Erin L.Burke

Partner-in-Charge Irvine

Irvine + 1.949.553.7591

Contact

Partager

Erin Burke has represented multinational companies in high-stakes complex litigation in toxic tort, product liability, antitrust, health care, fraud, and unfair competition matters. She has litigated individual and class action matters throughout the United States, representing notable clients across industries, including aviation, consumer goods, off-road vehicles, pesticide, hospital/health care, and retailers. Erin is Partner-in-Charge of the Irvine Office.

Erin's experience is illuminated by her trial experience. She defended Yamaha in multijurisdiction litigation, coordinating hundreds of cases across the United States, and in two bellwether trials. The California jury verdict was recognized as a "top defense verdict" of 2011. Erin defended Dole in a trial involving claims of sterility from pesticide exposure on Nicaraguan farms. She represented IBM in a high-profile case involving complex issues of chemical exposure and alleged health effects in clean rooms. The unanimous jury verdict was a top defense verdict of 2004. In a recent bench trial, she won complete dismissal of a fraud/breach of contract case on a judicial estoppel affirmative defense. Currently, Erin is defending a major retailer in hundreds of cases brought by states and municipalities alleging that the distribution and sale of prescription opioids constitutes a public nuisance.

Erin is an active member of the Firm's Border Project team, representing immigrants in asylum matters. She is also on the Olive Crest Board of Directors and the Board of Trustees for Olive Crest's Los Angeles Region (serving at risk children and families) and serves on Center Theater Group's Corporate Circle Cabinet.

Expérience

  • Sutter Health wins complete defense verdict in landmark antitrust class actionJones Day won a complete defense jury verdict for Sutter Health in a landmark antitrust class action seeking $1.2 billion in treble damages.
  • ICANN obtains favorable judgment in lawsuit brought by DotConnectAfricaJones Day successfully defended ICANN (INTERNET CORP. FOR ASSIGNED NAMES & NUMBERS) against a lawsuit filed by DotConnectAfrica Trust (DCA) after ICANN denied its application for the top-level domain name ".AFRICA" for failure to demonstrate the necessary level of government endorsements.
  • Caesars' second lien noteholders negotiate extraordinary recovery through consensual chapter 11 planJones Day represented the Official Committee of Second Priority Noteholders ("Second Priority Noteholders") of Caesars Entertainment Operating Company ("CEOC"), the casino operator who filed for bankruptcy in January 2015.
  • BSH resolves class action lawsuit alleging defective washing machinesJones Day client BSH Home Appliances Corporation ("BSH") reached a claims-made settlement in a class action lawsuit brought by purchasers of certain BSH front-load washing machines who alleged that the machines were defective because of a propensity to develop foul odors.
  • Pilatus resolves aircraft accident cases arising out of 2009 crash of Pilatus PC-12 Legacy aircraftJones Day defended Pilatus Aircraft and Pilatus Business Aircraft Ltd. in aircraft accident cases filed in Los Angeles, California Superior Court.
  • Yamaha prevails in Georgia Supreme Court after certiorari is denied and Yamaha's reversal of adverse jury verdict standsOn April 24, 2012, the Georgia Supreme Court denied the plaintiff's petition for certiorari and let stand the Georgia Court of Appeals' unanimous decision reversing a jury verdict against Yamaha Motor Co. in a products liability suit involving the Rhino, an off road vehicle, and directing the trial court to enter judgment in Yamaha's favor.
  • Yamaha prevails in jury trial involving Rhino SxS vehicleAfter a three month trial in the Orange County Superior Court, Complex Division, a jury returned a defense verdict on behalf of Jones Day client Yamaha Motor Co. in a "bellwether" case involving the Yamaha Rhino SxS vehicle.
  • Sutter Health obtains dismissal of unfair pricing caseSutter Roseville Medical Center and Sutter Health have been represented by Jones Day in a claim of unfair business practices for pricing to accident victims treated at Sutter Roseville's trauma center since 2005.
  • Yamaha successfully defends nationwide litigation of product liability cases and claims involving the Rhino side-by-side ("SxS") vehicleJones Day leads Yamaha's defense of Rhino cases and claims pending in the United States.
  • Dole defends against multiple cross-border mass tort cases alleging injuries from pesticide exposureJones Day defended Dole Food Company, Inc. in multiple toxic tort lawsuits brought by agricultural workers from 13 countries claiming that the use of the pesticide dibromochloropropane (DBCP) on banana farms in Latin America, Africa, and the Philippines during the 1970s caused adverse health effects.
  • Dole defends against toxic tort actionJones Day represented Dole Food Company in a five-month toxic tort jury trial in Central Civil West Court, Los Angeles.
  • Firestone Building Products wins summary judgment dismissing tort claimsJones Day represented Firestone Building Products Company and obtained summary judgment dismissing plaintiff's tort claims - including a claim that it had been libeled in a recall notice - and establishing plaintiff's liability on Firestone's counterclaims.
  • Chevron Corporation intervenes in shareholder litigation challenging Unocal mergerJones Day represented intervenor Chevron Corporation in class action lawsuits filed in both California state and federal courts by Unocal Corporation shareholders challenging a proposed merger between Chevron Corporation and Unocal Corporation pursuant to their April 2005 Agreement and Plan of Merger.
  • California Health Plan defeats Blue Shield's injunction in contract dispute and in turn recovers millions of dollarsRepresenting health plan company CareMore Medical Enterprises, Jones Day defeated a TRO and injunction, and successfully represented CareMore in an arbitration concerning a contract dispute over termination of a jointly held Medicare health plan involving more than 13,000 members and implicating tens of millions of dollars of revenue potential.
  • Sutter Health defends against uninsured claims class actionJones Day was retained to defend Sutter Health, a not-for-profit health care system, in a California coordinated putative class action challenging hospital pricing to uninsured patients and hospital collection practices.
    •

