• |
  • PDF
  • |
  • |
David A. Landman Photo

David A. Landman

  • T:216.363.4593
  • F:216.363.4588
+ Assistant Contact

David Landman’s practice focuses on complex commercial litigation. He has represented clients in federal and state court on a broad range of matters at both the trial and appellate level as well as in a variety of alternative dispute resolution forums. His experience includes business and securities litigation, accounting malpractice defense, false advertising and counterfeit Lanham Act cases, internal investigations, director and officer liability defense and First Amendment matters. David also has significant class action experience, including representing defendants in consumer class actions, deceptive trade practice class actions and financial and derivative securities class actions.

David has been selected by his peers for inclusion in Best Lawyers in America® in the Commercial Litigation field for the last several years. He has also been designated as a Rising Star by Super Lawyers.

David has delivered presentations on relevant legal issues, including presentations abroad relating to legal issues facing foreign companies seeking to do business in the U.S.

Experience Highlights

* Counsel for plaintiff, a medical products distributor, in Clinical Technology, Inc. v. NeuroTherm, Inc., Cuyahoga County, Ohio, Court of Common Pleas, case no. CV 12 789859. David was on a trial team that obtained a $4,191,071.81 jury verdict against a global manufacturer of interventional pain management therapies in an action alleging misappropriation of trade secrets and tortious interference with business relationships. See also Clinical Technology, Inc. v. NeuroTherm, Inc., 2013-Ohio-3739 (8th District, Ohio, Court of Appeals).

* Successfully obtained a complete dismissal with prejudice in a putative class action for violations of the Ohio Deceptive Trade Practices Act, Ohio Consumer Sales Practices Act and both state and federal RICO claims. The named plaintiff alleged that the defendant, a nationwide fitness center chain, knowingly misrepresented the terms and conditions of membership and training contracts. The court dismissed the complaint, finding the plaintiff failed to state a cause of action and that plaintiff failed to show that the alleged violations were substantially similar to acts or practices previously declared to be deceptive or unconscionable. Robins v. Global Fitness Holdings, LLC, 838 F. Supp. 2d 631 (N.D. Ohio).

* Represented credit card processors and issuing banks in a variety of litigation, including putative class actions and false advertising matters.


    • Fordham University School of Law, 2005, J.D.
      • cum laude
    • Binghamton University, 2001, B.A., History

    • New York
    • Ohio
    • American Bar Association
    • Federal Bar Association
    • Cleveland Metropolitan Bar Association
    • U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York
    • U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York
    • U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio
    • U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio
    • U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit