Profile
Recognitions
Cases
News/Events
Practice Focus

Education

J.D., Northwestern University School of Law, 2006

    • cum laude
    • Executive Articles Editor on the Northwestern University Law Review

Skidmore College, undergraduate degree,1997

    • cum laude
    • Phi Beta Kappa 

Bar Admissions

  • Illinois

Court Admissions

  • Illinois Supreme Court
  • U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois
  • U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
  • U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit

Susan M. Razzano is a partner at Eimer Stahl.  Sue has extensive experience in complex civil litigation, including class action and multidistrict litigation defense work.  Her practice focuses on antitrust, product liability, and consumer fraud litigation, including settling and administering class action lawsuits.  Sue has been recognized as an Emerging Lawyer by Leading Lawyers.

Prior to joining Eimer Stahl LLP in 2011, Sue was an Associate at Sidley Austin LLP where she had worked since graduating law school in 2006. 

Highlighted Cases

  • Alan Ross Machinery v. Machinio, Corp. – Representing global search engine for locating used machinery and equipment against lawsuit by equipment seller that claims Machinio unlawfully collected data from its website.  Plaintiff alleges violations of the Lanham Act and Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and asserts claims of breach of contract, unjust enrichment and tortious interference with prospective business advantage.
  • Mattox v. Edelman, et al. – Represented pro bono client in appeal of orders granting various dispositive motions filed against his Eighth Amendment deliberate indifference claims.  The appeal raised a novel question of law relating to the interaction between the Prison Litigation Reform Act’s (“PLRA”) exhaustion requirement and amendments under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15.  The Sixth Circuit reversed in part holding that the PLRA does not disrupt the normal operation of Rule 15.  The Court found that prisoners may amend their complaints to add claims based on events that occurred after their lawsuit was filed and that such amendments are consistent with the purpose of the PLRA’s exhaustion requirement.
  • Kleen Products Antitrust Litigation – Represented International Paper Company in a class action litigation pending in the Northern District of Illinois in which Plaintiffs allege that the Defendants, manufacturers of containerboard which is used to make cardboard boxes, conspired to restrict the supply of containerboard in order to increase the price of containerboard.
  • Liebler v. LG Electronics U.S.A., Inc. – Represented LG Electronics in a class action litigation filed in the District of New Jersey in which Plaintiffs alleged failure to disclose the amount of internal memory available in certain mobile phones and the usability of external storage and asserted various consumer fraud claims.  The matter was resolved after successful Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) motion practice.
  • Clark v. LG Electronics U.S.A, Inc. – Represented LG Electronics in a class action litigation removed to federal court in the Northern District of California in which Plaintiffs alleged defective design of a refrigerator and asserted various consumer fraud claims.  Claims were limited through a motion to dismiss which enabled a favorable settlement agreement.  A settlement class was certified and settlement administration was completed.
  • Koertge v. LG Electronics U.S.A., Inc. – Represented LG Electronics in a class action litigation filed in the District of New Jersey in which Plaintiffs alleged defective design of a home theater system and asserted various consumer fraud claims.  A settlement was negotiated prior to any responsive pleadings; the settlement class was certified and settlement administration was completed.

Listed by Leading Lawyer as an Emerging Lawyer in Class Action/Mass Tort Defense in 2015.

Board member for Chicago Legal Clinic.

  • Alan Ross Machinery v. Machinio, Corp. – Representing global search engine for locating used machinery and equipment against lawsuit by equipment seller that claims Machinio unlawfully collected data from its website.  Plaintiff alleges violations of the Lanham Act and Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and asserts claims of breach of contract, unjust enrichment and tortious interference with prospective business advantage.
  • Mattox v. Edelman, et al. – Represented pro bono client in appeal of orders granting various dispositive motions filed against his Eighth Amendment deliberate indifference claims.  The appeal raised a novel question of law relating to the interaction between the Prison Litigation Reform Act’s (“PLRA”) exhaustion requirement and amendments under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15.  The Sixth Circuit reversed in part holding that the PLRA does not disrupt the normal operation of Rule 15.  The Court found that prisoners may amend their complaints to add claims based on events that occurred after their lawsuit was filed and that such amendments are consistent with the purpose of the PLRA’s exhaustion requirement.
  • Kleen Products Antitrust Litigation – Represented International Paper Company in a class action litigation pending in the Northern District of Illinois in which Plaintiffs allege that the Defendants, manufacturers of containerboard which is used to make cardboard boxes, conspired to restrict the supply of containerboard in order to increase the price of containerboard.
  • Liebler v. LG Electronics U.S.A., Inc. – Represented LG Electronics in a class action litigation filed in the District of New Jersey in which Plaintiffs alleged failure to disclose the amount of internal memory available in certain mobile phones and the usability of external storage and asserted various consumer fraud claims.  The matter was resolved after successful Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) motion practice.
  • Clark v. LG Electronics U.S.A, Inc. – Represented LG Electronics in a class action litigation removed to federal court in the Northern District of California in which Plaintiffs alleged defective design of a refrigerator and asserted various consumer fraud claims.  Claims were limited through a motion to dismiss which enabled a favorable settlement agreement.  A settlement class was certified and settlement administration was completed.
  • Koertge v. LG Electronics U.S.A., Inc. – Represented LG Electronics in a class action litigation filed in the District of New Jersey in which Plaintiffs alleged defective design of a home theater system and asserted various consumer fraud claims.  A settlement was negotiated prior to any responsive pleadings; the settlement class was certified and settlement administration was completed.
  • New Hampshire v. Hess, et al. – Represented CITGO Petroleum in a multi-billion dollar litigation tried in New Hampshire state court.  The State of New Hampshire alleged that an additive used in gasoline is defective and causes groundwater contamination.
  • Temperature Adjusted Fuel Litigation – Represented CITGO in a class action litigation pending in federal court.  Plaintiffs alleged deceptive and misleading practices and conspiracy to further the same in the sale of motor fuel to consumers.
  • Omniscan Litigation – Represented GE Healthcare in a multidistrict litigation involving over a hundred personal injury cases filed in state and federal courts around the country.  Plaintiffs alleged negligence, strict liability, defective design, failure to warn, and breach of warranty.
  • Seroquel Litigation – Represented AstraZeneca in a multidistrict litigation involving several hundred personal injury cases filed in state and federal courts nationwide. Plaintiffs alleged negligence, strict liability, defective design, failure to warn, and breach of warranty.
  • Baycol Litigation – Represented Bayer in a multidistrict litigation consolidating hundreds of personal injury cases filed in both state and federal courts around the country.  Plaintiffs alleged negligence, strict liability, defective design, failure to warn, and breach of warranty.