Corinne L. Conrad Of Counsel




Corinne Conrad concentrates her civil litigation defense practice in the areas of premises liability, product liability, construction litigation, trucking and transportation, and employment. She has been successful in drafting and arguing dispositive motions that resolve cases early in litigation.

Corinne has successfully represented numerous municipalities and businesses, including restaurants, bars and retail stores, in premises liability actions. A significant portion of Corinne’s practice involves defending general contractors and other contractors in construction accident claims. Another portion of Corinne’s practice involves the defense of product liability claims against domestic and foreign manufacturers. 

In addition, Corinne specializes in trucking and transportation law, defending trucking companies and their drivers in catastrophic accidents. Her practice also involves counseling employers on personnel issues and providing an effective defense to employers in discrimination, wrongful termination, FMLA, FLSA and other employment-related claims.

Representative Matters

Successfully defended homeowners in a wrongful death action involving the vehicular death of two teenagers after leaving the homeowners’ residence where alcohol had been present. Defense argued at the trial level that there was no alcohol-related liability and that the defendants did not undertake any duty to prevent the consumption of alcohol. The trial court agreed and granted the motion to dismiss. The Appellate Court reversed this decision in part, and the Illinois Supreme Court reversed the Appellate Court’s decision, thus affirming the trial court’s dismissal of the lawsuit.

Defended a municipal client in a jury trial in Cook County, Ill., in a premises liability suit. The plaintiff was a plumber who struck an underground electrical line while digging and suffered serious and permanent injuries. The issue at trial was whether the utility lines had been clearly marked for the entire duration of the project. At trial, plaintiff asked for $3.6 million. After a two-week trial, the jury returned a defense verdict.