Gregory B. Koltun

Partner | Los Angeles | (213) 892-5551
(213) 892-5551

Greg’s practice focuses on complex commercial litigation, antitrust matters, and counseling. He has litigated cases in state and federal courts and before arbitration tribunals throughout the country in a variety of industries and fields. He has substantial trial experience, taking the lead on a number of trials and arbitrations. He has successfully defended many large-scale actions on behalf of major international corporations, including nationwide class actions involving billing disputes and alleged antitrust violations. He has extensive experience enforcing arbitration clauses/class action waivers. He also frequently advises clients in the pre-dispute context on a range of business practice issues.    

In the consumer class action area, Greg has led the defense of breach of contract, fraud, false advertising, and unfair trade practice cases involving financial institutions, transportation companies, and insurance companies, among others. He has litigated literally hundreds of cases in the transportation industry context. He also regularly handles cases involving financial accounting issues, including disputes over complex accounting, auditing, and taxation issues in professional liability cases. He also represents buyers and sellers in disputes arising from stock and asset purchase agreements and has extensive experience in resolving post-closing working capital adjustment and breach of representation and warranty disputes.

Greg is a member of the Association of Business Trial Lawyers and a board member of the Weingart Center Association and was recently recognized by Benchmark Litigation.

He received his B.A. magna cum laude and Phi Beta Kappa from Claremont McKenna College and his J.D. from the University of Chicago Law School, where he was symposium editor for the University of Chicago Legal Forum.


  • Recommended for Antitrust Law – Civil Litigation/Class Actions: Defense, United States – Legal 500 US 2018
Show More


  • Won motions to dismiss in series of high-stakes billing class actions (some part of Multi-District Litigation) and related qui tam action under the federal False Claims Act, all of which were upheld on appeal.

  • Won motion to compel individual/non-class arbitration on behalf of Fortune 50 client, in nationwide consumer class action alleging overbilling on services. Order upheld on appeal.

  • Won motion to dismiss without leave to amend for Fortune 50 company in nationwide antitrust class action that alleged that client unlawfully tied the sale of loss/damage protection to the sale of ground transportation services. No appeal filed.

  • Won dismissal with prejudice of putative nationwide class action for our Fortune 50 client alleging unfair business practices for requiring customers to seek billing adjustments for packages that they processed for shipment but decided not to ship. No appeal filed.

  • With hundreds of millions of dollars at stake, won dismissal with prejudice of nationwide class action complaint on the first motion to dismiss in case involving cutting-edge preemption issues arising from the collection of late-payment fees that allegedly exceeded the amounts allowable under state law. No appeal filed.

  • Won dismissal with prejudice in 51 separate nationwide class actions, which were combined into one MDL proceeding in the Northern District of Georgia. Plaintiffs alleged that defendants conspired to set fuel surcharge levels on “Less Than Truckload” shipments. On behalf of our Fortune 50 client, we obtained a stay of discovery and moved to dismiss the complaint on the ground that plaintiffs had not alleged facts to establish a conspiracy under the standards set forth by the Supreme Court in Twombly v. Bell Atlantic. The court granted the motion to dismiss and set a very high standard for any subsequent amendment. The plaintiffs concluded that they could not meet that standard, and the case was dismissed with prejudice.

  • 528 F.3d 614 (Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals). Won dismissal, with prejudice, for UPS in nationwide class action related to compliance with tariff requirements of the Interstate Commerce Act and transportation fees paid by a large class of shippers over a five-year period. Won affirmance of judgment by Ninth Circuit.



Unsolicited e-mails and information sent to Morrison & Foerster will not be considered confidential, may be disclosed to others pursuant to our Privacy Policy, may not receive a response, and do not create an attorney-client relationship with Morrison & Foerster. If you are not already a client of Morrison & Foerster, do not include any confidential information in this message. Also, please note that our attorneys do not seek to practice law in any jurisdiction in which they are not properly authorized to do so.