust enrichment against the respondents. As a result, Andy’s client was awarded a Final Award of $801,397.48. This award consisted of $602,003.56 in damages, along with attorneys' fees, pre- and post-judgment interest, and other associated costs.
• Recently, Andy prevailed on a motion to dismiss in a case where the plaintiff sought $35 million on claims of bad faith litigation, malicious prosecution, and abuse of process. Plaintiff alleged that because she had been forced to be a party in prior litigation, where Andy’s clients obtained a judgment against the Plaintiff’s husband for over $3.5 million, that she was entitled to damages ten times the amount the judgment against her husband as damages. Andy defeated these claims on multiple grounds, including res judicata, litigation privilege, lack of personal jurisdiction, and failure to state a claim on all grounds. Thereafter, Plaintiff filed a motion for reconsideration and asserted that the court, Lewis Brisbois, and its client all colluded to deny Plaintiff justice. The Court denied the motion finding no legal or factual basis supporting her claims, let alone meriting review for reconsideration.
• Successfully defeated a motion to remand to state court on behalf of an interstate moving company on grounds that removal to federal court under the Carmack Amendment was proper because all state law claims asserted by the plaintiff were preempted. See the full article here.