loader
Page is loading...
OVERVIEW

David C. Allen
Partner

Los Angeles

2029 Century Park East
Suite 300
Los Angeles, CA 90067

P 310-284-3860

F 310-284-3894

OVERVIEW

David C. Allen
Partner

Los Angeles

2029 Century Park East
Suite 300
Los Angeles, CA 90067

P 310-284-3860

F 310-284-3894

Managing partner of the firm’s Los Angeles office, David Allen is an experienced trial attorney who advises clients on product liability cases, consumer class actions, commercial claims, toxic torts and partnership disputes. Throughout the dispute resolution process, David is aligned with the client’s goals for resolving matters in a cost effective manner.

OVERVIEW

David C. Allen Partner

Los Angeles

2029 Century Park East
Suite 300
Los Angeles, CA 90067

P : 310-284-3860

Managing partner of the firm’s Los Angeles office, David Allen is an experienced trial attorney who advises clients on product liability cases, consumer class actions, commercial claims, toxic torts and partnership disputes. Throughout the dispute resolution process, David is aligned with the client’s goals for resolving matters in a cost effective manner.

David has proven time and again that he is able to navigate the most difficult disputes and litigation claims. In fact, the more complicated the problem, the more dedicated David is to resolving it. With more than 30 years of experience trying complex claims across the country in state and federal courts and arbitral venues, David has resolved federal multidistrict litigation, state coordinated proceedings, multi-party claims and nationwide class actions. He has represented companies in cases involving commercial contracts, real estate development, occupational and environmental chemical exposure, letters of credit and unfair competition.

Clients and colleagues alike appreciate that David is able to effectively and efficiently manage large-scale, high-stakes and protracted litigation. An outstanding team player, David has performed lead and supporting roles, including on multi-firm teams assembled to manage numerous related claims. David is the ultimate problem-solver. He understands how to assess sophisticated legal issues in light of the client’s business challenges and expectations. He works with clients to develop a strategy designed to lead to the desired result, while incorporating their bigger picture goals.

Although David offers a track record of helping clients devise successful strategies at trial, the reality is that most cases settle. He is equally valued for his ability to favorably settle difficult claims, saving his clients time, resources and money. Known for his skill in establishing credibility, opposing counsel knows that David can and will try a case if necessary. A straightforward and persuasive communicator, David designs litigation and settlement tactics that are both reasonable and balanced in light of the client’s business objectives.

David’s analytical abilities are honed and acute. He knows how, from practical experience, to best present his client’s position both in writing and oral argument. Moreover, David’s industry experience is particularly broad, ranging from petrochemicals to logistics to marketing and sales of consumer products and from real estate development to product design, manufacturing and quality assurance, including medical devices and pharmaceuticals.

Prior to joining the firm, David served as managing partner of the Los Angeles office of another major commercial law firm, as well as on its Management Committee.

