Dina M. Cox (Indianapolis, Indiana)

Dina M. Cox

Licensed for 21 years

Practice Area: Appellate, Business Litigation, Class Action Defense 6 more areas of practice + 6 more

Awards
AV Preeminent
Contact
317-643-4899

Dina M. Cox

317-643-4899

Credit cards accepted

Serving Indianapolis, IN view address

Attorney at firm Lewis Wagner, LLP

Serving Indianapolis, IN view address

Credit cards accepted

Awards AV Preeminent

About Dina M. Cox

Dina is a legal strategist and trial attorney who honors responsive client service as a top priority. Dina has served as lead counsel in numerous lawsuits and bet-the-company litigation involving multi-million dollar claims ranging from breach of contract, false advertising, unfair competition, unfair commercial practices, consumer fraud, and breach of warranty to claims of serious injury caused by products liability and professional negligence. Dina has significant jury trial experience in state and federal court and substantial appellate experience. Dina defends mass torts, class actions, government enforcement actions, drug and medical device cases, toxic tort and chemical exposure cases, and professional li...

Read more

Dina is a legal strategist and trial attorney who honors responsive client service as a top priority. Dina has served as lead counsel in numerous lawsuits and bet-the-company litigation involving multi-million dollar claims ranging from breach of contract, false advertising, unfair competition, unfair commercial practices, consumer fraud, and breach of warranty to claims of serious injury caused by products liability and professional negligence. Dina has significant jury trial experience in state and federal court and substantial appellate experience. Dina defends mass torts, class actions, government enforcement actions, drug and medical device cases, toxic tort and chemical exposure cases, and professional liability lawsuits including legal malpractice. Dina also counsels clients during government investigations and assists professionals facing disciplinary grievances and licensing issues. Dina’s mass tort and class action defense work is national in scope and has included lawsuits filed in numerous states from New York to California as well as lawsuits consolidated as part of multi-district litigation.

In the drug and medical device context, Dina has handled cases involving breast implants, orthopedic bone screws, spinal fixation systems, prosthetic devices, blood plasma products, and pain pumps, just to name a few. Dina’s toxic tort and chemical exposure cases have involved tobacco, lead-based paint, latex gloves, mold, and animal/livestock feed products.

Dina has defended legal malpractice lawsuits with damage claims ranging from $16 million in one and $100 million in another. Dina has represented clients ranging from solo practitioners to some of the largest firms in Indianapolis. Dina has utilized or deposed some of the preeminent experts in legal malpractice and legal ethics. Dina has defended lawyers in a diverse array of substantive areas, including estate planning; wills and trusts; criminal defense; corporate law; family law; business transactions such as stock sales, asset sales, and mergers; medical malpractice; and, personal injury. Most importantly, Dina is passionate about defending the profession. Dina works hard to mount an aggressive, thorough defense on behalf of all of her professional clients. The results she has obtained, and the friends she has made in the legal community, are the greatest rewards for this hard work.

Civic & Community Involvement

•Canal Stakeholders Association, Past Member
•Historic Ransom Place Neighborhood Association, Past Board Member
•Keep Indianapolis Beautiful, Past Advisory Board Member
•Metropolitan Indianapolis Public Broadcasting, Inc. (WFYI Indianapolis), Board Member, 2013 - present
•St. Florian Center, Past Board Member & Mock Trial Volunteer Instructor

In The News

Media Mentions

•Jul 20, 2012

Gender Appeal: Law firms embrace marketing geared toward the female client
The Indiana Lawyer
•Apr 12, 2012

Lawyers Part of Super-Commuter Trend
The Indiana Lawyer

Published Articles

•Aug 29, 2012

What to do when your supervising partner makes a mistake
DRI The Voice
•May 23, 2012

Malpractice vs. Misconduct
DRI: The Voice

Press Release

•Aug 15, 2016

Lewis Wagner attorneys selected by their peers for inclusion in The Best Lawyers in America 2017
•Feb 12, 2016

