David W. Engstrom

David has successfully represented clients in a wide-variety of business litigation for over 20 years. He is also an accomplished advisor to clients on business law matters, including commercial agreements, corporate compliance, internal investigations and risk management. David was selected for inclusion in Pennsylvania Super Lawyers for the years 2010 through 2017. Only five percent of the lawyers in Pennsylvania were selected for this honor.

His business litigation experience includes representing clients in partnership, investment management, product development, construction, and other commercial disputes. David has also counseled clients in cases involving antitrust claims, including unfair competition conspiracies, price fixing, market allocation, exclusive dealing and monopolization. In addition, he has defended clients in federal securities fraud class action lawsuits. He has also represented professionals, including lawyers, investment managers, officers and directors, in litigation involving standard of care and fiduciary duty claims. David’s litigation experience also includes employment disputes involving confidentiality and non-competition agreements, as well as wrongful termination and discrimination claims.

With regard to commercial transactions, David has negotiated and drafted product distribution, professional services, software licensing, SaaS, stock redemption, asset purchase, employment, and confidentiality agreements.   He has counseled clients on corporate compliance issues, including codes of conduct and anti-bribery and export control policies. In addition, he has advised clients on antitrust compliance, employment matters, liability mitigation, risk management, as well as counseled corporate boards on investigations of alleged corporate wrongdoing and corporate governance issues.  

He earned his Juris Doctor degree from Cornell Law School in 1995 and his Bachelor’s Degree from the University of Pennsylvania in 1992. Upon graduating from law school, David clerked for the Honorable Janis Graham Jack, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas. Prior to starting his own law firm, David practiced law with a well-known business litigation boutique firm and a mid-sized firm in Philadelphia.

David is admitted to practice in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and the following federal courts: United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania, United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit and United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

Representative Experience

• Successfully resolved an unfair competition dispute for a technology company.
• Achieved dismissal of federal securities fraud claims against brought against a former officer of a publicly traded company.
• Successfully resolved a dispute involving alleged violations of a non-disclosure agreement for a technology company.
• Successfully represented an investment management company in a dispute with a former officer and shareholder alleging employment and contract claims.
• Achieved a favorable settlement for a financial management company in a lawsuit alleging contract, fraud, and fiduciary duty claims.
• Represented a life sciences company in federal class action securities fraud litigation.
• Obtained a directed verdict for a private equity company in connection with a tortious interference with merger agreement dispute.
• Achieved a favorable jury verdict in a professional malpractice case.
• Represented a manufacturing company in a contract dispute involving development of a product.
• Defended officers and directors of corporations in a variety of actions alleging fraud, fiduciary duty and standard of care claims.
• Represented and defended corporations and other business organizations in antitrust cases involving individual and class action claims concerning unfair competition conspiracies, price fixing, market allocation, exclusive dealing and monopolization.
• Achieved summary judgment and dismissal of antitrust conspiracy case for a corporate defendant.
• Successfully defended a technology company in a dispute involving alleged misappropriation of trade secrets.
• Achieved dismissal of a false claims and conspiracy to defraud lawsuit brought against a corporate defendant.

Education

• J.D., Cornell Law School
• B.A., University of Pennsylvania, summa cum laude

Professional / Civic Activities

• Partner at Harkins Cunningham LLP, 2008 – 2010
• 2010 - 2017 Pennsylvania Super Lawyers
• Law Clerk to Honorable Janis Graham Jack, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas, 1995 - 1997
• Member, American Bar Associations, Pennsylvania Bar Association, and Philadelphia Bar Association
• President and Board Member, Swedish-American Chamber of Commerce--Philadelphia, 2010 - 2018
• Coach, Radnor-Wayne Little League

Bar / Court Admissions

• Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
• United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
• United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
• United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
• United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania

Publications / Presentations

• Presenter, Anti-Bribery and Anti-Corruption Laws Compliance, Training Seminar, June 2016.
  
• Entering the United States Market: Business Entity Selection, Location and Formation, Communiqué, April 2012.
• Confidentiality Agreements: Important Protective Measure To Safeguard Sensitive Business Information And Frequently Relied Upon By Courts In Making Trade Secret Determinations, Communiqué, March 2012.
• Presenter, Trade Secret Theft Is More Common Than You Think: What a Business Needs To Do To Protect Itself, TRA Seminar, March 2012.
• Federal District Court Dismisses Reinsurance Contract Dispute For Lack Of Personal Jurisdiction And Under Doctrine Of Forum Non Conveniens, Insurance & Reinsurance Briefing, Summer 2011.
• Third Circuit Decision Provides Guidance Regarding When Consumer Surveys May Be Disregarded By Courts In False Advertising Cases, Communiqué, August 2011.
• U.S. Supreme Court: Proof of Loss Causation Is Not Required to Obtain Class Certification of a Securities Fraud Case, Communiqué, June 2011.
• Recent Supreme Court and Second Circuit Cases Impact Corporate Defendants' Choices for Seeking Early Dismissal of Federal Securities Fraud Cases Based on the Two-Year Statute of Limitations, Communiqué, May 2011.
• Co-Author, USCIS’ New I-129 Form Requires All U.S. Employers To Certify Export Licensing Compliance And Enforcement, The Philadelphia Business Law Insider, April 2011.
• Matrixx Initiatives, Inc. v. Siracusano, Supreme Court Rejects Bright-Line Rule For Determining Materiality Of Adverse Event Reports Concerning Pharmaceutical Products, Communiqué, April 2011.
• The Importance Of Clarity In Drafting Choice Of Forum Clauses In International Commercial Contracts, Communiqué, February 2011.