Harry O. Channon

Mr. Channon focuses his practice on business and commercial litigation, and financial litigation including Financial Industry Regulation Authority (FINRA) arbitrations, as well as insurance coverage, liability and counseling. Mr. Channon has significant appellate and trial experience in both state and federal courts where he has represented a wide range of clients in business and employment disputes, non-compete/non-solicitation agreements, non-disclosure agreements, franchise agreements, and wage/commission disputes. Mr. Channon represents and counsels a variety of business professionals including financial advisors, brokers, business officers and directors, attorneys, property appraisers, accountants and other licensed individuals and regulated professions.

Representative Matters

Recently settled on behalf of class action plaintiffs against an Illinois corporation for deceptive practices in falsely marketing its probiotic food products.
Recently obtained a jury verdict for his cient, a player injured during a organized athletic game, on a premises liability theory. Lee v Canaan, et al.
Obtained a unanimous Illinois Supreme Court decision representing an estate on behalf of the Cook County Public Guardian setting a precedent that an attorney retained to prosecute a wrongful death case owes a fiduciary duty to the spouse and next of kin. Estate of Powell v. John C. Wunsch, P.C., et al, Nos. 115997 and 116009.
Obtained a summary judgment against an insurance company and in favor of a restoration company that performed emergency services wherein obligations and coverage for the underlying policy holder were disputed.
Assisted in obtaining a seven-figure jury verdict involving a international business dispute for outstanding commissions and successfully defended the appeal regarding same in Grinders Int’l, Inc. v. YG-1 Korea, et al.
Represented an insurance company against a multi-million dollar claim for breach of coverage and bad faith; following a jury trial and post-trial motions, Mr. Channon’s client was not only found not liable but also obtained a judgment against the plaintiff for the expenses incurred in the litigation.