Lewis Wagner Attorneys Selected by Indiana Super Lawyers as Top Attorneys
Indiana Super Lawyers Magazine
•Aug 17, 2015

90% of Lewis Wagner, LLP’s Equity Partners Selected For Inclusion in The Best Lawyers In America 2016; Four Named ‘Lawyer Of The Year’
•Feb 13, 2015

100% of Lewis Wagner's Equity Partners Named Indiana Super Lawyers
•Aug 18, 2014

80% of Lewis Wagner’s Equity Partners Selected for Inclusion in The Best Lawyers In America 2015; Three Named ‘Lawyer Of The Year’
•Apr 10, 2014

Dina Cox invited to serve as faculty member for flagship trial advocacy program by NITA
•Feb 12, 2014

70% of Firm Partners named Indiana Super Lawyers
•Aug 15, 2013

Robert Wagner, Tom Hays, John Trimble, Jerry Hammond, Rick Shoultz, Susan Cline, Dina Cox, Rich Blaiklock & Kyle Lansberry Selected for Inclusion in The Best Lawyers In America 2014
•Jan 08, 2013

WFYI Elects Dina Cox as Board Member
•May 23, 2012

Dina Cox selected to the National Institute for Trial Advocacy (NITA) Next Generation Faculty (NGF) Class of 2012
•Apr 11, 2012

And the Defense Wins Published by DRI: Dina Cox and Rob Baker achieved two defense wins recently in companion putative class action cases
•Mar 07, 2012

And the Defense Wins Published by DRI: Dina M. Cox and Kameelah Shaheed-Diallo obtained a dismissal of a legal malpractice claim against their law firm client
•Aug 07, 2009

Dina M. Cox invited to become a fellow in the Litigation Counsel of America’s Trial Lawyer Honorary Society

Honors & Awards

Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Rated AV
•Next Generation Faculty, National Institute for Trial Advocacy, 2012-2013
•Listed In The Best Lawyers in America in the fields of Product Liability Litigation - Defendants; Professional Malpractice Law - Defendants, 2011-2017
Best Lawyers’ 2015 Indianapolis Professional Malpractice Law - Defendants - Lawyer of the Year
•Listed In Indiana Super Lawyers, 2011-2016
•Top 25 Women, Indiana Super Lawyers, 2011-2016
•Top 50, Indiana Super Lawyers, 2013
•Listed In Rising Star, Indiana Super Lawyers, 2009
•Medmarc “Honor Roll” of Defense Counsel, 2007: Based upon input from Medmarc's management, claim staff and clients, Dina was recognized for her commitment to providing exceptional service to the company and its policyholders.

Publications

• CYBER INSURANCE 101: Coverage Issues Related to Cyber Attacks and Cyber Insurance, ABA Section of Litigation, March 2014 (co-author).
• Lawyers may still be subject to discipline when lacking any knowledge of employee misdeeds, LPL eAdvisory, March 2014.
• Taking payment from someone other than client may create risk of discipline, LPL eAdvisory, March 2014.
•“Legal Malpractice Law - State of Indiana,” Survey, American Bar Association, Section of Litigation, 2007 - present.
•“How to Scale the Tower of Babble,” DRI: The Whisper (Volume 8, Issue 2) 2012 (co-author).
•The Law of Lawyers’ Liability: Fifty-State Survey of Legal Malpractice, Professional Liability Committee, American Bar Association, 2012 (author of book chapter entitled “State of Indiana”).
•“Malpractice vs. Misconduct,” DRI: The Voice, May 23, 2012 (co-author).
•Summary: Indiana Legal Malpractice Law, American Bar Association, December 2008.
•“The Self-Critical Analysis Privilege in the Context of Drug & Medical Device Litigation,” Drug, Device & Biotechnology Committee Newsletter, International Association of Defense Counsel, Number 10, July 2007 (co-author).
•“Top Ten Ways to Protect Against Claims of Malpractice,” Professional Liability Litigation Alert, ABA Professional Liability Litigation Committee - Section of Litigation, Volume IV, Number 2, Spring 2007 (co-author).

