Related Practice Areas:
Alternative Dispute Resolution
Antitrust
Class Action
Intellectual Property Litigation
Investigations
Litigation
Product Liability
Restructuring & Insolvency
Toxic Tort
Partners:
John J. Arado
Brent R. Austin
William M. Barnes
Michael R. Blankshain
Douglas R. Carlson
James A. Christman
John C. Church
Alison C. Conlon
John W. Costello
Michael Dockterman
James P. Dorr
Mark L. Durbin
Jerald P. Esrick
Beth L. Fancsali
Donald Flayton
Lisa M. Fontoura
Kathy P. Fox
John E. Frey
Matthew M. Garrett
Jonathan S. Goodman
Kenneth M. Gorenberg
H. Roderic Heard
Richard M. Hoffman
Anthony G. Hopp
Anne G. Kimball
Stephen J. Landes
Denise A. Lazar
John S. Letchinger
Brian W. Lewis
Catherine Mathews Graf
Thomas I. Matyas
Michael L. McCluggage
Mark P. Miller
Nicole Nocera
Douglas L. Prochnow
John A. Roberts
Fred E. Schulz
Christopher T. Sheean
Robert L. Shuftan
S Jonathan Silverman
Lisa S. Simmons
David M. Simon
Derek C. Smith
Martin D. Snyder
R. John Street
Peter A. Tomaras
James B. Vogts
David L. Weinstein
Craig M. White
W. Allen Woolley
Jonathan W. Young
Commercial Litigation
Attorneys in Wildman Harrold’s Commercial Litigation Practice bring decades of experience as lead trial attorneys in highly-complex, high-stakes litigation matters. We have proven effective in coordinating joint and local counsel to achieve strong results for our collective clients. The principal guide on which we base our representation of clients in business disputes is to gain an understanding of the value and significance of the controversy to the client and to resolve it as quickly and efficiently as possible. We are proud of our national trial reputation. We are prepared and willing to try cases and work with our client to ensure their confidence in proceeding through trial. Our preparation and reputation have also made it possible for us to successfully resolve cases before they reach trial on favorable economic terms, where such an outcome is desired by our client and consistent with the client’s goals. We represent companies in complex litigation and alternative dispute resolution proceedings across a broad range of industries and matters. Recent experience includes the following:
- In one of the most closely watched cases of the past year, we represented a major retailer, in its billion-dollar contract dispute with a large online merchant. Wildman Harrold moved aggressively toward trial to effect a swift resolution and prohibit further damage to our client’s business. After a 3-month trial the court terminated the contract as requested by our client and dismissed all counterclaims. The trial required an innovative approach given the virtual nature of the internet, where contract violations are difficult to prove and discovery is ever-shifting due to the dynamic nature of internet content.
- We represented an industrial manufacturer when it faced a costly recall of nearly 700 escalators. Working with metallurgy experts, Wildman Harrold identified an alternative, after-hour repair, averting a costly and disruptive product recall. We filed suit against our client’s supplier for breach of warranty, pushed to trial and won early rulings on key evidentiary issues. The jury awarded our client every penny requested, new law was made in Illinois on damages for “repair costs,” and disruption to our clients customers was minimized.
- We represented a leading telecommunications company in a substantial commercial dispute with one of its suppliers over quality and supply issues related to components used in advanced automotive communications systems. The dispute was over tens of millions of dollars in potential exposure and involved issues throughout our client’s supply chain. The matter was resolved favorably through confidential mediation.
- We successfully defended a medical device manufacturer in a claim for over $10 million by its former Japanese distributor. After termination of their relationship the distributor shipped its entire inventory to the United States, but our client rejected the shipment. The jury concluded that our client rightfully rejected the shipment and assigned no liability to them. The defendant appealed and the Seventh Circuit upheld the verdict.

