1. Home
  2. |Professionals
  3. |Scott L. Winkelman

Scott L. Winkelman

Partner
Partner
c3dpbmtlbG1hbkBjcm93ZWxsLmNvbQ==
VCardLinkedIn
VCardLinkedIn

Areas of Focus

Overview

Scott L. Winkelman is a partner in the firm's Litigation Group and co-chair of the firm’s Transportation Practice. Scott co-founded the firm’s Product Risk Management Practice, has served on the firm’s Management Board and Executive Committee, and for a time managed the firm’s New York office and its Regulatory initiative.

Scott represents clients in class actions, force majeure and other contract disputes, multidistrict proceedings, arbitrations, and other complex litigation in products and commercial matters nationwide.

Scott represents clients in agency proceedings before the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC), and related product regulatory bodies, including in connection with four of the largest automotive recalls in United States history.

Scott conducts product and business risk assessments; performs crisis management; and counsels on liability prevention, commercial contracting, warranty, and best practices in law functions and legal management.

Scott is a certified "black belt" in Six Sigma methodology and brings project efficiencies to his client engagements.

Scott has been recognized by BTI Consulting Group as a 2020 Client Service All-Star. The honor, bestowed by corporate counsel, recognizes attorneys who “stand above all the others in delivering the absolute best in client service. Amid all the changes and unexpected events, they stand tallest.”

Since 1997, Scott has been selected by his peers for inclusion in The Best Lawyers In America as a "Best Lawyer" in the area of product liability litigation, and has been ranked in Super Lawyers.

Scott served as judicial clerk to the Honorable John Pratt of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

Scott is married with two children and roots for all Detroit sports teams.

Career & Education

    • University of Michigan, B.A., 1984
    • Harvard Law School, J.D., 1987
    • University of Michigan, B.A., 1984
    • Harvard Law School, J.D., 1987

    • District of Columbia
    • Illinois
    • District of Columbia
    • Illinois

Scott's Insights

Client Alert | 1 min read | 07.14.25

Trump v. Casa: Nationwide Injunctions And The Class Action Loophole

On June 27, in Trump v. Casa, the Supreme Court held that federal courts lack equitable authority to issue “nationwide”—or, using the Court’s preferred parlance, “universal”—injunctions. Writing for the 6-3 majority, Justice Barrett explained that whether Congress vested the judiciary with such power depends on the existence of a founding-era antecedent to the practice of universal injunctions. Finding none, the Court held that universal injunctions fall outside a federal court’s equitable authority....

View All Insights

Representative Matters

  • Argued successfully for the defense group in Mississippi federal district court, then twice before the Fifth Circuit, in climate change tort litigation.
  • Tried to victory a commercial arbitration in the energy sector valued in excess of $400 million after an eight-day evidentiary hearing.
  • Tried to victory before a three-judge panel a commercial arbitration in the transportation sector involving force majeure valued in excess of $1.2 billion after a nine-day evidentiary hearing.
  • Tried to verdict matters involving alleged breach of a partnership agreement and fraud in New York state court; antitrust and contract claims in Illinois federal court; antitrust claims and tort counterclaims in Texas federal court, and a real estate managing partner dispute in Virginia federal court.
  • Represented clients in connection with three of the largest automotive recalls in U.S. history.
  • Obtained summary judgment in neighborhood environmental tort litigation seeking a $440 million medical monitoring program, and denial of class certification of a medical monitoring action in Florida state court.
  • Achieved denial of class certification following evidentiary and oral argument proceedings in tort and commercial actions for Chrysler, UTC, Lockheed Martin, CSXT, and other clients in courts in Maryland, Michigan, New Jersey, Florida, and Ohio, and dismissal of additional putative class and mass actions on non-class grounds in courts in California, Illinois, West Virginia, Massachusetts, Virginia, Ohio, and Florida, among others.
  • Prevailed in one of the first and groundbreaking “no injury” putative class actions.
  • Obtained dismissal upon oral argument in Ohio state court of what was threatened to become the next wave of asbestos litigation, an outcome affirmed on appeal.
  • Obtained termination of a several-hundred-case occupational personal injury docket in West Virginia state court through a Daubert ruling following a several-day evidentiary hearing.
  • Obtained dismissal of all claims against our client in Hurricane Katrina Levee litigation multidistricted in New Orleans federal court.
  • Achieved outright victory on preemption grounds for clients in courts nationwide.
  • Obtained voluntary dismissal with prejudice of claims in multidistrict litigation stemming from the crash of Egypt Air Flight 990, and represented clients in connection with the downing of SwissAir 111, Air France 447, and other aviation events.
  • Successfully recovered funds stolen from an Olympic speedskater medalist through court action, then achieved disbarment of the offending party through state disciplinary proceedings.
  • Resolved successfully an environmental community tort litigation in Florida state court seeking $500 million in relief.
  • Resolved successfully a commercial dispute between an automotive part supplier and automotive manufacturer with claims in excess of $1 billion.
  • Served as a testifying expert witness in insurance coverage commercial litigation involving the reasonableness of underlying tort action settlement efforts.
  • Represented a world-leading manufacturer and supplier of aluminum wheels in NHTSA proceedings and personal injury tort litigation.
  • Defended a leading global provider of engine turbines in multimillion-dollar commercial litigation brought by a utility in Virginia state court.
  • Served as coordinating counsel for a Fortune 100 client in serial fungicide tort litigation in courts nationwide, and as coordinating counsel for a leading transportation entity in occupational tort litigation in courts nationwide.

Scott's Insights

Client Alert | 1 min read | 07.14.25

Trump v. Casa: Nationwide Injunctions And The Class Action Loophole

On June 27, in Trump v. Casa, the Supreme Court held that federal courts lack equitable authority to issue “nationwide”—or, using the Court’s preferred parlance, “universal”—injunctions. Writing for the 6-3 majority, Justice Barrett explained that whether Congress vested the judiciary with such power depends on the existence of a founding-era antecedent to the practice of universal injunctions. Finding none, the Court held that universal injunctions fall outside a federal court’s equitable authority....

View All Insights

Insights

Client Alert | 1 min read | 07.14.25

Trump v. Casa: Nationwide Injunctions And The Class Action Loophole

Firm News | 2 min read | 06.26.25

Crowell & Moring Honors Recipients of 26th Annual George Bailey Public Service Awards

Client Alert | 2 min read | 06.06.25

Supreme Court Dismisses Cert Petition On Uninjured Class Members As Improvidently Granted

Blog Post | 05.20.25

Senate Committee Holds Confirmation Hearing for FRA Administrator Nominee David Fink

View All Insights

Practices

Industries

Scott's Insights

Client Alert | 1 min read | 07.14.25

Trump v. Casa: Nationwide Injunctions And The Class Action Loophole

On June 27, in Trump v. Casa, the Supreme Court held that federal courts lack equitable authority to issue “nationwide”—or, using the Court’s preferred parlance, “universal”—injunctions. Writing for the 6-3 majority, Justice Barrett explained that whether Congress vested the judiciary with such power depends on the existence of a founding-era antecedent to the practice of universal injunctions. Finding none, the Court held that universal injunctions fall outside a federal court’s equitable authority....

View All Insights