Presentations

NITA National Session - Building Trial Skills, National Institute for Trial Advocacy, Boulder, CO, July 20-28, 2016, Faculty Member (including lecture and demonstration on closing argument).
The Reptile Theory: Snakes Everywhere - How Not to Lose Your Case During Deposition Cross-Examination, Medmarc - 29th Annual Medical Device Seminar, La Jolla, CA, June 8-10, 2016.
What the Heck Happened? The Eyes Don’t Have It!, 2016 ALFA International Client Seminar, Plenary Session, March 4, 2015, Panelist and Mock Trial Presenter.
National Session - Building Trial Skills, National Institute for Trial Advocacy, Boulder, CO, July 22-30, 2015, Faculty Member.
Tribalism in the Courtroom: What Neuroscience Says about Bias, Loyalty, and Group Behavior, 2015 ALFA International Client Seminar, March 7, 2015, Panelist & Mock Trial Presenter.
Beware of the Weakest Link! Mitigating supply chain risk: Best Practice Risk Management and Risk Transfer Strategies, Indiana Health Industry Forum, May 6, 2014, Panelist.
The Prom Dance: Working Together with a Group of Defendants, 2014 ALFA International Client Seminar, March 8, 2014, Panelist.
National Session - Building Trial Skills, National Institute for Trial Advocacy, Boulder, CO, July 23-31, 2014, Faculty Member.
National Session - Building Trial Skills, National Institute for Trial Advocacy, Boulder, CO, July 24-August 1, 2013, Faculty Member.
Practical and Thoughtful Tips for Successful Litigation Management, DTCI 18th Annual Conference & Meeting of the Membership, Abe Martin Lodge in Brown County State Park, November 16, 2012.
Panel Discussions on Lawyer Misconduct & Legal Malpractice, Indiana Lawyer, October 31, 2012.
Trial Tips & The Art of Legal Persuasion, Indiana Continuing Legal Education Forum, September 26, 2012 and October 4, 2012.
Navigating the Social Media Maze, Medmarc Annual Meeting of Defense Panel Counsel, Bolton Landing, NY, June 15, 2012.
Hot Topics in Accountant Liability - 2012, American Society of Women Accountants, May 22, 2012.
Ethics Within the World of Tax, Indiana Tax Practitioners Association, December 13, 2011.
•CPA Ethics & Risk Management, Indiana Society of Accountants, Nashville, IN, 2010 - present.
Deposition Advocacy Skills College, Indiana Continuing Legal Education Forum, July 13-14, 2010, Faulty Member.
•CPA Ethics & Risk Management, Indiana Society of Accountants, July 14, 2010.
Mid-Central Regional Basic Trial Skills Program, National Institute for Trial Advocacy, annually, 2007 - present, Faculty Member.
Mid-Central Deposition Program, National Institute for Trial Advocacy, annually, 2005 - present, Faculty Member.

Read less

Read more Read less

Areas of Law

  • Appellate
  • Business Litigation
  • Class Action Defense
  • Drug and Medical Device Litigation
  • Employment Law
  • Insurance Coverage and Bad Faith
  • Product Liability Defense
  • Professional Liability Defense
  • Toxic Tort

Client Reviews

This lawyer does not have any reviews.