    May 2020 White Paper

    Avoiding Pandemic-Related Employment Litigation and Disputes

    May 2016 Commentary

    Deciphering Sikkelee: Implications for Aviation Claims and Product Manufacturers

    March 2016 External Publications

    Lessons From California's Split On Strict Liability, Law 360

    July 11, 2013 External Publications

    Returning removal control to defendants, Los Angeles Daily Journal

    March 6, 2012 External Publications

    12 Angry Tweets: Jurors And Social Media Use, Law360

    Novemebr 2011 External Publications

    Court Sets Collateral Source Rule Straight, The Recorder

    • March 31, 2016
      Los Angeles Women’s History Month Celebration
    • October 4, 2012
      Jones Day Hosts California Client Development Event for Women
    • January 26, 2012
      The Ethical Pitfalls and Considerations of Social Media in Litigation, Jones Day MCLE University
    • January 2008
      In the Minds of Jurors – a case study based on interviews of the jurors in the Tellez v. Dole Food Co. trial, Long Beach Inns of Court
    • October 2006
      E-Discovery – Impact of New Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, ACCA Presentation
    • April 4, 2006
      Panel Discussion With District Court Judge Schira A. Scheindlin, author of the Zubulake Opinions, at ACC-SoCal Doubleheader
    • September 20, 2005
      Health Care Executive Compensation Under Fire:  How to Survive the Onslaught

    Avant d’envoyer cet e-mail, veuillez prendre note de ce qui suit :

    Les informations contenues sur le site www.jonesday.com sont destinées à un usage général et ne constituent pas des conseils juridiques. L’envoi et la réception de cet e-mail n’ont pas pour effet de créer une relation avocat-client. Aucun envoi de votre part à un membre du Cabinet ne sera traité comme confidentiel ou protégé à moins que nous n’ayons donné notre accord pour vous représenter. En envoyant cet e-mail, vous confirmez avoir lu et compris la présente notification.