Photo of Eric C. Tew

Eric C. Tew Senior Counsel

Areas of Practice

Industries

Bar Admissions

  • Virginia, 2001
  • District of Columbia, 2002

Court Admissions

  • U.S. Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit
  • U.S. District Court, District of Columbia
  • U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Virginia
  • U.S. District Court, Western District of Virginia

Education

William and Mary School of Law, J.D.

  • Order of the Coif
  • William & Mary Law Review, Editorial Board

Old Dominion University, B.S., magna cum laude

Eric C. Tew's practice involves a variety of litigation matters both at the trial and appellate levels, with particular emphasis on product liability, financial services, class actions, and multidistrict litigation. He also has handled environmental contamination matters and other complex civil litigation.

Mr. Tew has defended major national and international companies in dozens of class actions in state and federal courts throughout the country, many of which have involved consumer fraud allegations and related claims. Mr. Tew also has extensive experience representing clients in multidistrict litigation, and he has briefed and argued a wide array of procedural and substantive issues at the trial and appellate levels under both federal and state law. He also defends clients in high exposure personal injury and wrongful death cases, on both a regional and national basis. His product liability practice involves a variety of products, including automobiles, trucks, medical devices, food products, asbestos, and sports equipment. Mr. Tew also counsels clients on non-litigation matters, including reviewing proposed warranty language and contracts, and assessing potential liability exposure arising out of recalls and other customer satisfaction initiatives.

In the area of financial services litigation, Mr. Tew has represented banks, mortgage lenders and mortgage servicers in actions alleging wrongful foreclosure and related issues. His environmental practice has included the defense of a major petroleum company against claims of groundwater contamination allegedly caused by a gasoline additive.

Experience

  • Class action defense
  • Product liability defense
  • Multidistrict litigation
  • Appellate
  • Environmental contamination litigation
  • Eminent domain and condemnation proceedings
  • Financial services litigation
  • Coba v. Ford Motor Co., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 123546 (D.N.J. Aug. 4, 2017) (granting summary judgment in putative class action involving allegedly defective fuel tanks).
  • Holiday Motor Corp. v. Walters, 790 S.E.2d 447 (Va. 2016) (drafted amicus brief for PLAC supporting successful appeal by Mazda).
  • In re Ford Tailgate Litigation, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 159534 (N.D. Cal., Nov. 25, 2015) (granting summary judgment and Daubert motions to exclude four plaintiffs’ experts and denying motion for class certification as moot in case involving 1.5 million vehicles).
  • Mickens v. Ford Motor Co., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 121029 (D.N.J. Sept. 10, 2015) (granting summary judgment in putative class action).
  • Hyundai Motor Co. v. Duncan, 766 S.E.2d 893 (Va. 2015) (drafted amicus brief for PLAC supporting successful appeal by Hyundai).
  • In re Ford Tailgate Litigation, 2014 WL 1007066 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 12, 2014) (granting partial motion to dismiss class action).
  • Davisson v. Ford Motor Company, 2014 WL 4377792 (S.D. Ohio Sept. 3, 2014) (granting motion to dismiss multi-state class action without leave to amend).
  • Funkhouser v. Ford Motor Co., 285 Va. 272 (2013) (drafted amicus brief for PLAC affirming judgment for Ford).
  • Capital Motor Lines v. Detroit Diesel Corp., 799 F. Supp.2d 11 (D.D.C. 2011) (granting summary judgment in case involving motor coach fire).
  • Anchia v. DaimlerChrysler AG, 230 S.W.3d 493 (Tex. Ct. App. July 23, 2007) (affirming trial court ruling regarding lack of personal jurisdiction over foreign parent corporation).
  • Terry v. Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC, 2007 Tex. App. LEXIS 5601 (Tex. Ct. App. July 18, 2007) (affirming summary judgment in putative class action involving alleged bumper defect).
  • Ziegelmann v. DaimlerChrysler Corp., 649 N.W. 2d 556 (N.D. 2002) (affirming summary judgment in no-injury class action involving lack of brake-shift-interlock devices).

Memberships & Involvement

  • Defense Research Institute
  • Virginia Association of Defense Attorneys

Recognized by The Legal 500 United States in 2017 for Dispute Resolution - Product Liability, Mass Tort, and Class Action: Automotive/Transport