Write a Review

Peer Reviews

  • 4.5/5.0 21 reviews
  • AV Preeminent
  • Legal Knowledge

    4.5/5.0
  • Analytical Capability

    4.5/5.0
  • Judgment

    4.5/5.0
  • Communication

    4.6/5.0
  • Legal Experience

    4.4/5.0
  • 5.0/5.0 by a Partner on 05/15/14 in Civil Litigation

    Read more

    • Legal Knowledge

      5.0/5.0
    • Analytical Capability

      5.0/5.0
    • Judgment

      5.0/5.0
    • Communication

      5.0/5.0
    • Legal Experience

      5.0/5.0

    Read less

  • 5.0/5.0 by a Unknown on 12/01/11 in Litigation

    Read more

    • Legal Knowledge

      5.0/5.0
    • Analytical Capability

      5.0/5.0
    • Judgment

      5.0/5.0
    • Communication

      5.0/5.0
    • Legal Experience

      5.0/5.0

    Read less

  • 5.0/5.0 by a Partner on 11/15/11 in Civil Litigation

    An excellent lawyer. Clearly "AV" Read more

    An excellent lawyer. Clearly "AV"

    • Legal Knowledge

      5.0/5.0
    • Analytical Capability

      5.0/5.0
    • Judgment

      5.0/5.0
    • Communication

      5.0/5.0
    • Legal Experience

      5.0/5.0

    Read less

  • 5.0/5.0 by a Managing Partner on 11/07/11 in Defense Litigation

    Great AV candidate! Read more

    Great AV candidate!

    • Legal Knowledge

      4.0/5.0
    • Analytical Capability

      5.0/5.0
    • Judgment

      5.0/5.0
    • Communication

      5.0/5.0
    • Legal Experience

      4.0/5.0

    Read less

  • 5.0/5.0 by a Partner on 11/07/11 in Litigation

    Read more

    • Legal Knowledge

      5.0/5.0
    • Analytical Capability

      5.0/5.0
    • Judgment

      5.0/5.0
    • Communication

      5.0/5.0
    • Legal Experience

      5.0/5.0

    Read less

  • 5.0/5.0 by a Unknown on 11/01/11 in Civil Litigation

    Excellent lawyer who meets or exceeds expectiations at all times Read more

    Excellent lawyer who meets or exceeds expectiations at all times

    • Legal Knowledge

      5.0/5.0
    • Analytical Capability

      5.0/5.0
    • Judgment

      5.0/5.0
    • Communication

      5.0/5.0
    • Legal Experience

      5.0/5.0

    Read less

  • 5.0/5.0 by a Partner on 10/24/11 in Litigation

    Demonstrated poise and skillful advocacy in unusually difficult case Read more

    Demonstrated poise and skillful advocacy in unusually difficult case

    • Legal Knowledge

      5.0/5.0
    • Analytical Capability

      5.0/5.0
    • Judgment

      5.0/5.0
    • Communication

      5.0/5.0
    • Legal Experience

      5.0/5.0

    Read less

  • 5.0/5.0 by a Partner on 10/24/11 in Professional Liability Defense

    Read more

    • Legal Knowledge

      5.0/5.0
    • Analytical Capability

      5.0/5.0
    • Judgment

      5.0/5.0
    • Communication

      5.0/5.0
    • Legal Experience

      5.0/5.0

    Read less

  • 5.0/5.0 by a Partner on 10/23/11 in Business Torts

    Dina is an outstanding lawyer. Read more

    Dina is an outstanding lawyer.

    • Legal Knowledge

      5.0/5.0
    • Analytical Capability

      5.0/5.0
    • Judgment

      5.0/5.0
    • Communication

      5.0/5.0
    • Legal Experience

      5.0/5.0

    Read less

  • 5.0/5.0 by a Managing Partner on 03/29/10 in Civil Litigation

    Read more

    • Legal Knowledge

      5.0/5.0
    • Analytical Capability

      5.0/5.0
    • Judgment

      5.0/5.0
    • Communication

      5.0/5.0
    • Legal Experience

      5.0/5.0

    Read less

See All 21 Reviews See All 21 Reviews »


