Steven A. Levy

Steve Levy is a Principal in the firm's Litigation Group. He represents clients in complex litigation, including the representation of banks and other commercial lenders in the defense of consumer class actions and general commercial litigation.

Mr. Levy has a national litigation practice. He has tried cases in courts throughout the country involving commercial lease disputes, insurance broker malpractice claims, insurance coverage disputes, employment and restrictive covenant disputes, replevin issues, standard commercial breach of contract cases, and cases arising out of commercial bankruptcies. He has handled trials on behalf of Goldberg Kohn's lender clients, including those in which the lender objected to the proposed use of the lender's cash collateral or sought the appointment of a receiver, and in trials to determine whether an involuntary bankruptcy case was properly commenced by a lender.

In 2014, Mr. Levy was named a Fellow of the Litigation Counsel of America, a trial lawyer honorary society composed of less than one-half of one percent of American lawyers. Fellows are selected based upon excellence and accomplishments in litigation, both at the trial and appellate levels, and superior ethical reputation. He holds the AV Preeminent® peer review rating from Martindale-Hubbell, its highest rating for ethics and legal ability, and has been individually ranked in Chambers USA for his Litigation skills. 

Mr. Levy joined Goldberg Kohn in September 1991. He received his law degree, magna cum laude, from the University of Illinois College of Law in 1988, where he was a member of the Order of Coif. He received his B.S. in Finance, cum laude, from Miami University in 1985.

Mr. Levy is admitted to practice in Illinois and before the United States Supreme Court, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth, Seventh and Ninth Circuits, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, including the Trial Bar, and the U.S. District Court for the Central District of Illinois.

Representative Matters

• Successfully defended a bank in proving that an involuntary bankruptcy case was properly commenced.
• Representing financial institutions in all manner of litigation, including high profile cases in which the banks are alleged to be responsible for fraudulent schemes engaged in by their customers.
• Representing banks in connection with claims of discriminatory lending and/or claims of lender liability.
• Successfully prosecuted dozens of complex commercial foreclosure actions, including foreclosures of commercial properties ranging from office buildings, condominium buildings, apartment buildings, hotels, student housing, residential developments, golf courses and other recreational properties, industrial and manufacturing facilities, cold storage facilities, shopping centers and other retail properties. These cases often prompt lender liability counterclaims that are defended in the course of the foreclosure.
• Defending dozens of consumer class actions, including class actions asserting violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and violations arising out of banking and mortgage lending activities. In several of these actions, the courts denied class certification and the cases were promptly settled for nominal amounts.
• Defending a finance company alleged to have controlled or aided and abetted its borrower in selling in excess of $100 million of subordinated notes in violation of the securities laws.
• Represented a brokerage in a case that went to trial in which the brokerage asserted its former employee was engaged in violation of the former employees' non-solicitation and confidentiality obligations.
• Defending a finance company at the District Court and Appellate Court levels on a case of first impression interpreting the Illinois Credit Agreements Act.
• Defending an underwriter of municipal bonds against a $32 million securities fraud claim brought by the buyer of the bonds.
• Successfully defended a publicly traded company against claims of securities fraud and antitrust violations allegedly committed in connection with the client’s purchase of a closely held corporation, in which the plaintiffs sought in excess of $30 million. The court dismissed the plaintiffs' securities and antitrust claims with prejudice.
• Obtained a judgment after trial on behalf of the purchaser of an insurance policy, against the broker who procured the policy, on the grounds that the policy was defective.