Burt M. Rublin


Tel 215.864.8116
Fax 215.864.9783

Burt M. Rublin is the Practice Leader of the firm's Appellate Group. Burt has a diverse practice, and for over 40 years, he has successfully handled numerous significant appellate matters, as well as complex commercial litigation and class actions in state and federal courts around the country. He has substantial experience in defending consumer class actions brought against banks and credit card issuers involving a wide array of state and federal statutes. He also has considerable experience with the enforcement of arbitration clauses in consumer contracts and has prevailed on numerous motions to compel arbitration. In addition, Burt has handled many cases involving antitrust claims and has defended a number of defamation lawsuits.

Representative Matters

Appellate Cases

  • Beneficial National Bank v. Anderson, 539 U.S. 1 (2003) (allowing national banks to remove usury cases to federal court)
  • American Manufacturers Mutual Ins. Co. v. Sullivan, 526 U.S. 40 (1999) (insurance companies not "state actors" under Federal Civil Rights laws)
  • In re Remicade (Direct Purchaser) Antitrust Litigation, 938 F. 3d 515 (3d Cir. 2019) (enforcing arbitration provision)
  • Ross Dress for Less, Inc. v. VIWY, LP, 750 Fed. Appx. 141 (3d Cir. 2018) (affirming District Court order confirming arbitration award)
  • Vaccine Ctr. LLC v. GlaxosmithKline LLC, 672 Fed. Appx. 733 (9th Cir. 2017) (affirming dismissal of antitrust claim)
  • Cosmetic Gallery, Inc. v. Schoeneman, 495 F.3d 46 (3d Cir. 2007) (affirming summary judgment for defendants on antitrust claim arising from alleged group boycott of retailer)
  • Turner v. Beneficial Corp., 242 F.3d 1023 (11th Cir. 2001) (en banc) (affirming denial of certification of nationwide class)
  • Household Bank v. JFS Group, 320 F.3d 1249 (11th Cir. 2003) (finding federal jurisdiction in declaratory judgment action against opt-outs from class settlement)
  • Roberts v. Fleet Bank, 342 F.3d 260 (3d Cir. 2003) (affirming dismissal of all state law claims arising from credit-card APR increase)
  • Jackson v. Countrywide Home Loans, 222 Fed. Appx. 156, 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 1430 (3d Cir. Jan. 23, 2007) (affirming summary judgment for mortgage lender on all claims by borrower)
  • Hall v. Midland Group, 275 F.3d 35 (3d Cir. 2001) (approving settlement of class action despite objections)
  • Maio v. Aetna, Inc., 221 F.3d 472 (3d Cir. 2000) (affirming dismissal of RICO class action by HMO subscribers)
  • Gallas v. Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 211 F.3d 760 (3d Cir. 2000) (affirming dismissal of all of plaintiff's claims on basis of legislative immunity)
  • Harris v. Green Tree Fin. Corp., 183 F.3d 173 (3d Cir. 1999) (ordered arbitration of borrowers' claims)
  • Jones v. H&R Block, 117 F.3d 1433 (11th Cir. 1997) (affirming denial of certification of nationwide class)
  • Rogal v. American Broadcasting Co., 74 F.3d 40 (3d Cir. 1996) (successful defense of ABC in two-week trial of libel action arising from "20/20" broadcast)
  • Ezold v. Wolf, Block, Schorr and Solis-Cohen, 983 F.2d 509 (3d Cir. 1992) (finding no sex discrimination in denial of law firm partnership)
  • Greenwood Trust Co. v. Massachusetts, 971 F.2d 818 (1st Cir. 1992) (allowing credit-card issuer to charge late fees allowed under laws of its home state)
  • In re Capital Cities/ABC Application for Access, 913 F.2d 89 (3d Cir. 1990) (upholding news media access to transcript of in-chambers conference at criminal trial)
  • Pierce Assocs. v. Nemours Foundation, 865 F.2d 530 (3d Cir. 1988) (reversing $32 million verdict rendered after 79-day jury trial)
  • Nationwide Mutual Insurance Co. v. Fleming, 586 Pa. 622, 896 A.2d 565 (2006) (holding that order denying claim of attorney-client privilege is appealable under collateral order doctrine)
  • Chavers v. Fleet Bank, 844 A.2d 666 (R.I. 2004) (affirming dismissal of consumer fraud class action claim arising from credit-card APR increase)
  • Huggins v. Citibank, N.A., 355 S.C. 329, 585 S.E.2d 275 (S.Car. 2003) (refusing to recognize cause of action for "negligent enablement of impostor fraud")
  • Solomon v. United States Healthcare Systems of PA, 797 A.2d 346 (Pa. Super. 2002), alloc. denied, 570 Pa. 688, 808 A.2d 573 (2002) (affirming summary judgment for defendant HMO in class action alleging late payment of bills submitted by doctors)

