Christina D. Harrison
Practice Areas:
Commercial Litigation,
Insurance Coverage,
Appellate,
Class Action & MDL Litigation
Biography:
Christina Harrison focuses her practice on commercial litigation, class actions and insurance bad faith claims. Ms. Harrison also handles appeals in both state and federal courts.
Education:
The University of Illinois College of Law, J.D., Magna Cum Laude, 1998
Honors: Law Review; Harno Fellow
The University of Illinois, B.S., 1994
Honors: Kappa Tau Alpha Fraternity
Bar Admissions:
Illinois (1998)
Professional Memberships:
American Bar Association
Chicago Bar Association
Chicago-Lincoln Inn of Courts - Master of the Bench (Board member 2008-2010)
Additional Bar Admissions:
U.S. District Court Northern District of Illinois
U.S. District Court Central District of Illinois
U.S. Court of Appeals for 7th and 10th Circuits
Publications:
"Bad Faith Claims in Illinois" (Co-Author), Chapter 12, ICLE Insurance Law (2009).
"A Primer on Defending Breast Cancer Litigation" (Co-Author), American Journal of Trial Advocacy, Volume 25:3, Spring, 2002.
Representative Cases:
Smith as Bankruptcy Plan Trustee for Estate of Boston Chicken, Inc. v. Arthur Anderson, et al., District Court, Arizona. Represented individual director and member of audit committee of Boston Chicken, Inc. in suit against breach of fiduciary duty claims arising out of the Boston Chicken bankruptcy. Settled after extensive discovery and while summary judgment motions were pending.
Ahearn v. Archibald Candy Corporation, Cook County, Illinois. Defended an Illinois food manufacturer in a national class action based on breach of warranty and Illinois Consumer Fraud Act claims. Successfully settled after the trial court denied in part the plaintiffs' motion for class certification and granted in part the defendant's motion for summary judgment.
United States Fire Ins. Co. v. Zurich Ins. Co., Cook County, Illinois. Defended a primary insurer against an excess insurer's attempt to recover the defense and settlement costs it incurred in defending a party insured by both the primary and excess insurer. At the trial level, the court terminated the action when it granted our client's motion to dismiss and motion for summary judgment. The Appellate Court of Illinois ruled in our client's favor and found that the excess insurer's complaint was properly dismissed and summarily resolved in the primary insurer's favor.
See Extended Biography
