Andrew E. Lencyk

Andrew E. Lencyk is Counsel to the Firm.  Prior to joining the Firm, Mr. Lencyk was a partner in an established boutique firm in New York specializing in securities litigation.  He was graduated magna cum laude from Fordham College, New York, with a B.A. in Economics and History, where he was a member of the College’s Honors Program, and was elected to Phi Beta Kappa. Mr. Lencyk received his J.D. from Fordham University School of Law, where he was a member of the Fordham Urban Law Journal. He was named to the 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018 and 2019 Super Lawyers ®, New York Metro Edition.

Cases in which Mr. Lencyk actively represented plaintiffs include:

• In re Community Psychiatric Centers Securities Litigation, SA CV-91-533-AHS (Eex) (C.D. Cal.) and McGann v. Ernst & Young, SA CV-93-0814-AHS (Eex) (C.D. Cal.)(recovery of $54.5 million against company and its outside auditors)
• In re Danskin Securities Litigation, Master File No. 92 CIV. 8753 (JSM) (S.D.N.Y.);
• In re JWP Securities Litigation, Master File No. 92 Civ. 5815 (WCC) (S.D.N.Y.) (class recovery of approximately $36 million)
• In re Porta Systems Securities Litigation, Master File No. 93 Civ. 1453 (TCP) (E.D.N.Y.);
• In re Leslie Fay Cos. Securities Litigation, No. 92 Civ. 8036 (S.D.N.Y.)($35 million recovery)
• Berke v. Presstek, Inc., Civ. No. 96-347-M (MDL Docket No. 1140) (D.N.H.) ($22 million recovery)
• In re Micro Focus Securities Litigation, No. C-01-01352-SBA-WDB (N.D. Cal.)
• Dusek v. Mattel, Inc., et al., CV99-10864 MRP (C.D. Cal.) ($122 million global settlement)
• In re Sonus Networks, Inc. Securities Litigation-II, No. 06-CV-10040 (MLW) (D. Mass.)
• In re AIG ERISA Litigation, No. 04 Civ. 9387 (JES) (S.D.N.Y.) ($24.2 million recovery)
• In re Mutual Funds Investment Litigation, MDL No. 1586 (D. Md.)
• In re Alger, Columbia, Janus, MFS, One Group, Putnam, Allianz Dresdner, MDL No. 15863-JFM - Allianz Dresdner subtrack (D. Md.)
• In re Alliance, Franklin/Templeton, Bank of America/Nations Funds and Pilgrim Baxter, MDL No. 15862-AMD – Franklin/Templeton subtrack (D. Md.)
• In re AIG ERISA Litigation II, No. 08 Civ. 5722 (LTS) (S.D.N.Y.) ($40 million recovery); and
• Flynn v. Sientra, Inc., CV-15-07548 SJO (RAOx) (C.D. Cal.) ($10.9 million recovery) (co-lead counsel)

Court decisions in which Mr. Lencyk played an active role on behalf of plaintiffs include: 

• Empls' Ret. Sys. of Miss. v. TreeHouse Foods, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22717 (N.D. Ill. Feb. 12, 2018) (denying defendants’ motion to dismiss in its entirety)
• Flynn v. Sientra, Inc., 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 83409 (C.D. Cal. June 9, 2016) (denying in substantial part defendants’ motions to dismiss Section 10(b), Section 11 and 12(b)(2) claims), motion for reconsideration denied, slip op. (C.D. Cal. Aug 12, 2016)
• In re Principal U.S. Property Account ERISA Litigation, 274 F.R.D. 649 (S.D. Iowa 2011) (denying defendants’ motion to dismiss)
• In re AIG ERISA Litigation II, No. 08 Civ. 5722(LTS), 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 35717 (S.D.N.Y. May 31, 2011) (denying in substantial part defendants’ motions to dismiss), renewed motion to dismiss denied, slip op. (S.D.N.Y. June 26, 2014)
• In re Mutual Funds Investment Litigation, 384 F. Supp. 2d 845 (D. Md. 2005) (denying in substantial part defendants’ motions to dismiss)
• In re Alger, Columbia, Janus, MFS, One Group, Putnam, Allianz Dresdner, MDL No. 15863-JFM - Allianz Dresdner subtrack (D. Md. Nov. 3, 2005) (denying in substantial part defendants’ motions to dismiss)
• In re Alliance, Franklin/Templeton, Bank of America/Nations Funds and Pilgrim Baxter, MDL No. 15862-AMD – Franklin/Templeton subtrack (D. Md. June 27, 2008) (same)
• In re AIG ERISA Litigation, No. 04 Civ. 9387 (JES) (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 12, 2006) (denying defendants’ motions to dismiss in their entirety)
• Dusek v. Mattel, Inc., et al., CV99-10864 MRP (C.D. Cal. Dec. 17, 2001) (denying defendants’ motions to dismiss Section 14(a) complaint in their entirety)
• In re Micro Focus Sec. Litig., Case No. C-00-20055 SW (N.D. Cal. Dec. 20, 2000) (denying motion to dismiss Section 11 complaint);
• Zuckerman v. FoxMeyer Health Corp., 4 F. Supp.2d 618 (N.D. Tex. 1998) (denying defendants’ motion to dismiss in its entirety in one of the first cases decided in the Fifth Circuit under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995)
• In re U.S. Liquids Securities Litigation, Master File No. H-99-2785 (S.D. Tex. Jan. 23, 2001) (denying motion to dismiss Section 11 claims)
• Sands Point Partners, L.P., et al. v. Pediatrix Medical Group, Inc., et al., Case No. 99-6181-CIV-Zloch (S.D. Fla. June 6, 2000) (denying defendants’ motion to dismiss in its entirety)
• Berke v. Presstek, Inc., Civ. No. 96-347-M (MDL Docket No. 1140) (D.N.H. Mar. 30, 1999) (denying defendants’ motion to dismiss)
• Chalverus v. Pegasystems, Inc., 59 F. Supp. 2d 226 (D. Mass. 1999) (denying defendants’ motion to dismiss);
• Danis v. USN Communications, Inc., 73 F. Supp. 2d 923 (N.D. Ill. 1999) (denying defendants’ motion to dismiss)
• In re JWP Inc. Securities Litigation, 928 F. Supp. 1239 (S.D.N.Y. 1996) (denying defendants' motion for summary judgment);
• In re Danskin Securities Litigation, Master File No. 92 CIV. 8753 (JSM) (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 23, 1994) (denying corporate and underwriter defendants’ motions to dismiss in all respects)
• In re UCAR International Inc., Securities Litigation, No. 3:98cv600 (JBA) (D. Conn.) (Case settled during pendency of defendants’ motion to dismiss).

Mr. Lencyk has co-authored the following articles for the Practicing Law Institute’s Accountants’ Liability Handbooks:

• Liability in Forecast and Projection Engagements: Impact of Luce v. Edelstein
• An Accountant's Duty to Disclose Internal Control Weaknesses
• Whistle-blowing: An Accountants' Duty to Disclose A Client's Illegal Acts
• Pleading Motions under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995
• Discovery Issues in Cases Involving Auditors (co-authored and appeared in the 2002 PLI Handbook on Accountants' Liability After Enron.)

In addition, he co-authored the following article for the Association of the Bar of the City of New York, Corporate & Securities Law Updates:

• Safe Harbor Provisions for Forward-Looking Statements (co-authored and published by the Association of the Bar of the City of New York, Corporate & Securities Law Updates, Vol. II, May 12, 2000)