Howard N. Feldman


Howard N. Feldman has more than 30 years of litigation experience. He focuses his practice primarily on complex civil litigation typically involving intricate questions of law and fact. He has litigated cases in state and federal courts (including bankruptcy courts), as well as in arbitration proceedings, concerning securities,commercial contracts, real property rights, insurance, unfair trade practices, intellectual property (patent, trademark, and copyright), defamation matters, and products liability, among other matters, on behalf of plaintiffs and defendants. His cases have included class actions, derivative suits, and internal investigations.

Howard has also defended clients in government agency and grand jury investigations and proceedings. These cases have involved allegations of insider trading, unregistered securities, defense procurement fraud, False Claims Act violations, the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, violations of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, and unlawfully operating as an agent of a foreign government.

Previously, Howard served as a judicial clerk for the Honorable Rita C. Davidson, Maryland Court of Appeals. While studying at American University Washington College of Law, he was a member of the Honor Society and an assistant editor of The American University Law Review.

Outside the Firm

Howard enjoys playing golf, bicycling, hiking, and traveling with his wife of more than 30 years.


  • An American multinational telecommunications corporation, coordinated defense in a nationwide class action fiber optic litigation. This complex multi-district litigation consisted of over 30 cases centralized in the Southern District of Indiana. These cases challenged the company’s right to install, operate, and maintain its fiber optic telecommunications cable network.
  • An American multinational telecommunications corporation, in its dispute against an industrial railroad company litigated in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. In this multimillion dollar case, our client alleged that the defendant breached the most favored nations provision in the parties’ license agreement.
  • An American multinational telecommunications corporation, in connection with a complex construction contract litigation against a nationally known mutual insurance company. This multimillion dollar litigation was litigated in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Newark, New Jersey and involved claims on performance and payment bond surety contracts as well as mechanics’ lien validity issues.
  • On behalf of a state insurance commissioner (in his role as liquidator), prosecuted six lawsuits and arbitrations against securities brokers to recover over $50 million lost in illegal and inappropriate financial futures transactions. Successfully tried one of the proceedings before a three judge arbitration panel obtaining an award in excess of $8 million.
  • A New York securities broker-dealer and several of his investment funds, in separate suits against the officers and directors of a multinational conglomerate and its accountants. Plaintiffs alleged that in reliance on fraudulent financial statements and income projections, they were induced to make a significant investment in the company, which soon thereafter entered bankruptcy. Numerous accounting and auditing issues were raised in the case, which primarily focused on whether the company’s assets (including real estate) and liabilities were properly reflected on financial statements under generally accepted accounting principles, and whether audit procedures were sufficient and appropriate under generally accepted auditing standards.
  • Coordinated defense of American stock brokerage and asset management firm and numerous oil and gas limited partnerships which were alleged to have violated various provisions of the federal securities laws in connection with several public offerings. This litigation was voluntarily dismissed by the class representative after extensive briefs were filed in support of the clients’ motion to dismiss.
  • Numerous underwriting syndicates sued by a large number of financial institutions, in connection with mortgage guarantee insurance. The financial institutions alleged, that among other things, breach of contract and securities fraud arising out of an agent’s improper issuance of mortgage guarantee insurance. Issues included whether the agent exceeded his authority in issuing the policy, fraudulent procurement, and a wide variety of coverage questions.
  • Coordinated representation of approximately 250 merchant marine engineers who filed product liability claims in various federal and state courts. In these cases the plaintiffs have sought recovery against numerous asbestos manufacturers and merchant shipping companies for personal injuries arising from asbestos exposure.
  • A private equity investment fund, its adviser, and several board members, in commercial litigation brought by stockholders of a private company who asserted a myriad of claims, including claims for oppressive conduct, breach of fiduciary duty and intentional interference with contract. The state trial court granted motions to dismiss the claims for failure to state a claim and for lack of personal jurisdiction. The appellate court affirmed in part and remanded the personal jurisdiction question for further proceedings.
  • A high-profile senior executive, defended in connection with an SEC insider trading investigation and shareholders’ class action and derivative suits. The SEC declined to bring charges following its investigation and the class action and derivative suits were dismissed.


  • 2017, listed in Capital Pro Bono Honor Roll


Professional Activities

Howard served as a director of the Council for Court Excellence for four years. The Council is a nonprofit civic organization that works to improve the administration of justice in the District of Columbia and federal courts and related agencies. He served on the Council’s Court Improvements Committee and was involved in the drafting of Civil Trial Delay Reduction recommendations that were considered and used by the Superior Court in its reforms of civil case processing.



  • United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
  • District of Columbia
  • Maryland
  • U.S. District Court - District of Columbia
  • U.S. District Court - Maryland
  • United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
  • United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit


  • State University of New York at Stony Brook, BA
  • American University, Washington College of Law, JD