Mr. Kantrow has presented on professional liability and other legal issues at approximately 50 seminars and conferences throughout the United States, and in Europe, and in Israel, including before the following organizations: American Conference Institute; American International Group Conference; American Society for Healthcare Risk Management; Association of Legal Administrators; BCS Group’s Annual Conference; Chicago Bar Association; Harvard Club of Chicago; Illinois State University; International Underwriting Association; Israel Advanced Technology Industries; Lloyd’s Underwriting Association; Markel Corporation; Minnesota Lawyers Mutual Insurance Company; Monomoy Capital; Navigators Management Company; New Jersey Bar Association; Ravinia Capital; and Technion University (Israel). He also co-hosts Lewis Brisbois’ “The BIPA Radar” podcast, has appeared as a guest on approximately 75 radio and television programs and podcasts, has been interviewed by leading industry publications, and has published articles on various legal topics and issues.

• Quoted, "Ill. Justices' BIPA Rulings Create Headaches For Insurers," Law360, February 24, 2023
• Quoted, "Illinois Supreme Court: BIPA Claims Accrue With Each Scan," Insurance Journal, February 17, 2023
• Quoted, "White Castle Case Could Mean More Money for Claimants," Global Data Review (GDR), April 22, 2021
• Quoted, “Six Ways to Address Privacy Concerns in Biometric Vendor Contracts,” Cybersecurity Law Report (CSLR), March 3, 2021
• Quoted, “Big Questions for BIPA Case Law in 2021,” Cybersecurity Law Report (CSLR), February 17, 2021
• Quoted, “Firm courts new biometric clients with BIPA practice,” Chicago Daily Law Bulletin, February 13, 2019

• Secured an important appellate victory in a coverage dispute arising out of a doctor’s alleged assault of a patient. In a 46-page published opinion, the Illinois Appellate Court, Fourth District, not only reversed the trial court’s finding that the insurer owed a duty to defend the underlying personal injury claim brought by the patient pursuant to a professional liability policy, but also remanded with instructions that judgment was to be entered in favor of the insurer on its declaratory judgment action. The insurer’s declaratory action sought a finding that no defense or indemnity coverage was available under the policy.
• Secured a significant appellate victory on behalf of a company and its principals when the Illinois Appellate Court, Second District, affirmed the dismissal of the plaintiff’s promissory fraud claim – a cause of action unique to Illinois and notoriously difficult to have dismissed prior to discovery. Plaintiff alleged Defendants engaged in a “scheme to defraud” when they requested numerous extensions of payment terms and made additional purchase orders, despite knowing that they would be unable to pay for the purchases because their company was insolvent and likely to be sold. Lewis Brisbois obtained dismissal of the complaint. On appeal, the appellate court determined that although the plaintiff styled its claims as “fraud,” the parties’ contract required arbitration of any claim arising in connection with the agreement or purchase orders, regardless of the “moniker” that the plaintiff attached to the claim. Accordingly, the appellate court affirmed the lower court’s dismissal of the plaintiff’s claim.
• Successfully defended a media network that provides interactive online advertisements in a high-exposure, high-profile technology class action matter. Plaintiffs alleged that Mr. Kantrow’s client used local shared objects stored in Adobe Flash Media local storage to regenerate certain information stored in internet users’ HTTP browser “cookies” after users deleted those cookies. Josh convinced plaintiffs’ counsel and the California federal court that these allegations were false, and negotiated a favorable settlement for the client that was significantly less than similarly situated defendants.
• Secured a victory on behalf of a municipality in Illinois when the Circuit Court of Cook County granted its motion to dismiss the plaintiff’s malicious prosecution and defamation claims. In this matter, the plaintiff filed a nine-count complaint alleging that he sustained damages to his reputation stemming from allegedly false statements made by an employee of a co-defendant, which led to his arrest. Although the charges against the plaintiff were eventually dropped, he alleged that he suffered reputational and financial damages arising from his “false arrest” and prosecution. Each of the defendants moved to dismiss the counts levied against them.
• First-chaired a first-party bad faith insurance coverage trial for certain London market insurers in in a Mississippi state court involving more than $25 million in claims. The litigation was proceeding adversely against the underwriters, prior counsel did not properly assert federal court jurisdiction, and the policyholder attempted to transfer the case to state court. Mr. Kantrow amended the pleadings, secured the necessary affidavits and convinced the federal court to retain jurisdiction. Mr. Kantrow then persuaded the court to sever the underwriter’s declaratory judgment action from the policyholder’s bad faith claims, and to try the declaratory judgment action first. After first-chairing the declaratory judgment trial and obtaining significant rulings in his client’s favor, the case settled for a nominal amount.
