Robinson Cole LLP
High Contrast Mode

Wystan Ackerman focuses his practice on three main areas: class actions, appeals, and insurance coverage litigation.

Class Actions

Wystan chairs our firm's Class Action team and is the editor of our firm's Class Actions Insider blog. He is one of Connecticut's leading class action defense lawyers, and has a national class action defense practice. Over more than twenty years, Wystan has been involved in defending more than 130 class actions in over 20 jurisdictions. In many of those cases, he prevailed on a dispositive motion.

Wystan successfully petitioned the United States Supreme Court to grant certiorari and was co-counsel on the merits in Standard Fire Insurance Company v. Knowles, 568 U.S. 588 (2013), in which the Court rejected a plaintiff's attempt to evade federal jurisdiction by stipulating that the amount sought would not exceed the $5 million threshold under the Class Action Fairness Act.

Wystan has defended putative class action cases involving insurance and financial services, products liability, environmental issues, employment, data breaches, healthcare, managed care, higher education, consumer contracts, Internet tracking, and securities. He has extensive experience defending major insurers in putative class actions involving homeowners' insurance, auto insurance, underwriting and business practices, and also advises insurers regarding the defense of their insureds in class actions. He has handled insurance class actions involving, for example, the COVID-19 pandemic, general contractor overhead and profit, labor depreciation, automobile total losses, diminished value, PIP coverage, and various other issues. He is a past chair of the Class Action and Multidistrict Section of the Federation of Defense and Corporate Counsel (FDCC), and a past chair of the Class Action Special Litigation Group of the Commercial Litigation Committee of the Defense Research Institute (DRI).

Appeals

Wystan also has a national appellate practice, mainly focused on insurance. He has been involved in over 160 appeals, including appeals in every regional federal circuit, as well as in state supreme and/or appellate courts in 19 states, and the U.S. Supreme Court. He is retained for trial monitoring as appellate counsel in cases involving large exposures or where an appeal is anticipated. He regularly represents national insurance industry associations as amici curiae in appellate and supreme courts. Wystan has been involved, as either counsel for the insurer or for an amicus curiae, in many of the most significant insurance coverage-related appeals over the last twenty years. Wystan has chaired the Appellate Section of the Federation of Defense and Corporate Counsel (FDCC) and has served on the pro bono panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.

Insurance Coverage Litigation

Wystan also has extensive experience litigating and advising insurers on coverage issues. His coverage practice is national in scope. High-profile coverage cases he has litigated include cases involving flood exclusion and Valued Policy Law issues arising from Hurricane Katrina, Chinese-made drywall, Superstorm Sandy, the cracking foundation litigation in Connecticut, and the COVID-19 pandemic.

Wystan has been listed as a Second Circuit Litigation Star in Benchmark Appellate (2013) and is listed as a litigation star in Benchmark Litigation (2013-2025). He was selected by his peers for inclusion in Hartford, CT – Best Lawyers® for 2023-2025 in the area of Litigation-Insurance. Wystan also has been selected to the Connecticut Super Lawyers list from 2015 to 2025, and was selected as a Rising Star in Connecticut Super Lawyers from 2009 to 2014. In addition, he was named a JD Supra Readers' Choice Awards Top Author in the Class Action category for 2018, 2023 and 2025.

Wystan serves as our firm's Professional Development Partner.

  • Columbia Law School (Juris Doctor, Moot Court)
    • James Kent Scholar
    • Law Review (Notes Editor)
  • Bowdoin College (Bachelors, summa cum laude)
    • B.A., Government