EXPERIENCE
  • A Barnes & Thornburg attorney defended a retailer against class action claims of misrepresentation of health benefits of dietary supplements sold to the public. After lengthy discovery and denial of class certification, the case settled for a nominal amount. Osborne v. Musceltech Research and Development, Inc., et al., Case No. BC , Superior Court for the County of Los Angeles. (*This matter occurred prior to joining Barnes & Thornburg.)
  • A Barnes & Thornburg attorney defended client against 126 personal injury cases coordinated under West Virginia’s Mass Litigation Panel rules. The plaintiffs alleged numerous and various injuries as a result of exposure to Perchloroethylene (“PCE”), which was used in a coal mine operation known as “float-sink” that tested the quality of coal samples by determining the relative density of the coal as compared to the density of PCE. After Plaintiffs completed a court-ordered fact questionnaire, a defense motion for summary judgment resulted in the dismissal with prejudice of all 126 cases. In Re Float-Sink Litigation, C.A. No. 11-C-5000000
  • A Barnes & Thornburg attorney defended client in five coordinated cases wherein plaintiffs alleged personal injuries after exposure to groundwater contaminated with trichloroethylene (“TCE”). After a Summary Jury Trial with two separate juries reaching verdicts, a global settlement was reached. Stites, et al. v. Sundstrand Corporation, United States District Court for the Western District of Michigan. (*This matter occurred prior to joining Barnes & Thornburg.)
  • A Barnes & Thornburg attorney defended five chemical suppliers in coordinated cases arising out of Plaintiff’s discharge of contaminated waste water. The Plaintiffs and neighboring property owners asserted personal injury and property damage claims as a result of the contamination. After four years of litigation, including an interlocutory appeal, reached a settlement of all claims favorable to clients. Gelman Sciences, Inc. v. The Dow Chemical Company, Circuit court for Washtenaw County, Michigan. (*This matter occurred prior to joining Barnes & Thornburg.)
  • A Barnes & Thornburg attorney represented a global electronics manufacturer in the defense of a consumer class action assigned to the Complex Case Division of the Superior Court. The claims related to allegations of fraud in the conduct of product rebates offered by client. A very favorable, class-wide settlement was reached after the Court’s hearing on class certification indicated that the class certification for trial would be denied. Luis Ho v. Samsung Electronics of America, Case No. 03AS03429, Superior Court for the County of Sacramento. (*This matter occurred prior to joining Barnes & Thornburg.)
  • A Barnes & Thornburg attorney represented a global electronics manufacturer in the defense of a consumer class action assigned to the Complex Case Division of the Superior Court. The claims related to alleged misrepresentations made during client’s sale of microwave ovens. The class action was defeated and the case was favorably settled thereafter. (*This matter occurred prior to joining Barnes & Thornburg.)
  • A Barnes & Thornburg attorney represented a global electronics manufacturer in the defense of consumer class action assigned to the Complex Case Division of the Superior Court. The Plaintiffs alleged that client misrepresented the storage capacity of the memory on cell phones by stating the memory capacity in bytes. This was one of among several identical suits filed across the United States. The court granted client’s motion to dismiss based on the Metric Treaty, which permitted the unit of measurement used by client. This defense was later taken and applied in the cases pending in other States. Barbara Johnson, et al. v. Samsung Telecommunications of America, Case No. BC 323004, Superior Court for the County of Los Angeles. (*This matter occurred prior to joining Barnes & Thornburg.)
  • A Barnes & Thornburg attorney represented a global food manufacturer in the defense of a class action claims arising out of alleged misrepresentation of ingredients in snack foods sold by client. After achieving dismissal of most of Plaintiffs’ claims on a Rule 12 motion and aggressively pursuing discovery, the case was dismissed in exchange for a waiver of costs. Henderson, et al., v. Gruma Corporation, Case No., CV10 4173 AHM (AJWx), United States District Court for the Central District of California.
  • A Barnes & Thornburg attorney represented a manufacturer of weight loss dietary supplement in numerous class actions filed across the country alleging misrepresentation, mislabeling and personal injuries. In the coordinated class actions in California, the client defeated the class action motion and negotiated a nationwide settlement in a competing class action pending in Michigan on very favorable terms. Perez, et al. v. Metabolife International, Inc., Superior Court for the County of San Diego, California. (*This matter occurred prior to joining Barnes & Thornburg.)
  • A Barnes & Thornburg attorney represented a producer of apple juice in the MDL (Multi-District Litigation) arising out of numerous consumer class actions alleging that the producers misrepresented the ingredients in the juice. In Re Apple Juice Litigation, JPML No., United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. (*This matter occurred prior to joining Barnes & Thornburg.)
  • A Barnes & Thornburg attorney represented an internet domain registry company in the defense of multiple cases coordinated in the Complex Case Division of the Superior Court. The claim involved allegations of consumer fraud and violation of the Penal Code arising out of the launch of a new Internet domain name registry (.biz). The class action was defeated and the case settled thereafter. Smiley, et al v. NeuLevel, Inc., et al., Case No. Case No. BC 254659 and ePrize, LLC v. NeuLevel, Inc., et al., Case No. BC 257632, Superior Court for the County of Los Angeles. (*This matter occurred prior to joining Barnes & Thornburg.)
  • A Barnes & Thornburg attorney represented the three largest grocery companies in the United States in the joint defense of many consumer class actions that were coordinated under California’s equivalent of the federal MDL (Multi-District Litigation) and assigned to the Complex Case Division of the Superior Court for management of the cases. Plaintiffs alleged that defendants mislabeled farm-raised salmon but after three years of litigation that included an interlocutory appeal, all cases were dismissed in exchange for a waiver of costs. In re Farm-Raised Salmon Litigation, Case No. JCCP No. 4329, Superior Court for the County of Los Angeles. (*This matter occurred prior to joining Barnes & Thornburg.)
  • A Barnes & Thornburg attorney served as trial counsel in the jury trial of 26 toxic tort claims consolidated in the State of Maryland. Plaintiffs alleged myriad injuries and diseases as a result of exposure to many difference chemicals used in the production of GoreTex®. After a 13-week trial, the jury returned defense verdicts on all claims. Kennedy, et al. v. Mobay Corp., et al. (*This matter occurred prior to joining Barnes & Thornburg.)
  • Barnes & Thornburg attorneys served as coordinating counsel for Johnson & Johnson's DePuy Orthopedics Inc. in an eight-week bellwether trial before a federal jury in Dallas. DePuy prevailed and was cleared of the allegations that it manufactured a dangerous and defective metal-on-metal hip implant. This was the first trial in the litigation in which more than 7,000 cases are consolidated in a multi-district litigation (MDL) pending in Dallas. Barnes & Thornburg is coordinating counsel for the MDL.
INSIGHTS & EVENTS
Trending Connect
We use cookies on this site to enhance your user experience. By clicking any link on this page you are giving your consent for us to use cookies.