• ​Won a motion for summary judgment in a federal court on behalf of three insurance broker clients after a tenacious effort and a two-year investigation, which revealed that the plaintiffs submitted a fraudulent claim. As a result, Mr. Kantrow’s clients did not have to pay undisputed damages of several million dollars as a result of several errors and omissions they made in procuring insurance coverage.
• Defeated, on a motion for summary judgment, a claim by a major U.S. telecommunications corporation for D&O coverage of an $11 million verdict that had already been upheld by the Delaware Supreme Court and for $2 million in defense costs. The court found that the underlying class action litigation was not covered by the $25 million fiduciary liability policy issued by London insurers despite the fact that the litigation arguably asserted a covered claim. This victory also protected the remaining limits of the $25 million policy from three other underlying class actions alleging similar conduct. The ruling was upheld on appeal.
• Won a motion for judgment on the pleadings, a rare occurrence in policyholder friendly Cook County, Illinois, defeating an insured's claim for coverage in a $2 million underlying action.  What made the victory even more remarkable was the fact that the claim fell within the professional liability policy's insuring agreement. Yet Mr. Kantrow convinced the court that two exclusions were applicable on their face, despite the fact the parties had not yet engaged in discovery.
• Won a motion to dismiss an errors and omission case filed in Illinois against an out of state professional despite the fact that Mr. Kantrow’s client: (a) communicated with its Illinois customer regularly by phone and email, (b) invoiced the customer in Illinois, (c) derived revenue from an Illinois business, and (d) Illinois has a very broad personal jurisdiction statute. Mr. Kantrow nevertheless convinced the court that these activities were not sufficient “minimum contacts” for an Illinois court to exercise jurisdiction over his client.
• Obtained a dismissal of all seven counts against his insurance agent client, including six counts that carried penalties of reimbursement of a plaintiffs’ attorney’s fees and punitive damages. The plaintiffs filed suit after numerous alleged misrepresentations were made to them while procuring a life insurance policy, including threats to report the plaintiffs to immigration officials if they challenged the validity of the policy. The plaintiffs sought several million dollars if the case went to trial. The case was pending in Cook County, Illinois, one of the most Plaintiff-friendly venues in the U.S. and an annual member of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s “Judicial Hellhole” list. Following extensive briefing and an hour-long argument in which the plaintiffs were represented by three lawyers from three different law firms, the judge agreed with Mr. Kantrow’s client’s position that: (1) Plaintiffs suffered no actual damages to sustain a cause of action for consumer fraud, breach of contract and misrepresentation; (2) Plaintiffs’ bad faith claim could only be brought against an insurance company, not an individual insurance agent; (3) the breach of fiduciary claim was foreclosed by Illinois statutory law; and (4) Plaintiffs did not satisfy the heightened requirements to plead a claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress. As a result, six of the plaintiffs’ seven counts were dismissed with prejudice and the case later settled for a nominal sum.
• Convinced a judge in one of the most plaintiff-friendly venues in America to throw out negligence and breach of fiduciary duty counts against an accounting firm caught up in a bitter dispute between divorcing spouses. The suit, which involves tens of millions of dollars and one of the region’s top divorce attorneys, alleged that the accountant engaged in a conspiracy with other professionals, trustees, and his wife when the firm set up estate planning devices prior to the divorce proceedings. The firm did not advise the parties to secure separate representation even though they had performed work for the wife for years, nor did they have the parties sign an engagement letter. The devices had the effect of substantially reducing the plaintiff’s share of the marital estate assets following the divorce. Josh argued that the statute of limitations barred the malpractice claims based on documents uncovered in the separate divorce proceedings, of which he convinced the court to take judicial notice. This development came after he successfully persuaded the judge not to consolidate the professional liability lawsuit with the divorce case. Following extensive briefing and oral argument, the court ruled that, despite the plaintiff husband not knowing the full extent of his damages or the number of parties involved in the alleged scheme, his knowledge that one device existed prior to the filing of the divorce case put him on inquiry notice to discover any and all malpractice based potential causes of actions and file his complaint within two years, which he did not do. The court dismissed the negligence and breach of fiduciary duty counts with prejudice, an uncommon result in this venue, and the conspiracy count without prejudice.
• Defended certain London market insurers in a complex fiduciary liability coverage lawsuit brought by a major U.S. corporation in its home state of New Jersey, involving a $25 million policy limit. The insurers had reserved the case for approximately 80 percent of the policy limit. The claim fell within the insuring agreement, and the insurers’ sole defense pertained to a single exclusion that was arguably ambiguous. Through aggressive litigation and savvy negotiations, Mr. Kantrow was able to attain a settlement at a significant discount of $12.5 million off the $25 million policy limits claim.
