Kamie F. Brown is a shareholder and Vice Chair of the Firm’s Litigation Section. She has extensive experience representing a wide range of manufacturers, distributors and insurers in product liability and commercial litigation matters. She serves as litigation counsel for various corporations, including Fortune 500 companies, in a variety of settings, including high-profile, mass tort cases in various jurisdictions across the country. Ms. Brown has handled multi-district litigation arising from transportation accidents; the defense of product liability actions involving pharmaceuticals, medical devices, automobiles, motorcycles, airplanes, helicopters, tobacco, asbestos, chemicals, electrical equipment, children’s products and industrial equipment; insurance coverage and contract disputes; and the defense of consumer protection actions.
Ms. Brown is included on the list of The Best Lawyers in America in Commercial Litigation. She maintains an AV Preeminent (4.9) rating with Martindale-Hubbell, which is the highest rating awarded to attorneys for professional competence and ethics. She has been voted by her peers as one of Utah’s “Legal Elite,” as published by Utah Business Magazine (2007-2016). Ms. Brown participated with the Product Liability Subcommittee of the Utah Supreme Court Advisory Committee on Civil Jury Instructions drafting revised jury instructions for product liability cases. Ms. Brown has been selected for inclusion in Mountain States Super Lawyers (2016-2018) in the category of Personal Injury Products: Defense and as a Rising Star (2009). She has also been recognized as one of Utah Business Magazine’s 30 Women to Watch (2012).
- Campbell v. Philip Morris, USA, et al., (Fla. Cir. Ct. May 22, 2013) (defense verdict in state court in an Engle-progeny case arising from a decertified class action concerning smoking and health).
- Denton v. Philip Morris, USA, et al., 3:09-cv-10036-MMH-JBT (Fla. Dist. Ct. Aug. 1, 2012) (defense verdict in federal court in an Engle-progeny case arising from a decertified class action concerning smoking and health).
- One Beacon American Insurance Co., et al. v. Huntsman Polymers Corporation nka Huntsman Advanced Materials LLC, 2012 UT App. 100 (April 5, 2012) (affirming summary judgment in favor of Huntsman for payment by insurers of 100% of the settlement and defense costs in a wrongful death lawsuit involving asbestos exposure).
- Szymanski v. Philip Morris, USA, et al., Civ. No. 07-CA-015501 (Fla. Cir. Ct. Oct. 20, 2011) (defense verdict in first Engle-progeny case tried in Lee County, Florida arising from a decertified class action concerning smoking and health).
- Mountain Bird, Inc. Spirit Air, Inc. v. Goodrich Corporation and Cessna Aircraft Company, 2010 U.S. App. Lexis 5975 (10th Cir. 2010) (summary judgment affirmed in favor of Cessna under the economic loss doctrine in a hull loss claim).
- Egbert v. Nissan, 2010 UT 8 (holding Utah’s product liability statute consitutional and addressing the confines of the enhanced injury doctrine under Utah law).
- Bean v. Reeder Flying Service, et al., 2009 U.S. Dist. Lexis 61159 (D. Utah Jul. 16, 2009) (granting summary judgment in favor of aviation concern in a product liability case).
- In Re: Cessna 2008 Series Aircraft Products Liability Litigation, 2007 U.S. Dist. Lexis 54359, Ingram, et al., v. Cessna Aircraft Company, et al., Case No. 05-2531 (D. Kan. Jul. 25, 2007) (granting motion to vacate ruling allowing plaintiff to bring a claim for punitive damages).
- Egbert v. Nissan, 2007 UT 64 (holding instructing jury on Utah’s presumption of non-defectiveness proper and recognizing the enhanced injury doctrine under Utah law).
- Grange v. Mylan, Inc., et al., 2008 U.S. Dist. Lexis 92460 (D. Utah, Oct. 31, 2008) (granting motion to dismiss punitive damages claim based on federal preemption).
- North v. Ford Motor Co., 505 F. Supp.2d 1113 (D. Utah 2007) (granting Daubert motion to exclude expert psychologist from testifying at trial).
- C.A. Johnson Trenching, L.C. v. Vermeer Mfg. Co., 2005 Utah App. Lexis 104 (affirming summary judgment for manufacturer in strict product liaibility cases).