Charlie is a versatile and adaptive trial and appellate lawyer who represents clients in high-stakes cases in jurisdictions across the United States. For example, in 2017 he obtained almost $16 million in settlements as lead plaintiff's counsel in three trademark and unfair competition cases brought under the Lanham Act and related state laws. As first-chair trial counsel, Charlie obtained a $10 million settlement in the largest of the three cases on the third day of trial in federal court in West Palm Beach, Florida. Also as lead counsel, he also obtained a defense verdict in a $50 million data breach trial in Miami federal court that lasted three weeks and eventually resulted in a post-trial $1.75 million attorney fee recovery. Charlie also has had two adverse jury verdicts reversed on appeal; in a seven-figure consumer fraud case in Dallas County, Texas, the appellate court reversed the verdict and entered judgment for Charlie's client. In the past few years, he also has obtained defense verdicts in Brooklyn, New York; Portland, Oregon; Northern California; New Jersey; Houston, Texas; and Southern Missouri, among other jurisdictions.
Charlie has also been lead appellate counsel in consequential cases in state and federal appellate courts across the country. He has argued more than 30 appeals in more than 15 different state and federal appellate courts. Moreover, one of his federal appeals is included in a prominent casebook on tort law. His work has also resulted in the reversal of two civil jury verdicts and one federal criminal conviction. Charlie's experience in the appellate court have helped him develop the ability to identify legal issues that leverage better outcomes for his clients, not only as a courtroom lawyer, but as a business adviser.
Recognized for his trial and post-trial experience, Charlie is a Fellow of the Litigation Counsel of America, the legal honorary society composed of less than one-half of one percent of American lawyers. Fellowship is highly selective and by invitation only, and fellows are selected based upon evaluations of excellence, effectiveness and accomplishments in litigation, and superior ethical reputation.
Charlie is currently national trial and appellate counsel for a several multinational corporations. He has defended a range of clients in matters involving a wide variety of subjects, including the defense of international corporations in antitrust and RICO litigation; federal criminal and civil rights litigation on behalf of those unable to afford representation; complex commercial matters; as well as consumer protection, mass tort, catastrophic injury/wrongful death, class action and product liability matters for many different industries.
Charlie also manages entire case dockets under alternative-fee arrangements, and as served as in-house counsel overseeing hundreds of cases across the United States. His case management and in-house counsel experience gives him unique insight into not only the litigation needs of his clients, but their business needs, allowing him to fully understand a client's objectives and the big picture of how litigation and business operations affect each other.
National Union v. Tyco Integrated Security, USDC for Southern District of Florida (Miami) (defense verdict as first-chair in $50 million data-breach trial resulting in $1.75 million attorney-fee recovery).
Dryer v. Scott Technologies, Madison County, New York (2015) (first-chair in five-week $50 million high-profile product liability trial involving burn and amputation injuries to a firefighter).
Nooter Corp. v. Evanston Ins. Co., St. Louis City, Missouri (2014) (three-week jury and declaratory judgment trial involving $100 million commercial and insurance issues).
Bohl v. ADT Sec. Services, Inc., Somerset County, New Jersey (2014) (defense verdict in permanent disability claim).
Millwood Golf & Racket v. SimplexGrinnell, Greene County, Missouri (2013) (defense verdict in $3 million commercial kitchen fire).
Roman v. ADT Sec. Services, Inc., Kings County, New York (Brooklyn) (2013) (defense verdict in 10-day trial claiming permanent disability from electrical accident).
Valbruna Stainless Steel v. ADT Sec. Services, Inc., Harris County, Texas (Houston) (2012) (defense verdict in fraud/consumer protection state court trial; favorable directed verdict on breach of contract counterclaim).
Parker-Hendricksen v. Rodriguez, et. al., Monmouth County, New Jersey (2011) (defense verdict in permanent-disability case involving commercial truck/pedestrian accident).
Nacol & Associates v. ADT Sec. Services, Inc., USDC for Southern District of Texas (Houston) (2011) (jury verdict in $1.8 million exposure consumer-fraud case remitted to $1,000).
PacifiCorp v. SimplexGrinnell, Multnomah County, Oregon (2010) (defense verdict in case involving electrical engineering issues following power plant accident).
Traveler’s Indemnity v. SimplexGrinnell, Placer County, California (2009) (defense verdict in multimillion-dollar case involving restaurant fire).
ADT Sec. Services, Inc. v. Van Peterson, --- So.3d --- (2016) (reversal of seven-figure DTPA verdict with entry of judgment for client).
Barko Hydraulics, LLC v. Shepherd, 167 So.3d 304 (2014) (reversal of adverse jury verdict).
Davis v. Brickman Landscaping, Ltd., 219 N.J. 395 (2014) (reinstating summary judgment on expert issues in $10 million case where two minors died).
Nirvana v. ADT Sec. Services Inc. 881 F. Supp. 2d 556 (S.D.N.Y. 2012), aff’d (2d Cir. 2013) (affirming dismissal of $3 million tort and fraud theories).
ADT Sec. Services, Inc. v. Van Peterson Fine Jewelers, 390 S.W.3d 603 (Court of Appeals of Texas, Dallas, 2012) (interlocutory appeal reversing denial of summary judgment on four claims).
Core-Mark Midcontinent, Inc. v. Sonitrol Corp., 300 P.3d 963 (2012 COA 120) (vacating jury award based on erroneous exclusion of expert witnesses).
Valenzuela v. ADT Sec. Services, Inc., 475 Fed. Appx. 115 (9th Cir. 2012) (affirming summary judgment on tort and fraud claims).
Greenspan v. ADT Sec. Services, Inc., 444 Fed. Appx. 566, 2011 WL 4361530 (affirming favorable summary judgment order and reversing sole adverse ruling).
United States v. Taylor, 636 F.3d 461, (8th Cir. Feb. 18, 2011) (reversing denial of motion to suppress evidence obtained during automobile search that violated Fourth Amendment).
Spengler v. ADT Sec. Services, Inc., 505 F.3d 456 (6th Cir. 2007) (affirming summary judgment in wrongful-death case; creating significant industry precedent).
Synnex Corp. v. ADT Sec. Services, Inc., 394 N.J. Super. 577 (App. Div. 2007) (dismissal of jury verdict).
United States v. Aldridge, 413 F.3d 829 (8th Cir. 2005) (vacated unconstitutional sentence, ultimately resulted in a significant reduction; affirmed conviction over dissent).
Johnson v. Blaukat, 453 F.3d 1108 (8th Cir.2006) (reversal of adverse grant of summary judgment in civil rights case).
Charles C. Eblen & Kristina L. Burmeister, Minimize Liability in Freeze and Burst Lawsuits, Fire Protection Contractor, Dec. 2013, at 28.
Charlie Eblen & Aaron Kirkland, Maximize Your Contract’s Exculpatory Provisions, Law360, July 15, 2013.
Paul A. Williams, Charles C. Eblen & Kristina L. Burmeister, Minimizing Tort Liability With The Right Terms, Law360, Feb. 28, 2012.
Charles C. Eblen, Defining the Geographic Market in Modern Commerce: The Effect of Globalization and E-Commerce on Tampa Electric and its Progeny, Baylor Law Review (Dec. 2004).