J.D., UCLA School of Law
Admitted: Minnesota, Pennsylvania and California; U.S. District Court, District of Minnesota, Middle District of Pennsylvania; U.S. Court of Appeals, Third, Fifth, Eighth and Ninth Circuits; U.S. Supreme Court
Mr. Woodward is an officer of the firm. From 1987-2003, he served as an Assistant Attorney General in the Civil Enforcement Unit of the Minnesota Attorney General's Office. Mr. Woodward has extensive experience representing the State of Minnesota in lawsuits enforcing statutory prohibitions against false advertising, deceptive trade practices and consumer fraud. His consumer protection litigation areas of emphasis included health frauds, mortgage related enforcement matters and deceptive practices particularly impacting vulnerable consumers. On behalf of the Minnesota Attorney General's Office, Mr. Woodward helped to create a multi-state health fraud litigation group, which he co-chaired from 1994-1996. He served as lead counsel on behalf of the State of Minnesota in numerous multi-state enforcement efforts involving the application of state consumer protection statutes to nationwide drug advertising and promotional practices within the pharmaceutical industry, as well as a multi-state settlement with a large food company involving application of federal and state food laws and state consumer laws to the advertising and sale of a combination food/toy product marketed to young children.
Mr. Woodward has extensive consumer protection litigation experience. He has represented the State of Minnesota in both state and federal courts. He represented the State of Minnesota in State v. American Family Mut. Ins. Co., 609 N.W.2d 1 (Minn. Ct. App. 2000), a consumer and insurance law enforcement matter benefiting homeowners statewide in a case confirming the Attorney General's authority to sue insurers to enforce Minnesota consumer and insurance laws. Mr. Woodward has represented the State in numerous false advertising, deceptive trade practices and consumer fraud cases, including litigation challenging advance fee loan schemes; college financial aid services companies; credit repair frauds; usurious credit card charges; home mortgage escrow overcharges; false advertising for bogus yellow page directories; the sale of bogus cancer treatment devices; the marketing to young consumers of an unapproved, dangerous drug misrepresented as a safe and natural product; misrepresentations in the sale of hearing aids; travel promotion schemes; deceptive practices affecting small businesses; and deceptive sweepstakes practices by major national sweepstakes companies.
From 1976-1979 and 1980-1987, Mr. Woodward served as a staff attorney for a non-profit legal services corporation providing legal representation in civil matters, including litigation, to low-income persons in south central Pennsylvania. He was counsel before the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in Pugh v. Holmes, 405 A.2d 897 (Pa. 1979), a seminal case which established on a statewide basis the implied warranty of habitability in residential lease transactions.
Mr. Woodward has provided pro bono representation to persons seeking asylum. In 2000, he received the Pro Bono Volunteer Annual Attorney Award from Minnesota Advocates for Human Rights. After graduating with highest honors from St. Cloud State University (B.A.), he obtained his J.D. from the School of Law of the University of California in Los Angeles, where he was admitted to the Order of the Coif and was a member of the UCLA Law Review. He was also awarded a Masters of Law with highest honors from the National Law Center, Washington, D.C.
Mr. Woodward works on antitrust, consumer fraud and securities fraud class litigation in which the Heins Mills & Olson firm serves as plaintiffs' counsel. For example, since joining the firm, he has worked on such cases as Behrend v. Comcast Corp., Kristian v. Comcast Corp., and Rogers v. Comcast Corp. (E.D. Pa.) (antitrust claims on behalf of cable subscribers); In re McKesson HBOC Securities Litigation (N.D. Cal.) (securities fraud claims); In re New Motor Vehicles Canadian Export Antitrust Litigation (D. Maine) (antitrust action on behalf of consumers against automobile manufacturers); Phillips v. Sears Roebuck, et. al. (S.D. Ill.) (consumer fraud and RICO claims against manufacturers of lawn mowers); and Nogosek v. Carrier Corp. (D. Minn.) (consumer fraud and breach of warranty action against furnace manufacturer).