Constitutional tort cases are some of the most important cases in our legal system. When your civil rights or liberties have been violated by the government or other large institutions, a regular lawyer will not do. You need someone with expertise in constitutional law who will work tirelessly to pursue the justice you deserve. Someone who sees you as a person, not a payout; because who you are as a person is at the heart of any civil rights case. Andrew Irlbeck believes in getting to know his clients and has spent countless hours in their homes, sharing meals and stories with them. He knows personal connections are essential to the representation of those the government would like to remain dehumanized and marginalized in the eyes of the law. 

Mr. Irlbeck extends this personalized approach to complex civil litigation, a legal dispute between two or more parties that seek damages, or specific performance, rather than criminal sanctions, as well. As a civil litigator, Andrew represents parties in trials, appeals, motion hearings, arbitration, and meditations before federal and state courts.

Complex civil litigation lawsuits encompass many diverse areas of law, including but not limited to:


• Police Brutality/Misconduct
• Constitutional torts and other civil rights violations
• Personal Injury
• Medical Malpractice
• State and Federal Appeals
• Plaintiff Civil Litigation
• Tort Law
• Wrongful Death
• Employment Law
• Copyright Law

Plaintiff Civil Litigation
• Tort Law
• Wrongful Death
• Employment Law
• Copyright Law

Andrew is a seasoned litigator with a track record that speaks for itself. Whether representing people victimized by government actors, people injured severely by the negligence or other misconduct of others, or fighting for the rights of a family who lost a loved one due to the illegal acts and omissions of law enforcement, Andrew Irlbeck always puts his clients' interests first.

Representative Outcomes:

Rozycki v. Champlin et al., (2017), Obtained directed verdict and money judgment at trial for Plaintiff who was victim of excessive force and warrantless entry.

Shawn Ross v. City of Minneapolis, (2017)   Represented client who was subjected to an unwarranted, videotaped assault by a police officer. Mr. Irlbeck showed a pattern of abuse on the part of the now former officer resulting in the successful negotiation of a $105,000 settlement. The officer was ultimately criminally charged in a subsequent, related matter.

Christopher Lollie v. City of St. Paul, et. al.  Lollie v. Johnson, 2016 WL 447452, -- F. Supp.3d -- (2016):  Litigated case for client who was tased and arrested after sitting in a public seating area while Black. Case garnered national news attention. After initially ignoring Messrs. Lollie and Irlbeck, the City eventually paid $100,000 on the eve of trial.

Anonymous Plaintiffs v. Ramsey County et al. Mr. Irlbeck represented a group of Plaintiffs whose property and businesses were damaged by a Ramsey County Sheriff’s Deputy who crashed into their office building, which subsequently sustained serious fire and water damage. Irlbeck and the Plaintiffs asserted a constitutional “Takings” claims, along with various state torts, and ultimately negotiated a $792,000 lump sum payment to the Anonymous Plaintiffs for business interruption and personal property damages.

Ronald Rosen and June Trnka v. Sgt. Schmidt et al, CIV. 12-1188 ADM/FLN, 2013 WL 5567447 (D. Minn. Oct. 9, 2013), and 2014 WL 1384084 (D. Minn. Apr. 9, 2014). Obtained orders denying qualified immunity to officers who conducted an unreasonable search and seizure and granting Plaintiff’s motion for directed verdict at trial. Ultimately obtained jury award of $90,000, and attorney fee judgment of $127,964.50.

Anonymous Investment Firm v. Anonymous (2015):  Successfully defended client against $3,000,000  fraud suit filed by former employer. Case dismissed.

Jeremy Axel v. Officer Michael Griffin, CIV. 12-1019 DSD/AJB (D. Minn. 2014). Used Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) to introduce prior bad act evidence at trial against a defendant police officer on an excessive force claim, and obtained a total judgment, including verdict and attorney fee award, of $270,653.33.

James and Aisha Keten, individually and o.b.o. K.K. v. Minneapolis Police Department et al, CIV. 11-1520 DWF/JSM, 2013 WL 870378 (D. Minn. Mar. 8, 2013). Defeated the City of Minneapolis’s motion seeking qualified immunity for police officers who unreasonably executed search warrant on the clients’ home and shot the clients’ non-threatening dog inches from the family’s pre-school age daughter using a novel Fourth Amendment seizure theory.  Obtained settlement of $225,000, with approval of special terms as to minor-child/Plaintiff by Judge Donovan W. Frank.

Ras Yirehmiel Tafari f.k.a. James LaVance Newbill v. St. Paul Police Department et al, CIV. 12-1987 SRN/JJK (D. Minn. 2013). Obtained settlement of $237,500 on an excessive force claim against police officers who tased Mr. Tafaricausing him to fall down a flight of stairs, and then kicked him in the head, breaking vertebrae in his neck after he ran from officers during a drug bust.

Anthony Clark v. St. Paul Police Department et al, CIV. 10-4131 MJD/JSM (D. Minn. 2012). After representing Mr. Clark pro bono on the criminal case, litigated his excessive force claim against several police officers to a $249,000 settlement where the officers beat Mr. Clark in the head with flashlights, kicked him in the head, and chemically burned him with aerosol subject restraint in a dark alley after Mr. Clark initially ran from officers who sought to detain him inside of a rap concert.

Haflich v. McLeod, CIV 09-161-M-DWM-JCL, 2010 WL 5665043 (D. Mont. Dec. 29, 2010) R&R adopted, CV 09-161-M-DWM-JCL, 2011 WL 320556 (D. Mont. Jan. 21, 2011). Obtained an order denying summary judgment and allowing a Monell claim to proceed to trial, which included the statement that “[Plaintiff] raised genuine issues of material facts, and has identified sufficient evidence on which a reasonable jury could conclude the City of Troy engaged in, or implemented a custom or practice of deliberate indifference to the excessive use of force employed by McLeod in violation of the Fourth Amendment.”