John S. Monical	P: 312.924.4262
Managing Partner	F: 312.372.2389
	E: jmonical@LKSU.com
	Printable PDF Version
	vCard

John S. Monical, Lawrence Kamin’s managing partner, has been with the firm since 1998. His primary area of practice is litigation, including defending major manufacturers of juvenile products in their product liability actions across the country and representing the financial services industry in arbitration, mediation and litigation of disputes between broker-dealers, their registered representatives and their clients.

Opposing counsel have most often complimented John for his tenacious attention to detail. John uses the details to tailor case strategies that have been successful in trial as well as direct settlement negotiation and mediation. For example, one client hired John after losing five straight related cases with another attorney. John developed new defenses that prior counsel had failed to present. These defenses resulted in the client winning three subsequent related cases and favorably settling one more. In another case, John negotiated an innovative settlement by advising his client to accept full responsibility for a quarter-million-dollar tax penalty in exchange for other concessions by the opposing party. Because John was able to convince the IRS to reverse the entire penalty, his client ultimately paid nothing.

John, along with his partner Charles Risch, had similar success in a substantial arbitration brought against one of the world’s largest broker-dealers. The claimants’ case was supported by a scathing internal memorandum chastising the individual broker for his interactions with clients. After tirelessly studying documents and interviewing witnesses, John chose not to play down the memorandum, but to embrace it. At trial, he identified subtle changes in the broker’s subsequent client interactions and reconstructed through testimony the broker-dealer’s extensive, but largely undocumented, actions in response to the memorandum that had brought about these changes. Presented with this evidence, the FINRA arbitration panel denied all of the claimants’ claims and took the unusual step of charging the claimants for all of the costs associated with the 17 days of hearing. The opposing counsel had lined up dozens of similar claims against the same broker and firm, aggregating tens of millions of dollars. Faced with this convincing result, he chose to forgo any further filings.

Through his active membership in the Defense Research Institute (DRI) as well as the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association (SIFMA), John stays current on legal developments and contributes to the ongoing discussion of cutting-edge arguments for his clients. As an example, John authored and presented The Post-Sale Duties to Warn or Recall – Are They Preempted When NHTSA and the CPSC Oversee the Manufacturer's Conduct? (DRI Product Liability Conference) (2001). This article urged litigators to press a creative, but untested, preemption argument. A year later, at a meeting of prominent defense counsel, a speaker credited his successful case result to this innovative defense.

John grew up with 11 sisters and five brothers—honing his skills arguing and mediating between his 16 siblings.