Ross litigates individual and class action lawsuits, and already has extensive general litigation experience in his third year at Shook. As the responsible attorney on many cases, Ross takes care of clients from the inception to resolution of claims. As a result, his experience includes: motion practice, written discovery, depositions, trial preparation and briefing, pre-suit investigations and alternative dispute resolution.
He handles claims alleging not only product liability (defective design, manufacturing, marketing, warning, instruction, and/or information) but also general negligence, consumer protection violations, premises liability, breaches of contract and warranty and contribution/indemnity. From his product liability practice, he knows many industries: fire protection and alarms, medical device, life and safety, design and construction and automobile. He also is familiar with businesses providing services for hospitals, hotels, arenas and universities. Knowing these industries and their regulatory and industry standards is a key part of Ross’ practice.
Ross has won motions to dismiss and for summary judgment as well as discovery motions, such as motions to compel and for protective orders. He also crafts discovery requests to uncover facts that set up winning arguments. Most frequently, he makes these arguments at mediation, where he does it all—writes briefs, makes opening statements, and negotiates settlements.
Ross uses his background in behavioral economics from the University of Pennsylvania to evaluate cases and to present the argument juries will find most persuasive. Heuristics and framing have helped Ross reach numerous favorable results for his clients, discovering hidden facts and admissions, winning dispositive motions, and negotiating favorable settlements.
Ross is also an effective communicator. While in law school, Ross won the Top Oralist Award and was a member of the National Moot Court Team. As a member of the team, he wrote and argued an appellate brief regarding constitutional and international issues, particularly that a certain foreign affairs statute, incorrectly interpreted, could dramatically affect the economy and diplomacy.