Andrew H. Erteschik 
Associate
Education

University of North Carolina, JD, 2006

University of North Carolina, BA, 2002

Phi Beta Kappa

Professional and Community Activities

Adjunct Professor, UNC School of Law
Appellate Rules Committee, North Carolina Bar Association
Second Vice President and Member of Board of Trustees, NC Supreme Court Historical Society
Chair,Wake County Bar Association Sponsorships Committee
Chair, Carolina Student Legal Services Board of Directors 
Faculty Coach, UNC Law Moot Court Teams
Rental Licensing Committee, Town of Chapel Hill
Board of Directors, Capital City Athletic Association
Litigation Section, North Carolina Bar Association
Member, Instruments of Justice

Notable Accomplishments
Jurisdictions Licensed
301 Fayetteville Street, Suite 1900, Raleigh, NC 27601t: 919.783.2895|
P.O. Box 1801, Raleigh, NC 27602-1801f: 919.783.1075|

Drew focuses his practice on civil litigation and appeals. His litigation experience covers a wide array of substantive areas, including complex business litigation, professional liability defense, and litigation involving state and local government entities.  He has tried cases to verdict in state court, federal court, and the North Carolina Business Court, and has been named by Super Lawyers magazine as a "Rising Star" among North Carolina litigators.

He also regularly represents clients with matters before North Carolina’s appellate courts.  Prior to joining the firm, Drew served for two years as a law clerk to Senior Associate Justice Mark D. Martin of the Supreme Court of North Carolina.  From 2007 to 2010, Drew served as an adjunct professor at the UNC School of Law, where he taught an advanced course in appellate advocacy, as well as a course in legal writing and oral argument.  He currently serves on the Appellate Rules Committee of the North Carolina Bar Association.

Drew has served in leadership roles in a variety of community and bar-related organizations. He also maintains an active pro bono practice.

Representative Experience

Laws v. Priority Trustee Services of North Carolina, LLC, 375 Fed. Appx. 345 (4th Cir. 2010)

Successfully briefed and argued appeal involving a purported $11 million class action lawsuit against a law firm and the firm it hired to perform foreclosure sales. The plaintiffs had alleged that the relationship between the law firm and the foreclosure firm created a conflict of interest, and that therefore both firms had breached fiduciary duties to a potential class of thousands of borrowers. We moved to dismiss the complaint on the basis that the plaintiffs had impermissibly relied on State Bar Ethics Opinions to support their theory of liability, and the District Court dismissed the Complaint. The Fourth Circuit affirmed, holding for the first time in the Fourth Circuit that a violation of the ethics rules governing lawyers cannot be used in support of recovery in a civil action in North Carolina. 

Terreco Properties, LLC v. Avahoula Resources, LLC (AAA Arbitration 2009)

Represented North Carolina landowners in defense of multi-million dollar claims for lost profits, compensatory damages, and attorneys' fees concerning a failed venture to obtain permits for a post-Hurricane Katrina storm debris landfill on land our clients owned in Louisiana. The plaintiff, a start-up engineering and consulting company, alleged that our clients fraudulently induced it to enter the venture, then undermined the permit through unauthorized contacts with environmental regulators. After a multi-week hearing on the merits, all claims were dismissed, resulting in one of North Carolina’s largest defense verdicts of 2009.

In re: South Bay Properties, LLC, No. 10-04922-8-SWH (Bank. E.D.N.C. 2011)

Successfully briefed and argued motion to dismiss adversary proceeding involving claims that a $14.5 million mortgage was unenforceable due to a discrepancy between the date of the mortgage and promissory note it was intended to secure. We argued that although the mortgage would be invalid under North Carolina law, South Carolina law applied to the dispute, and a series of 19th-century South Carolina Supreme Court decisions made clear that the date discrepancy did not render the mortgage invalid. In a case of first-impression under South Carolina law, the Court held in favor of our client and relied on these 19th-century decisions, explaining: “Old and dusty as these cases may be, this court has found no more recent precedent to contradict them, and they appear to have established a lasting legal footprint.”


read all representative experience
Communication Agreement

I understand and agree that Poyner Spruill LLP will have no obligation to keep confidential the information that I am now sending to the firm.