Michael J. Mueller
Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP
Mr. Mueller is a partner in the Washington, D.C. and Miami offices of Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP, where he formerly chaired the Complex Commercial Litigation Practice Group. He specializes in complex class actions, with an emphasis on RICO, wage-hour, and consumer product claims. He has tried more class actions/representative actions to verdict than perhaps any other attorney in the country.
For several decades, Mr. Mueller was on the Board of Advisors of the RICO Law Reporter, a monthly publication focusing on developments in RICO law, and on the Editorial Advisory Board of the Civil RICO Report, a bi-weekly publication focusing on developments in civil RICO law.
Mr. Mueller has been active in American Bar Association committees devoted to RICO issues. He is a former Chair of the Antitrust Section’s Civil RICO Committee, and former Management Co-Chair of the Labor & Employment Law Section’s Antitrust RICO & Labor Law Committee. He served as Chapter Editor for “RICO and Labor Law,” which first appeared as Chapter 30 in the Fourth Edition of The Developing Labor Law (ABA and BNA 2001). He also wrote the section on antitrust and RICO claims in employment cases for the Supplement to William J. Holloway and Michael J. Leech, Employment Termination Rights and Remedies (2d ed. BNA) (2003).
Mr. Mueller is a regular speaker at the RICO seminar sponsored by the Institute for Continuing Legal Education in Georgia. He also has published numerous articles and papers on RICO practice and developments in RICO law, including the following: “Retaliation Bites: Got a whistle-blower on staff? Better not fire him. Thanks to Sarbanes-Oxley, he can now sue under RICO,” Corporate Counsel (June 2003); “Who’s Extorting Who?: Debunking Myths About the Use of Civil RICO in Labor Disputes,” white paper delivered at annual meeting of ABA Labor and Employment Law Section (August 13, 2002); “Can Employees Still Sue for Racketeering?”, The Metropolitan Corporate Counsel (June 2000); “Supreme Court announces test for whether civil RICO plaintiffs state a conspiracy claim,” Civil RICO Report (May 24, 2000); “Supreme Court rejects another accrual rule for civil RICO claims, but fails again to provide definitive answer,” Civil RICO Report (dual by-line) (Mar. 29, 2000); “The use of RICO in Workers’ Compensation Disputes,” white paper delivered at annual meeting of Antitrust, RICO & Labor Law Committee (August 9, 1999); “Supreme Court to resolve split on conspiracy standing for injuries not caused by predicate acts,” Civil RICO Report, Vol. 15, No. 5, p. 1 (July 21, 1999); “Humana, Inc. v. Forsyth: The Insurance Business Is Now Subject to RICO … Is This the End of the McCarran-Ferguson Defense for Insurers?”, 29 RICO Law Reporter, No. 2, p. 204 (Feb. 1999); “The Impact of Salinas on Civil RICO Cases,” white paper delivered at spring meeting of Civil RICO Committee (April 3, 1998); “Supreme Court Broadly Interprets RICO’s Conspiracy Provision,” Civil RICO Report, Vol. 13, No. 14, p. 4 (Dec. 24, 1997); Private Litigation Addressing Corporate Campaign Activity,” white paper delivered at annual meeting of Antitrust, RICO and Labor Law Committee (Aug. 1997); “Klehr v. A.O. Smith Corp.: When Will We Learn the Accrual Rule for Civil RICO?”, 26 RICO Law Reporter, No. 1, p. 8 (July 1997); “Current Analogues Between RICO and the Clayton Act,” white paper for spring meeting of Civil RICO Subcommittee (dual by-line), published in 21 RICO Law Reporter, No. 5, p. 841 (May 1995); “Improper Litigation Conduct as RICO Predicate Acts,” white paper delivered at spring meeting of Civil RICO Subcommittee (April 6, 1995); “Litigation Activity Can Constitute RICO Predicate Acts,” Private Antitrust Litigation News, No. 19, p. 43 (Feb. 6, 1995); “RICO’s Broad Applicability to Foreign Business Activity,” 19 RICO Law Reporter, No. 1, p. 7 (Jan. 1994).