  • Commonwealth of Massachusetts
  • State of Connecticut
  • State of New York
  • U.S. Supreme Court
  • U.S. Court of Appeals, 1st Circuit
  • U.S. Court of Appeals, 2nd Circuit
  • U.S. Court of Appeals, 3rd Circuit
  • U.S. Court of Appeals, 4th Circuit
  • U.S. Court of Appeals, 5th Circuit
  • U.S. Court of Appeals, 6th Circuit
  • U.S. Court of Appeals, 7th Circuit
  • U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit
  • U.S. Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit
  • U.S. Court of Appeals, 10th Circuit
  • U.S. Court of Appeals, 11th Circuit
  • U.S. District Court, District of Colorado
  • U.S. District Court, District of Connecticut
  • U.S. District Court, Northern District of Florida
  • U.S. District Court, District of Massachusetts
  • U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Michigan
  • U.S. District Court, Eastern District of New York
  • U.S. District Court, Northern District of New York
  • U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York
  • U.S. District Court, Western District of New York
  • U.S. District Court, Western District of Wisconsin

Listed in Benchmark Litigation as a Local Litigation Star for Connecticut in the area of Insurance since 2015

Listed as a Future Star in Benchmark Litigation for 2013 and 2014

Listed as a Second Circuit Litigation Star in Connecticut in Benchmark Appellate, 2013

AV® Preeminent™ Peer Review Rated in Martindale-Hubbell™ (Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Ratings is a trademark. AV Preeminent is a certification mark of Reed Elsevier Properties, Inc.)

Selected to the Connecticut Super Lawyers list from 2015 to 2025

Selected as a Rising Star in the Connecticut Super Lawyers list from 2009 to 2014

2025, 2023 and 2018 JD Supra Readers' Choice Awards Top Author in the Class Action category

Connecticut Law Tribune, recognized in 2012 New Leaders in the Law Yearbook

Selected by his peers for inclusion in The Best Lawyers in America© in the area of Litigation-Insurance since 2023

Federation of Defense and Corporate Counsel
Chair, Amicus and Public Policy Committee
Chair, Class Action/MDL Section
Past Chair, Appellate Section

Connecticut Bar Association
Insurance Law Section, Executive Committee

Connecticut Bar Foundation
James W. Cooper Fellow (2017 - Current)

Town of Berlin
Past Chair, Board of Ethics (2013 - Past)
Member, Commission for Persons with Disabilities

Experience


Secured Victory Clarifying PIP Coverage Before Massachusetts Appeals Court

Represented a major insurer in successfully defending a Massachusetts Appeals Court appeal confirming that personal injury protection (PIP) coverage requires actual physical contact with a vehicle. Court unanimously agreed that “struck” does not include “near miss” incidents, rejected the plaintiff’s reliance on out-of-state cases, distinguished a Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court decision, and emphasized that expanding PIP coverage beyond the statutory text is a matter for the legislature. Outcome provided important guidance for insurers and policyholders on PIP coverage. A petition for further appellate review is pending in the Supreme Judicial Court.

Read More
Secured Victory Clarifying PIP Coverage Before Massachusetts Appeals Court

Appellate: COVID-19 Business Interruption Claim – Eighth Circuit

Briefed and argued appeal in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit involving claim by a municipality under a policy providing coverage for loss of sales tax revenue in specified circumstances. The court agreed with our client’s position and affirmed the trial court’s declaratory judgment that the policy provisions were not ambiguous or in conflict, and that there was no coverage without direct physical loss or damage to property at the relevant locations.

Read More

Insurance Coverage Litigation: Hurricane Katrina Commercial Property Case

Member of trial team for $100 million Hurricane Katrina commercial property case. First Hurricane Katrina case the client insurance company allowed before a New Orleans jury. Tried to verdict and settled on appeal for less than 2 percent of the claim.

Read More


Publications


Missouri Court of Appeals Finds No Duty to Defend or Indemnify in Class Action Involving Environmental Contamination Beginning in the 1960s teaser
November 10, 2025

Missouri Court of Appeals Finds No Duty to Defend or Indemnify in Class Action Involving Environmental Contamination Beginning in the 1960s

Covering Appeals
COVID-19 Business Interruption Cases Reach the End of the Road, with Mixed Results teaser
September 2, 2025

COVID-19 Business Interruption Cases Reach the End of the Road, with Mixed Results

Covering Appeals
Welcome to Robinson+Cole’s “Covering Appeals” Blog teaser
September 2, 2025