Recent Trial Court Cases

  • Ung v. Universal Acceptance Corp., 249 F. Supp. 3d 985 (D. Minn., 2017) (granting summary judgment for defendant on TCPA claim)
  • Ung v. Universal Acceptance Corp., 319 F.R.D. 537 (D. Minn. Jan. 24, 2017) (denying class certification of TCPA claim)
  • Cohen v. Chicago Title Ins. Co., 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31735 (E.D. Pa. March 7, 2013) (granting motion to decertify class in consumer fraud class action)
  • USA Technologies, Inc. v. Tirpak, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 72318 (E.D. Pa. May 24, 2012) (granting preliminary injunction against opposing slate in proxy contest)
  • Carlson v. Raymour and Flanigan Furniture Co., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31161 (W.D. N.Y. March 23, 2011) (dismissing Truth in Lending Act class action)
  • Kelen v. World Financial Network National Bank, 763 F.Supp.2d 391 (S.D.N.Y. 2011) (dismissing Truth in Lending Act class action)
  • Elinich v. Discover Bank, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12659 (E.D. Pa. Jan. 29, 2013) (granting motion to compel arbitration in class action)
  • Martin v. Discover Bank, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 177881 (E.D. Pa. Nov. 30, 2012) (granting motion to compel arbitration in class action)
  • Passmore v. Discover Bank, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 123918 (N.D. Ohio Oct. 26, 2011) (granting motion to compel arbitration in class action)
  • Black v. JP Morgan Chase & Co., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 99428 (W.D. Pa. Aug. 25, 2011) (granting motion to compel arbitration in class action)
  • Brown v. City of Philadelphia, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 119163 (E.D. Pa. Nov. 9, 2010) (enforcing arbitration clause)

Arbitration Proceedings

  • Kiran v. 99 Restaurants, American Arbitration Association Case No. 11 20 1300 1293 (Oct. 27, 2014)—Arbitrator rendered Clause Construction Award finding that parties' arbitration agreement did not permit classwide arbitration.

Pro Bono Experience

Filed an amicus brief on behalf of the Pennsylvania Cancer Alliance, a consortium of Pennsylvania’s leading hospitals, universities, and cancer research institutions, resulting in trial and appellate court rulings that preserved $126 million in a settlement payment made by tobacco companies for health care costs related to smoking.

Recognition & Accomplishments

The Best Lawyers in America, First Amendment litigation, 1995-2021

Benchmark Litigation, "Local Litigation Star," Antitrust, Appellate, and General Commercial Litigation, 2010-2021

Elected to The American Law Institute, 2006


Author of numerous Ballard Spahr legal alerts. Other publications include:

Co-author, "Shedding Light on Shady Grove: Rule 23 Trumps State Law," Law360, July 21, 2015

"Multistate Class Actions Face Tough Test at 3rd Circuit," Law360, October 23, 2014

Co-author, "Reaffirming Mandatory Arbitration of Consumer Claims," Law360, January 17, 2012

Author, chapter on class actions, Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas Civil Practice Manual, 9th-19th eds., 1998-2019

Speaking Engagements

Frequent presenter at Practising Law Institute and Pennsylvania Bar Institute programs and seminars.

University of Chicago Law School (J.D. 1978)
Research Assistant to Professor Philip B. Kurland, one of the nation's leading constitutional law scholars, assisting in the research, writing, and editing of The Supreme Court Review (1975 and 1976) and Watergate and the Constitution (1978)

University of Chicago (B.A. 1976)
Member, Phi Beta Kappa


New York

Illinois (no longer admitted to practice)

U.S. Supreme Court 

U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit