About Andrew D. Smith
Andrew Smith is a transactional attorney focusing on commercial real estate (including purchase and sale transactions, commercial leasing, and commercial and residential development projects) and commercial transactions with an emphasis on mergers and acquisitions and financing transactions. In addition, he frequently represents wind energy project developers and investors with respect to North Dakota wind energy projects, and has substantial experience representing farm organizations, grain elevators, and family farmers in North Dakota’s agriculture community. Andrew also serves as general outside counsel for a number of regional companies. Andrew joined the Vogel Law Firm in 2015 after graduating first in his class from the University of North Dakota School of Law where he was the Outside Articles Editor of the North Dakota Law Review and served as a Teaching Assistant.
Upon graduation, Andrew was elected to the Order of the Coif, an honorary scholastic society, which recognizes law students attaining a high grade of scholarship and academic success. While in law school, Andrew was an extern for the Honorable Kermit E. Bye of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. Andrew lives in Kindred, North Dakota, with his wife and two children, and spends his spare time coaching youth sports, spending time at the family lake cabin, golfing, and hunting.
Proven verdicts and settlements at Vogel Law Firm
These results are credited to Vogel Law Firm. A result appears under an attorney's own name only when a published source names them as counsel on the case.
The parents of an eight-year-old boy killed in a November 1995 crash in West Fargo, North Dakota, sued the driver, his father and a second driver alleged to have been racing him. The driver admitted liability, and the jury awarded the parents $810,457.96 against him and found the second driver not negligent. The trial court refused to subtract the family's pretrial settlement with the father from the award, and the North Dakota Supreme Court affirmed in 1999.
Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Each case is unique and depends on its own facts.