Welcome to Robinson+Cole’s “Covering Appeals” Blog

Covering Appeals
Missouri Court of Appeals Finds No Duty to Defend or Indemnify in Class Action Involving Environmental Contamination Beginning in the 1960s teaser
November 10, 2025

Missouri Court of Appeals Finds No Duty to Defend or Indemnify in Class Action Involving Environmental Contamination Beginning in the 1960s

Covering Appeals
COVID-19 Business Interruption Cases Reach the End of the Road, with Mixed Results teaser
September 2, 2025

COVID-19 Business Interruption Cases Reach the End of the Road, with Mixed Results

Covering Appeals
Welcome to Robinson+Cole’s “Covering Appeals” Blog teaser
September 2, 2025

Welcome to Robinson+Cole’s “Covering Appeals” Blog

Covering Appeals
Hawai’i Supreme Court Applies Pollution Exclusion in CGL Case Involving Climate Change teaser
August 29, 2025

Hawai’i Supreme Court Applies Pollution Exclusion in CGL Case Involving Climate Change

Covering Appeals
Data Privacy + Cybersecurity Insider teaser
March 6, 2025

Data Privacy + Cybersecurity Insider

Spring 2022

Certification of Legal Questions to State Courts

Of Note column of Practical Law The Journal

Many states allow federal courts to certify a question to the state’s highest court when faced with a significant but unsettled question of state law, which affords the benefits of upholding principles of comity and increasing efficiency in the judicial process. However, while certification empowers those courts to provide an authoritative ruling on key state law issues, it is neither appropriate nor advantageous to seek certification in every case. In the Q&A-format article, Wystan explains the certification process, highlighting the procedure and practical considerations for parties seeking to obtain or prevent certification, and addresses the standard federal courts typically apply when considering an application to certify question to a state court, and the types of questions that are most – and least – appropriate for certification. View the article.

April 13, 2015

The Next Big Wave of Insurance Class Actions

Law360

In the article, Mr. Ackerman discusses whether an insurer may apply depreciation to the labor component of the replacement cost estimate. Specifically, he examines the labor depreciation issue, recent decisions, and the next moves. View the article.

January 30, 2015

U.S. Supreme Court Addresses Requirements for Removal in Dart Cherokee Basin v. Owens

DRI Business Suit
Fall 2014

Turning New Guns on Old Targets: Class Actions Against Insurance Companies

FDCC Quarterly


Hawai’i Supreme Court Applies Pollution Exclusion in CGL Case Involving Climate Change teaser
August 29, 2025

Hawai’i Supreme Court Applies Pollution Exclusion in CGL Case Involving Climate Change

Covering Appeals
Data Privacy + Cybersecurity Insider teaser
March 6, 2025

Data Privacy + Cybersecurity Insider

Spring 2022

Certification of Legal Questions to State Courts

Of Note column of Practical Law The Journal

Many states allow federal courts to certify a question to the state’s highest court when faced with a significant but unsettled question of state law, which affords the benefits of upholding principles of comity and increasing efficiency in the judicial process. However, while certification empowers those courts to provide an authoritative ruling on key state law issues, it is neither appropriate nor advantageous to seek certification in every case. In the Q&A-format article, Wystan explains the certification process, highlighting the procedure and practical considerations for parties seeking to obtain or prevent certification, and addresses the standard federal courts typically apply when considering an application to certify question to a state court, and the types of questions that are most – and least – appropriate for certification. View the article.

April 13, 2015

The Next Big Wave of Insurance Class Actions

Law360

In the article, Mr. Ackerman discusses whether an insurer may apply depreciation to the labor component of the replacement cost estimate. Specifically, he examines the labor depreciation issue, recent decisions, and the next moves. View the article.