*Individual reviews provided before 2009 are not displayed

Community Contributions

      Credentials

      Position
      Attorney
      Admission Details
      Admitted in 1995, Indiana
      1995, U.S. District Court, Northern District of Indiana
      1995, U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana
      1996, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
      2010, U.S. District Court for the Western District of Michigan
      2013, U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas
      2016, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
      2016, U.S. District Court, Southern District of Illinois
      Credit Cards Accepted
      Law School Attended
      Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law
      Class of 1995
      J.D.
      cum laude, Honors: G. Kent Frandsen Memorial Scholarship; Law School Alumni Association Scholarship; Order of the Barristers, Intramural Moot Court; Competitor, New York National Moot Court; Tutor, Dean's Tutorial Society, Law Review: Indiana Law Review, Articles Editor, 1993 - 1995
      University Attended
      Ball State University, Muncie, Indiana
      Class of 1991
      B.G.S.
      cum laude & dean’s list
      Associations & Memberships

      Professional Associations

      •ALFA International
      •Contact Partner
      •Business Litigation - Steering Committee
      •Product Liability Practice Group - Steering Committee
      •Professional Liability Practice Group
      •Women's Initiative - Steering Committee
      •Marketing Committee
      •American Bar Association
      •Standing Committee on Lawyers' Professional Liability
      •Reporter, ABA LPL eAdvisory
      •National Legal Malpractice Data Center
      •Professional Liability Committee of the Litigation Section
      •Former Co-Editor, Professional Liability Litigation Alert
      •Former Co-Chair, Membership Committee
      •Association of Professional Responsibility Lawyers (APRL)
      •Defense Research Institute
      •Drug & Medical Device Committee
      •Professional Liability Committee
      •Defense Trial Counsel of Indiana
      •Trial Tactics Committee
      •Indiana State Bar Association
      •Litigation Section
      •Indianapolis Bar Association
      •Lawyers' Club of Indianapolis
      •Litigation Counsel of America, Trial Lawyer Honorary Society
      •fellow
      •Marion County Bar Association
      •National Institute for Trial Advocacy (NITA)
      •Next Generation Faculty (NGF) Class of 2012
      •Professional Liability Underwriting Society (PLUS)

