Andrew M. Hutchison


San Francisco

(415) 593-9625

(415) 692-3514

Andy concentrates his practice in the areas of commercial litigation, intellectual property litigation, employment litigation, professional liability, construction litigation, product liability, and banking law. He handles both individual and class actions, and has litigated cases in federal and state courts at both the trial and appellate levels and through alternative dispute resolution. He has handled cases before a substantial contingent of the federal bench in California.

He has represented business entities and individuals in complex commercial and business tort litigation involving breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, intentional interference with contract and prospective economic advantage, corporate, limited liability company and partnership dissolutions and disputes, defamation, unfair competition, false advertising, conversion, fraud, conspiracy, statutory violations, shareholder derivative actions, and TCPA claims. He has represented business entities and individuals in employment matters involving restrictive covenants, trade secrets, wrongful termination, retaliation, discrimination, harassment, ERISA claims, and wage, salary, and commissions disputes. He has successfully defended companies in putative class actions. He has also represented banks and financial institutions in a variety of matters.

Andy represents businesses in various types of intellectual property and consumer protection disputes, including putative class actions involving violations of California's Unfair Competition Law, False Advertising Law, and Consumers Legal Remedies Act based on labeling and branding of products. He has successfully defended companies in claims involving patent infringement. Andy has also successfully defended companies in cases involving copyright infringement, trade dress infringement, trademark infringement, and false advertising claims under the Lanham Act and California's Unfair Competition Law and False Advertising Law. 

Andy regularly represents manufacturers, contractors, architects, landscape architects, engineers, consultants, and other design professionals in litigated matters and provides general corporate counseling on issues including risk management, contract drafting and negotiation, contractual defense and indemnity obligations, insurance procurement and coverage, fee disputes, mechanic's liens, and corporate structure, registration, licensing, and statutory compliance. He also represents companies in claims and litigation involving environmental contamination and remediation and catastrophic losses.

Andy has defended and prosecuted claims involving director’s and officer’s liability. His defense work includes defending directors, officers, and corporations in lawsuits brought by former officers and shareholders for wrongful termination, breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, conspiracy, and business torts such as intentional inference with contractual relations and prospective economic advantage. His prosecution work includes representing a corporation in an action against former officers for fraud and breach of fiduciary duty and representing a former director, chairman of the board, and CEO in a lawsuit against the other directors and officers for breach of fiduciary duty arising from his wrongful ouster from the company.

Andy has represented primary and excess insurers in lawsuits involving first-party and third-party insurance coverage, bad faith, and unfair business practices under insurance policies including commercial general liability, professional liability, technology and information E&O liability, and managed care organization liability coverage. Andy also represents insurance brokers in professional liability actions related to the procurement of insurance.

Andy earned his undergraduate degree, cum laude, from Harvard University in 2001 and his law degree, with distinction, from the University of Iowa College of Law in 2004.


Successfully moved to dismiss a putative class action against our airline client facing breach of contract, unjust enrichment, and a variety of other claims stemming from alleged false advertising regarding its enhanced economy class. In dismissing the complaint, which carried potential exposure of millions of dollars, the court accepted our arguments that the claims were time-barred and/or preempted. Before moving to dismiss, we successfully sought an order staying discovery in the case.



  • University of Iowa College of Law, J.D., with honors, 2004
  • Harvard University, B.A., cum laude, 2001
  • Arizona
  • California
  • Illinois
  • U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
  • U.S. District Court -- Central District of California
  • U.S. District Court -- Eastern District of California
  • U.S. District Court -- Northern District of California
  • U.S. District Court -- Southern District of California
  • U.S. District Court -- Northern District of Illinois
  • U.S. District Court -- Central District of Illinois
  • Arizona Supreme Court
  • California Supreme Court
  • Illinois Supreme Court
  • American Bar Association
  • The Bar Association of San Francisco