January 30, 2015

U.S. Supreme Court Addresses Requirements for Removal in Dart Cherokee Basin v. Owens

DRI Business Suit
Fall 2014

Turning New Guns on Old Targets: Class Actions Against Insurance Companies

FDCC Quarterly

News


January 16, 2026

Insurance Appeals Team Achieves Key Victory on PIP Coverage Before Massachusetts Appeals Court

Robinson+Cole’s Insurance Appeals team secured an important victory for a major insurer before the Massachusetts Appeals Court, which issued a decision confirming the scope of personal injury protection (PIP) coverage under state law. The plaintiff sought PIP coverage for injuries sustained while allegedly evading an oncoming vehicle, arguing that the statutory term “struck” should encompass “near miss” incidents without physical contact. The Appeals Court unanimously agreed with our client’s position and the lower courts, holding that the plain meaning of “struck” in the statute requires actual physical contact with the motor vehicle. In reaching its decision, the court rejected the plaintiff’s reliance on out-of-state decisions and distinguished a Supreme Judicial Court’s decision regarding “hit and run” incidents under uninsured/underinsured motorist coverage. The Appeals Court further emphasized that expanding coverage to “near miss” cases would create ambiguity and uncertainty in the statute and concluded that any such change is for the legislature to address. This important outcome provides important guidance for insurers and policyholders regarding the requirements for PIP benefits in Massachusetts. A petition for further appellate review is pending in the Supreme Judicial Court. The Insurance Appeals team was led by partner Wystan Ackerman, with key support from Julia Fountain.

November 6, 2025

Robinson+Cole Commends 62 Attorneys Recognized in 2025 Super Lawyers®

Recognition spans key regions and highlights the firm’s seasoned practitioners and emerging leaders in many business transactions and litigation practices
Robinson+Cole Commends 62 Attorneys Recognized in 2025 <i>Super Lawyers</i>® teaser
September 3, 2025

Robinson+Cole Insurance Practice Launches Latest Blog, Covering Appeals

New resource expands firm’s industry insights, unpacking the latest, high-impact insurance coverage appellate cases and trends
Robinson+Cole Insurance Practice Launches Latest Blog, <i>Covering Appeals</i> teaser
January 16, 2026

Insurance Appeals Team Achieves Key Victory on PIP Coverage Before Massachusetts Appeals Court

Robinson+Cole’s Insurance Appeals team secured an important victory for a major insurer before the Massachusetts Appeals Court, which issued a decision confirming the scope of personal injury protection (PIP) coverage under state law. The plaintiff sought PIP coverage for injuries sustained while allegedly evading an oncoming vehicle, arguing that the statutory term “struck” should encompass “near miss” incidents without physical contact. The Appeals Court unanimously agreed with our client’s position and the lower courts, holding that the plain meaning of “struck” in the statute requires actual physical contact with the motor vehicle. In reaching its decision, the court rejected the plaintiff’s reliance on out-of-state decisions and distinguished a Supreme Judicial Court’s decision regarding “hit and run” incidents under uninsured/underinsured motorist coverage. The Appeals Court further emphasized that expanding coverage to “near miss” cases would create ambiguity and uncertainty in the statute and concluded that any such change is for the legislature to address. This important outcome provides important guidance for insurers and policyholders regarding the requirements for PIP benefits in Massachusetts. A petition for further appellate review is pending in the Supreme Judicial Court. The Insurance Appeals team was led by partner Wystan Ackerman, with key support from Julia Fountain.

November 6, 2025

Robinson+Cole Commends 62 Attorneys Recognized in 2025 Super Lawyers®

Recognition spans key regions and highlights the firm’s seasoned practitioners and emerging leaders in many business transactions and litigation practices
Robinson+Cole Commends 62 Attorneys Recognized in 2025 <i>Super Lawyers</i>® teaser
September 3, 2025

Robinson+Cole Insurance Practice Launches Latest Blog, Covering Appeals

New resource expands firm’s industry insights, unpacking the latest, high-impact insurance coverage appellate cases and trends
Robinson+Cole Insurance Practice Launches Latest Blog, <i>Covering Appeals</i> teaser
August 26, 2025

