Christopher S. Hamilton - Lawyer in Dallas, TX

Chris Hamilton has established himself as one of the leading high-stakes trial lawyers in the United States. Hamilton has a recent track record of verdicts and settlements that are setting the mark in both the personal injury arena and in complex business disputes.

For example, Hamilton was recently featured in Courtroom View Networks (CVN) list of Most Impressive Trials of 2019. In 2014, Hamilton was recognized by the Dallas Business Journal as having the largest jury verdict in Texas for a personal injury case and the 17th largest jury verdict in the United States. In 2016, Hamilton was recognized by Top Verdict as having the ninth-largest personal injury verdict in Texas. Hamilton was recognized in 2011 by Verdict Search as having one of the top 10 verdicts in Texas and top 100 verdicts in the United States.

Hamilton was selected as one of the Best Lawyers in America for 2019, the Lawdragon 500 Leading Lawyers in America for 2020, and is a member of the prestigious American Board of Trial Advocates (ABOTA).

Hamiltons recent verdicts and successes include:

• $39.4 million jury verdict in a commercial dispute involving a breach of partnership agreements, breach of fiduciary duties, and fraud in an alternative energy transaction recognized as one of the top 10 verdicts in Texas and top 100 verdicts in the United States in 2011. The verdict resulted in a confidential settlement.
• $27 million compensatory damages jury verdict in a wrongful death case alleging premises liability for inadequate security against The McDonalds Corporation.
• Confidential settlement after a two-week trial in a high-profile wrongful death case. $19.7 million jury verdict in a medical malpractice case.
• $18.3 million arbitration award for negligent misrepresentation in a commercial case involving the sale of a medical device company.
• Confidential eight-figure settlement in a medical malpractice case involving brain injury to a child.
• Won summary judgment in an insurance coverage dispute finding coverage for an eight-figure judgment where the insurance company had claimed multiple exclusions in denying coverage.
• Confidential settlement in a landmark case proving contamination of groundwater from fracking, representing a family that was severely burned in an explosion.
• Successfully represented an insurance company in a bet-the-company insurance coverage dispute against a re-insurer, resulting in substantial recoveries to policyholders.
• Confidential settlement for a truck driver who lost his leg in a construction accident.
• Confidential settlement in a high-profile negligent security case against Target Corporation where a customer suffered brain injuries following an unprovoked attack by third-party criminals.
• Confidential settlement representing the family of a victim who was killed by an 18-wheeler.
• $11.5 million settlement in a False Claims Act case involving kickbacks claims against one of the largest medical device manufacturers in the world. The successful settlement occurred after the Government had rejected and declined to intervene in the case.
• Confidential settlement in a breach of partnership and breach of fiduciary duty action relating to a partnership interest obtained in a high-profile divorce proceeding.
• $5.3 million jury verdict on an oral partnership agreement and for claims of fraud in a dispute over collegiate licensing agreements. The verdict resulted in a confidential settlement.
• Confidential settlement in a high-profile section 1983 case against a school district where a disabled student was choked by a district employee.
• Confidential settlement in a trademark infringement case involving disgorgement of profits against a Fortune 500 company.
• Confidential settlement in an international business dispute for a local company alleging fraudulent inducement claims relating to a patent involving the novel application of inkjet technologies.
• Favorable jury verdict on behalf of a real estate developer in an oil and gas dispute.
• $1 million jury verdict in a case involving a wreck with a commercial 15-passenger van where the victim sustained an aggravation of a pre-existing torn hip cartilage. The case was subject to a high-low settlement agreement.
• Take nothing defense verdict on behalf of Dallas County in a case in which Hamilton was appointed by the Commissioners Court as a Special Deputy District Attorney to defend the county in a whistleblower case against a sitting judge alleging several million dollars in damages.
• Represented Southern Methodist University in the successful resolution of a land dispute regarding the George W. Bush Presidential Library.

Hamiltons cases have been featured in Bloomberg, CNN, Texas Lawyer, Dallas Business Journal, Law360, The Dallas Morning News, Texas Lawbook, The Houston Chronicle, The Austin-American Statesman, various local television and print news affiliates across the United States, and a number of online publications. Hamilton was named Pro Bono Lawyer of the Year in 2017 by the American Association for Justice. Hamilton was also nominated for Dallas Morning News ?Texan of the Year for his pro bono work representing individuals unlawfully detained at DFW Airport during the travel ban. Hamilton earned a selection to D Magazines Best Lawyers in Dallas list for 2017 based on his work for clients involved in catastrophic personal injury cases, product and medical liability claims, and he was selected to D Magazines Best Lawyers in Dallas list for 2014 for his work in business litigation. He was selected to the Texas Super Lawyers listing by Texas Monthly (Thomson Reuters) in 2014, 2015, 2016, and 2017. He has been repeatedly selected to the Texas Super Lawyers Rising Stars list by Texas Monthly (Thomson Reuters) in 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, and 2014. Hamilton is also a member of the Leaders Forum for the American Association for Justice.

Hamilton, a fluent Spanish speaker, is a current member of the Board of Directors for the Texas Trial Lawyers Association. Hamilton is an usher at his Church.

Results of previous cases are not indicative or promissory of future case results.