Andrew has a diverse legal background with significant civil and criminal litigation experience. He has represented clients in state and federal court in cases involving breach of contract, agricultural litigation, employment disputes, civil rights litigation, defamation and personal injury. Andrew has practiced in a variety of settings, including a national law firm, as a public defender in Pierce and Lancaster Counties and as a general practice attorney in rural Nebraska. He has represented clients in the Nebraska Court of Appeals, Nebraska Supreme Court and United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. Andrew is a native of Central Nebraska and enjoys the opportunity to practice in courtrooms across the state. In his free time, he enjoys spending time with his family.
Gibbon High School, Gibbon, Nebraska
Criminal Justice, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, BS
University of Nebraska College of Law, JD
Licenses, Admissions & Associations
- Licensed and admitted to practice in the state and federal courts of Nebraska.
- Admitted to practice in the U.S. District Court of Nebraska and the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals.
- Member of the Nebraska Bar Association and Robert Van Pelt American Inn of Court.
Foster, et. al. v. BNSF Railway Company, 866 F.3d 962 (8th Cir. 2017). The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit affirmed summary judgment in favor of the railroad on the plaintiffs’ claims under the Federal Railroad Safety Act (“FRSA”), 49 U.S.C. § 20109. The three plaintiffs claimed the railroad retaliated against them for engaging in protected activities under the FRSA. The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Iowa granted summary judgment in favor of the railroad on the plaintiffs’ claims, finding the plaintiffs failed to exhaust administrative remedies, did not engage in a protected activity under the FRSA and any alleged protected activity was not a contributing factor to their claimed adverse actions.
Foster, et. al. v. BNSF Railway Company, Case No. 4:14-cv-313 (S.D. Iowa Jan. 28, 2016). The Court granted summary judgment in favor of the railroad against three plaintiffs in a lawsuit alleging retaliation for engaging in a protected activity under the Federal Railroad Safety Act, 49 U.S.C. § 20109. The Court held plaintiffs failed to exhaust all their administrative remedies on some claims. The Court held plaintiffs failed to produce evidence of retaliation as a contributing factor in their discipline despite plaintiffs’ assertions that the discipline was not warranted.
Odell v. BNSF Railway Company, Case No. CI 12-7872 (Neb. Dist. Ct. LIA Order Feb. 6, 2015; FELA Order Jan. 5, 2016; Dismissal Order Jan. 5, 2016). The Court granted partial summary judgment in favor of the railroad on plaintiff’s Locomotive Inspection Act (“LIA”), 49 U.S.C. § 20701, claim. Later, the Court denied the railroad’s motion for summary judgment on plaintiff’s Federal Employer’s Liability Act (“FELA”), 45 U.S.C. § 51, claim, however the Court still dismissed plaintiff’s case for failure of prosecution. An appeal is pending.
Soule v. BNSF Railway Company, In the District Court of Douglas County, Nebraska (2014). After four days of expert and fact witness testimony, the jury returned a verdict in favor of BNSF on the plaintiff engineer’s Locomotive Inspection Act and Federal Employer’s Liability Act claims. No appeal was taken.