78 Robinson+Cole Lawyers Listed in The Best Lawyers in America© 2026

Firm receives top listing in Connecticut lawyer count in national peer review survey
78 Robinson+Cole Lawyers Listed in The Best Lawyers in America© 2026 teaser
July 31, 2025

Wystan Ackerman Appointed Chair of FDCC’s Amicus and Public Policy Committee

Federation of Defense & Corporate Counsel
March 7, 2025

Wystan Ackerman Recognized as a “Top Author”

2025 JD Supra Readers' Choice Awards
Wystan Ackerman Recognized as a “Top Author” teaser
October 31, 2024

Robinson+Cole Lawyers Recognized in 2024 Super Lawyers®

Thomson Reuters
Robinson+Cole Lawyers Recognized in 2024 <i>Super Lawyers</i>® teaser
October 9, 2024

Robinson+Cole Recognized in 2025 Edition of Benchmark Litigation

August 15, 2024

78 Robinson+Cole Lawyers Listed in The Best Lawyers in America© 2025

78 Robinson+Cole Lawyers Listed in <i>The Best Lawyers in America</i>© 2025 teaser

August 26, 2025

78 Robinson+Cole Lawyers Listed in The Best Lawyers in America© 2026

Firm receives top listing in Connecticut lawyer count in national peer review survey
78 Robinson+Cole Lawyers Listed in The Best Lawyers in America© 2026 teaser
July 31, 2025

Wystan Ackerman Appointed Chair of FDCC’s Amicus and Public Policy Committee

Federation of Defense & Corporate Counsel
March 7, 2025

Wystan Ackerman Recognized as a “Top Author”

2025 JD Supra Readers' Choice Awards
Wystan Ackerman Recognized as a “Top Author” teaser
October 31, 2024

Robinson+Cole Lawyers Recognized in 2024 Super Lawyers®

Thomson Reuters
Robinson+Cole Lawyers Recognized in 2024 <i>Super Lawyers</i>® teaser
October 9, 2024

Robinson+Cole Recognized in 2025 Edition of Benchmark Litigation

August 15, 2024

78 Robinson+Cole Lawyers Listed in The Best Lawyers in America© 2025

78 Robinson+Cole Lawyers Listed in <i>The Best Lawyers in America</i>© 2025 teaser

Events


Past

Coverage-Related Class Actions and MDLs: Recent Developments and What is on the Horizon

Nov 10 2023
Federation of Defense & Corporate Counsel’s (FDCC) Insurance Industry Institute (I-3)
Past

Current Trends in Consumer Class Action Litigation

Apr 26 2022
Perrin Conferences Class Action Litigation Conference
Past

Coverage-Related Class Actions and MDLs: Recent Developments and What is on the Horizon

Nov 10 2023
Federation of Defense & Corporate Counsel’s (FDCC) Insurance Industry Institute (I-3)
Past

Current Trends in Consumer Class Action Litigation

Apr 26 2022
Perrin Conferences Class Action Litigation Conference
Past

Defending Class Actions Using Absent Class Member Discovery

Dec 9 2021
Strafford CLE webinar
Past

Coronavirus Business Interruption Insurance Class Action Lawsuits: Coverage and Certification Issues

May 21 2020
Perrin Conferences
Past

Business Interruption Insurance Coverage and the COVID-19 Crisis: An Examination

Mar 26 2020
R+C-Hosted Webinar
Past

Blurred Lines: Construction Defect and Ensuing Loss

Nov 6 2019
DRI Complex Coverage Forum
Past

Defending Class Actions Using Absent Class Member Discovery

Dec 9 2021
Strafford CLE webinar
Past

Coronavirus Business Interruption Insurance Class Action Lawsuits: Coverage and Certification Issues

May 21 2020
Perrin Conferences
Past

Business Interruption Insurance Coverage and the COVID-19 Crisis: An Examination

Mar 26 2020
R+C-Hosted Webinar
Past

Blurred Lines: Construction Defect and Ensuing Loss

Nov 6 2019
DRI Complex Coverage Forum

Class Action Insider


Below is an excerpt of the Class Action Insider posts authored by Wystan.