• Following protracted litigation and motion practice, settled several different multi-million lawsuits venued in Wisconsin, Illinois and Indiana against Mr. Kantrow's directors and officers clients for $10,000,000 under the client’s insurers’ loss reserves.
• Represented two business trade organizations and submitted a brief that helped convince the Kentucky Supreme Court to overturn a $3.75 million punitive damages verdict against a hospital following a medical malpractice trial.
• Convinced a Florida court to dismiss plaintiff's complaint against an online legal rating agency. The court upheld the client’s right to post its ratings of lawyers and doctors online. Significantly, in one of the first tests under the state’s anti-SLAPP statute, the court held that the client is entitled to a $10,000 statutory award and its attorney’s fees.
• Negotiated the favorable resolution of a complex multimillion-dollar claim in Texas involving data in transit against a technology service provider for 20 percent of the value of the claim, despite evidence demonstrating that the service provider was responsible for the loss. The claim, pursued by a major U.S. bank, credit card issuers and a Fortune 500 corporation, involved coordinated data theft from hundreds of automatic teller machines by the Russian mafia. Although there was considerable news coverage of the data breach and involvement by the FBI, Mr. Kantrow assisted the client in maintaining a low profile and avoiding media attention.
• As counsel of record for two pharmacy associations, submitted an amicus brief that assisted a national pharmacy in getting a $5.4 million pharmacy malpractice verdict overturned by a Florida appellate court.
• Assisted a Louisiana business association in convincing the Louisiana Supreme Court to reverse a multi-million dollar punitive damages award against a refinery.
• Settled a multi-million claim against his directors and officer clients for less than $50,000 in an Indiana state court after threatening to seek dismissal of the entire claim based on plaintiff’s failure to pursue a necessary party.
• Project management counsel for insurer regarding over 500 claims asserted against real estate professionals nationwide. Worked directly with the real estate agents, defense counsel and the insurer to significantly reduce the loss exposure.
• Project management counsel for insurers who defended a $50 million negligent software and business interruption claim asserted by a Fortune 100 corporation. Following extensive discovery and motion practice, helped obtained a settlement in the mid-six figures, despite evidence that strongly suggested the software provider was responsible for the loss.
• Through motion practice and savvy negotiating, settled a $4.2 million legal malpractice claim pending in Madison County, Illinois for approximately 15 percent of the value of the claim.
• Defended a high-speed sightseeing vessel captain in a $30 million professional liability claim by a 35-year-old triathlete who was mauled by the vessel while swimming in Lake Michigan. Following a four week trial in Chicago and appellate proceedings, the case was settled for a confidential amount less than the pre-trial settlement demand.
• Defended tour boat operator against a $10 million professional liability lawsuit in Chicago. Notwithstanding adverse findings following several regulatory agencies’ investigations, the case settled for a significant discount off the pre-trial demand following a two week trial.
• Won dismissal of the three out of four counts brought by a putative class of thousands of individuals who alleged data breach and professional liability claims against a health care service company.
• Achieved a remarkable settlement on a case where Mr. Kantrow defended a wholesale insurance broker in a multi-million lawsuit filed in an Illinois state court. Notwithstanding the retail broker’s demand that his client contribute one-third of the multi-million settlement and that his client had authorized a six figure settlement authority, Mr. Kantrow was able to get his client dismissed for $25,000.
• Following an early pre-trial conference, Mr. Kantrow achieved what his insurance consultant client called a “great settlement.” The plaintiff alleged that it suffered hundreds of thousands of dollars in losses due to Josh's client’s alleged failure to advise that a potential gap in coverage may result in changing health insurance programs. Mr. Kantrow was able to achieve a settlement for about 50% of the value of the claim by bringing a motion to dismiss and seeking an early settlement conference, during which the consultant was able to provide informal testimony to the court about the plaintiff’s potential contributory negligence.
• In several cases as “rescue counsel,” including in Illinois, Mississippi and Utah, achieved highly favorable settlements of complex multi-million dollar coverage litigation matters by discovering defenses prior counsel missed and overcoming waiver and estoppel issues asserted by the policyholder. Mr. Kantrow tried one of these cases.
• In cases throughout the United States, has successfully reduced, through litigation and audits, the amount of defense costs that otherwise would have been owed by insurers to policyholders.

• American Israel Public Affairs Committee’s Chicago Area Young Leadership Council, co-founder and former co-chair
• Anshe Emet Synagogue Men’s Club Board
• American Technion Society
• Chicago Jewish United Fund Lawyers Division Dinner Committee