Joseph M. Callow, Jr.

Joe Callow leads litigation matters on a national, regional, and local basis. Joe works primarily on complex litigation. He has experience in class action/collective actions and multi-district litigation as well as environmental, securities, IP, antitrust, product liability and general corporate/commercial litigation.

Currently, Joe represents several state Attorneys General in complex litigation. Joe was one of the lead litigation counsel for the State of Ohio in its litigation against opioid distributors that resulted in an $808 million settlement for the State. He is also one of the lead litigation counsel for the States of Michigan and Illinois in their respective litigation against PFAS and AFFF manufacturers, distributors, and other parties.

Joe has extensive experience in False Claims Act (qui tam) litigation and has represented parties in FCA cases around the country, including Georgia, Texas, Louisiana, Florida, and New Jersey. Joe has helped the US Government recover over $200 million in FCA settlements over the past several years.

Joe frequently speaks at CLE seminars and blogs on several litigation topics, including cybersecurity and litigation management. He welcomes the opportunity to conduct seminars for clients and other organizations on litigation avoidance strategies and litigation related topics.

Awards and Recognition:

• Named the "Cincinnati Best Lawyers' Antitrust Litigation Lawyer of the Year" (2012, 2017, 2020, 2022)
• Listed in Chambers USA: America's Leading Business Lawyers, 2016-2019
• Listed in The Best Lawyers in America, 2011 - 2024
• Named to Ohio Super Lawyers, since 2008
• AV® Preeminent™ Peer Review Rated, Martindale - Hubbell
• Cincinnati Academy of Leadership for Lawyers(CALL), Class XI

*AV®, AV Preeminent®, Martindale-Hubbell Distinguished and Martindale-Hubbell Notable are certification marks used under license in accordance with the Martindale-Hubbell certification procedures, standards and policies. Martindale-Hubbell® is the facilitator of a peer-review rating process. Ratings reflect the anonymous opinions of members of the bar and the judiciary. Martindale-Hubbell® Peer Review Ratings™ fall into two categories – legal ability and general ethical standards.