      Representative Cases
      Experience: Representative Cases: Defense verdict by jury in case alleging race discrimination by physician against hospital in federal court
      Seventh Circuit affirms dismissal of class action cramming allegations and denial of class certification
      654 F.3d 728
      Indiana Court of Appeals affirms dismissal of legal malpractice claim
      2011 WL 1620602
      Indiana Supreme Court affirms summary judgment in favor of plastic medicine cup manufacturers in wrongful death case
      No. 49S04-0902-CV-88
      Defense verdict by jury in case alleging race discrimination by physician against hospital in federal court
      Plaintiff physician claimed a contractual relationship with hospital based on having privileges at the hospital and alleged race discrimination under Section 1981 and damage to his reputation exceeding $50 million. Jury entered verdict in favor of the defendant hospital after seven day federal trial.
      Seventh Circuit affirms dismissal of class action cramming allegations and denial of class certification
      654 F.3d 728
      Dina M. Cox obtained summary judgment and order denying class certification on behalf of the nation's largest telecommunications billing clearinghouse in alleged cramming (i.e. unauthorized telephone billing) putative class action. On appeal, with oral argument to the Seventh Circuit, the court affirmed the district court's rulings that plaintiff's authorization of disputed charges on its phone bill precluded its claims of unjust enrichment and statutory deception, and that individual issues surrounding each customer's transaction precluded class certification. Additionally, the Seventh Circuit agreed with the defense that an alleged violation of Indiana's anti-cramming regulation could not serve as the factual predicate for its claims because Indiana's anti-cramming regulation does not apply to billing clearinghouses like Enhanced Services, which are not telephone companies or billing agents. This Opinion will likely have significant industry impact because it is one of the first published appellate opinions addressing class action cramming allegations and because it establishes favorable law on the application of state anti-cramming regulations.
      Indiana Court of Appeals affirms dismissal of legal malpractice claim
      2011 WL 1620602 Dina M. Cox successfully defended a Law Firm in a legal malpractice action where Plaintiff claimed negligent representation by his defense lawyer in an underlying criminal case. Plaintiff alleged that that Law Firm was vicariously liable for the lawyer's conduct. Plaintiff voluntarily dismissed the Law Firm in hopes of obtaining a better settlement with the underlying defense attorney, who was also named individually in the suit. When the mediation failed, Plaintiff sought to reinstate his claims against the Law Firm. Ms. Cox successfully argued that the statute of limitations for Plaintiff's claims against the Law Firm had expired and therefore could not be reinstated. Ms. Cox also argued that the Journey's Account Statute did not apply to save Plaintiff's time-barred claim after voluntary dismissal, as asserted by the Plaintiff. The trial court agreed and denied Plaintiff's motion to reinstate the Law Firm. Plaintiff petitioned the Indiana Court of Appeals for certification of the issue of whether the Journey's Account Statute applied to save Plaintiff's time-barred claim, but the Court of Appeals denied Plaintiff's Motion for Certification. Undeterred, the Plaintiff re-filed the same claim against the Law Firm in another court. Ms. Cox argued collateral estoppel and obtained a dismissal of Plaintiff's claims. On appeal, the Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal.
      Indiana Supreme Court affirms summary judgment in favor of plastic medicine cup manufacturers in wrongful death case
      No. 49S04-0902-CV-88
      In this medical device products liability case defended by Dina M. Cox, a minor child died of an accidental overdose of acetaminophen with codeine while recuperating from surgery. The cup used to administer the medicine was a plastic, translucent cup with a capacity of 30 milliliters. Just 15 milliliters was prescribed. The facts were undisputed that the administering nurse was familiar with the cup, and that the autopsy showed more than twice the prescribed level of medication in the minor's bloodstream. The nurse testified that she had filled the cup approximately half-way, although the minor's father testified that he witnessed the nurse administer a full cup of the medicine.
      The minors' parents sued on the theory that the cup was not suitable for precision measurement, and that there should have been a corresponding warning. This argument was supported by the affidavit of an expert who testified that the cup had a 20 to 30% margin for error, but no warning with respect to that margin.
      In this multi-defendant case, Dina was the first to move for summary judgment before the trial court on behalf of her product distributing clients
      the other manufacturing defendants then followed suit. Dina deposed plaintiffs' pharmacy expert who was identified to defeat summary judgment
      and, thereafter, she moved to exclude his opinions in concert with the other defendants. Dina coordinated the joint summary judgment reply on behalf of the defense, and she participated in oral argument before the trial court. Summary judgment was granted in favor of the cup defendants. When this ruling was appealed by plaintiffs, Lewis Wagner led appellate briefing efforts before the Indiana Court of Appeals. Although the Court of Appeals revised the trial court ruling, the Indiana Supreme Court (on transfer) agreed that summary judgment was appropriate for the cup defendants.
      In affirming summary judgment for the cup defendants, the Indiana Supreme Court reversed the Indiana Court of Appeals opinion which stood for the proposition that omitted warnings create a presumption of causation that defeats summary judgment
      and, in such cases, plaintiffs are not required to show that they would have read and heeded an adequate warning.
      According to the Indiana Supreme Court, although cause-in-fact is typically a factual question reserved for determination by the jury, it becomes a question of law for the court where reasonable minds cannot differ. The Supreme Court held that summary judgment was appropriate based upon the cause-in-fact issue because the minor was administered more than twice the prescribed dose of the medication, whereas the plaintiffs' expert testified that the cup had just a 20 to 30% margin for error. Thus, even a warning about the cup's purported 20-30% margin of error would not prevented the harm caused by a presumed double-dose. As stated by the Court, the 'read-and-heed' presumption does not completely dispose of the causation issue in a failure-to-warn case. The most the presumption does is establish that a warning would have been read and obeyed. It does not establish that the defect in fact caused the plaintiff's injury. The Kovach opinion has since been cited numerous times in subsequent appellate opinions expounding upon the causation requirement in tort cases.