Bar and Court Admissions:
- New York, 1984
- U.S. District Court, Southern and Eastern Districts of New York, 1986
- U.S. Court of Appeals, Second Circuit, 1991
- District of Columbia, 2003
New York Metro Super Lawyers, 2012-2016
“Change of Corporate Control – Balancing the Obligations to Shareholders with Obligations to Employees, Customers, the Surrounding Community and Other Constituencies,” The Pennsylvania Bar Association Quarterly (July 1999)
- Mediation Panel, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York.
- The Association of the Bar of the City of New York (Member, Committee on Tort Litigation, 1995-1996)
- Federal Bar Council
- American Association for Justice.
- University of California at Santa Cruz (B.A., with honors, 1978)
- Harvard University (J.D., 1983)
Attorney Clinton Fisher is a shareholder at Simmons Hanly Conroy in the Complex Litigation Department. Based out of the New York office, Mr. Fisher’s practice focuses on mass torts in the pharmaceutical and medical device areas, where he is especially expert in the management, discovery and prosecution of document-intensive, complex litigation involving scientific, economic and regulatory issues.
With more than three decades of legal experience, Mr. Fisher has served in a number of leadership positions in national- and state-wide mass tort litigations – including as a court-appointed member of the Plaintiffs’ Executive Committee in the Chantix Multi-District Litigation.
His practice also involves personal injury, products liability, and commercial litigation in a wide range of contexts. He has represented individuals in catastrophic personal injury cases, policyholders seeking insurance coverage in significant arbitrations, and individuals and corporations in alternative dispute resolution – such as bankruptcy-related mediation – and litigation.
Mr. Fisher has appeared and tried cases in numerous federal and state courts throughout the United States, and he has been an invited speaker on mass tort issues at a number of national litigation conferences.
- In Re Lipitor (Atorvastatin Calcium) Marketing, Sales Practices and Products Liability Litigation, MDL 2502 (D.S.C.)
- In Re Propecia (Finasteride) Products Liability Litigation, MDL 2331 (E.D.N.Y 2012) (Head, Discovery Committee)
- In Re Actos Products Liability Litigation, MDL 2299 (W.D.La 2012)
- In Re Chantix Products Liability Litigation, MDL 2092 (N.D. Al.) (member, Plaintiffs’ Executive Committee) and New York State coordinated proceedings (member, Plaintiffs’ Steering Committee)
- In re Gadolinium-Based Contrast Agents Products Liability Litigation, MDL 1909 (N.D. Oh.)
- In re Zelnorm Litigation, Case No. 280, (Sup. Ct. NJ Law Division: Bergen Cty)(Co-lead Plaintiffs’ Counsel in centralized complex litigation)
- In re Bextra and Celebrex Products Liability Litigation, MDL 1699 (N.D. Cal.) and New York State Coordinated Proceedings (member, Discovery Oversight Committee)
- Representation of a severely injured accident victim in a trial against the U.S. Government (reported at 483 F.Supp2d 267 (E.D.N.Y. 2007))
- Representation of a class of over 20,000 tort claimants seeking to obtain coverage from their defunct employer’s primary insurance carrier (Continental Casualty Company v. Employers Insurance Company of Wasau, Index No. 601037/03 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. May 8, 2007); (N.Y App. Div., 1st Dept., December 30, 2008))
- Representation of an Asbestos Claims Trust seeking tens of millions of dollars of insurance in a successful four-week CPR Institute arbitration before a retired federal judge
- Successful defense of a public company and a special committee of the company’s board of directors in a stockholders derivative action challenging the sale of the company to an entity formed by the company’s management (see Publications, below)
- Representation of one of two directors of a closely held Delaware oil and transportation corporation worth hundreds of millions of dollars in an action alleging breach of contract and fiduciary duties (Appeal reported at 678 A.2d 256)
- Representation of a New York securities firm against a South American trading firm and its CEO seeking damages for indemnification and unjust enrichment (Decision reported at 1998 WL 213218; Appeal reported at 183 F.3d 151