Eric R. Lifvendahl - Partner

Back to all Attorneys

Biography

Eric R. Lifvendahl is a partner of Williams Montgomery & John Ltd. and a member of the firm's commercial litigation, professional liability, construction and white collar defense practice groups. He focuses his practice on complex commercial litigation and professional malpractice defense. He is "AV Preeminent" peer review rated by Martindale-Hubbell, reflecting the highest peer recognition for ethical standards and legal ability.

Mr. Lifvendahl has represented both corporations and individuals in litigation in state and federal courts, including matters involving non-compete agreements, construction claims, breach of contract claims, securities law, fraud claims, and legal, accounting and broker malpractice claims.

Mr. Lifvendahl has tried cases for breach of contract, fraud, legal malpractice and other claims before judges and juries, and has participated in several large arbitrations with claims exceeding $50 million for indemnity, contribution, breach of contract and fraud. He also represents a national franchisor in numerous arbitrations for breach of franchise agreements and has obtained more than $5 million in awards on behalf of this client.

Mr. Lifvendahl joined the firm in 2003 after practicing as an associate at another Chicago law firm and serving as an assistant prosecutor for Cook County, Ill. While at the Cook County State's Attorney's Office, he prosecuted murder, battery and sex offense cases, drug cases, and a variety of other criminal matters. He obtained a guilty verdict against the youngest murderers in the history of Illinois and argued appeals before the Illinois appellate courts.

Education/Bar Admissions

Mr. Lifvendahl received a B.A. in communications in 1988 from Boston College. He received his J.D. in 1992 from Loyola University Chicago School of Law, where he received the American Jurisprudence Award for the highest grade in business planning law.

Mr. Lifvendahl was admitted to the Illinois bar in 1992 and also has been admitted to the following federal trial and appellate courts:

  • U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois (including the trial bar)
  • U.S. District Court, Central District of Illinois
  • U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit

Professional Activities

Mr. Lifvendahl is active in various professional and civic organizations, including:

  • Chicago Bar Association
  • American Bar Association
  • The Society of Trial Lawyers
  • Winnetka Hockey Board, past president
  • North Shore Ice Arena, past member
   

Past Speaking Engagements

Representative Matters

  • 1350 Lake Shore Associates, LLP v. City of Chicago, et al.

    Circuit Court of Cook County, Ill., and Illinois Appellate Court
    As co-counsel, successfully represented a group of private land owners at trial in opposition to a large real estate project in a historic district of Chicago that violated local building ordinances.

  • Bechtel Power Corp., et al. v. Athens Generating Corp., et al. v. Siemens Westinghouse Power Corp.

    Arbitration in Washington, D.C. (2009)
    Achieved verdict of "not guilty" for client Siemens Westinghouse Power in arbitration of construction claims brought by Athens Generating seeking tens of millions of dollars in delays and liquidated damages. Siemens supplied combustion turbine generators and other equipment to a power plant in New York owned by Athens. When delays derailed the construction schedule, the general contractor, Bechtel, sued Athens for liquidated and other damages. Athens sought contribution or indemnity from Siemens. After a hearing spanning periods over more than three years, the arbitration panel found that Athens was entitled to no relief from Siemens by way of contribution, indemnity or otherwise.

  • Braun Consulting Inc. v. Inforte Corporation, et al.

    Circuit Court of Cook County, Ill.
    Successfully represented an information technology firm in a lawsuit against former employees for breach of a non-compete clause in an employment contract.

  • Confidential Arbitration

    Represented manufacturer of energy control systems in a six-week arbitration before an American Arbitration Association panel in New York. Hearing involved testimony from numerous witnesses and experts focusing on whether certain mechanical components met the stated specifications in the contract.

  • Confidential Legal Malpractice Matter

    Represented prominent Chicago law firm in a six-week bench trial involving legal malpractice claims. Case stemmed from advice provided to a client regarding security law claims against an investment banking and brokerage firm.

  • Forsythe Solutions v. Nexgen Corporation

    Circuit Court of Cook County, Ill.
    Successfully tried a lawsuit for breach of a non-compete agreement against a former subcontractor of an information technology firm.

  • Franchise Agreement Matters

    American Arbitration Association
    Currently represent national real estate franchisor in numerous arbitration matters stemming from breaches of franchise agreements by franchisers throughout the United States. Since 2008, has won more than $5 million in arbitration awards following American Arbitration Association hearings.

  • Imo Industries, Inc. v. Siemens DeMag Delaval Turbomachinery

    Court of Chancery for the State of Delaware, New Castle County (2005)
    Secured summary judgment for defendants Mannesmann Corporation and DeMag Delaval Turbomachinery on a counterclaim for contractual indemnity of asbestos claims under an asset purchase agreement. Judgment was affirmed by the Delaware Supreme Court.

  • Neoforma Inc. v. MedXS Solutions, et al.

    U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois
    Represented the plaintiff in a breach of contract lawsuit involving the sale of a business to the defendants. Case settled.

  • Zeller Realty Corp. v. AXA Equitable Life Insurance Co.

    Circuit Court of Cook County, Ill.
    Favorably settled breach of contract and fraudulent concealment lawsuit on behalf of defendants following a two-week jury trial. Settlement amount was substantially less than what was initially offered at the beginning of the case.