New Fourth Circuit Decision Addresses Mandatory (No Opt-Out) Classes and Commonality

While the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit’s recent class action decision in Trauernicht v. Genworth Financial Inc., No. 24-1880, – F.4th –, 2026 WL 667917 (4th Cir. Mar. 10, 2026), involves an ERISA retirement plan, the decision is useful well beyond that context. The decision highlights that: (1) mandatory (no opt-out) classes... Continue Reading

Visit Blog

Ninth Circuit Says Class Members Must Demonstrate Standing at Summary Judgment for Certified Damages Classes

A recent Ninth Circuit decision held that both named and unnamed class members in a class seeking monetary damages must come forward with sufficient evidence of Article III standing at the summary judgment stage—not merely at a later claims or distribution process. This gives defendants a powerful tool in defending class actions after they are... Continue Reading

Visit Blog

Consumer Deception and Price Inflation Case: Eighth Circuit Reverses Class Certification Based on Individualized Issues

If,  like me, you grew up during (or otherwise lived through) the 1980s, you’ll recall the ever-present jingle “The best part of wakin’ up is Folgers in your cup” (and perhaps some creative modifications thereof by the children and teens of that era). My grandmother preferred Folgers, clipping coupons for it when available, and her... Continue Reading

Visit Blog

Ninth Circuit Says Post-Removal Amendment Deleting Class Allegations Destroys Federal Jurisdiction Under CAFA

When a class action is removed to federal court under the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA), plaintiffs sometimes amend their pleadings to try to defeat federal jurisdiction. The recent U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit decision in Faulk v. JELD-WEN, Inc., 2025 WL 3183012 (9th Cir. Nov. 14, 2025), addresses how post-removal amendments... Continue Reading

Visit Blog

Appeal Bonds: A Strategic Tool in Appeals of Class Action Settlements

When a class action settlement is objected to and subsequently approved by the court, objectors sometimes appeal, which can substantially delay the settlement process including distribution of settlement funds to class members. To mitigate the risks and costs of such delays, parties to the settlement can ask the court to require objectors to post an... Continue Reading

Visit Blog

Advisory Committee on Federal Civil Rules Considering Potential Amendments to Class Action Rule and Potential Third-Party Litigation Funding Rule

At a recent meeting, the Advisory Committee on Civil Rules of the Judicial Conference of the United States discussed, at an early stage, potential amendments to the federal class action rule, as well as a potential rule requiring disclosure of third-party litigation funding. No specific proposed amendments are before the committee at this stage (see... Continue Reading

Visit Blog

Ninth Circuit Finds Class Certification Inappropriate in Case Involving Projected Sold Adjustments on Auto Insurance Total Losses

A recent Ninth Circuit decision reconciled other decisions within that circuit involving auto insurance total losses, concluding that individual questions predominated and therefore affirming the district court’s denial of class certification. The dissent, however, called for en banc review, suggesting that an intra-circuit split exists. In Ambrosio v. Progressive Preferred Insurance Company, – F. 4th... Continue Reading

Visit Blog

How Will Trump v. CASA, Inc.  Affect Class Certification Law?

The Supreme Court’s recent decision in Trump v. CASA, Inc., –– S. Ct. ––, 2025 WL 1773631 (U.S. June 27, 2025), restricting the use of “universal injunctions” by federal district courts, is receiving extensive attention regarding how it may affect the litigation challenging various executive orders and actions of President Trump. From the perspective of... Continue Reading

Visit Blog

Data Breach Class Action Settlement Approval Affirmed by Ninth Circuit with Attorneys’ Fee Award Reversed and Remanded

Some data breach class actions settle quickly, with one of two settlement structures: (1) a “claims made” structure, in which the total amount paid to class members who submit valid claims is not capped, and attorneys’ fees are awarded by the court and paid separately by the defendant; or (2) a “common fund” structure, in... Continue Reading

Visit Blog