logo

Back

James H. Heller

Vice Chair, Commercial Litigation Department
Chair, Products Liability

: Philadelphia
One Liberty Place
1650 Market Street
Suite 2800
Philadelphia, PA 19103
P: (215) 665-2189
TF: (800) 523-2900
F: (215) 701-2189

James H. Heller

James H. Heller, chair of the firm's Products Liability Practice Group and vice chair of the Commercial Litigation Department, joined the firm in August 1985. Jim is a member of the firm's Board of Directors. Jim practices out of the Philadelphia office. Jim handles complex commercial disputes and catastrophic personal injury claims.

During his tenure at Cozen O’Connor, Jim has had extensive litigation experience, trying more than 50 cases to verdict or judgment in state and federal courts throughout the United States. Jim is the national coordinating attorney and national trial attorney for an international product manufacturer. He has litigated hundreds of products' liability matters throughout the United States, many of which involve serious personal injury or wrongful death claims from residential fires or neurological injuries from exposure to carbon monoxide. A number of these claims have been pursued on a class action basis.

Jim has also litigated numerous commercial disputes, including claims of fraud, complex breach of contract actions, shareholder derivative actions and litigation arising out of the sale or merger of publicly held companies. He has prosecuted fraud practices by health care providers, attorneys, and claimants. He also has intellectual property litigation experience having prosecuted claims throughout the United States for patent, copyright, and trademark infringement.

Jim earned his Bachelor of Arts at the University of Michigan in 1982, and his J.D. at the University of Miami in 1985. He is a member of Phi Alpha Delta.

Experience

Delivered a resounding victory in a month-long trial in plaintiff-friendly Cook County, Ill., for a leading manufacturer of consumer safety products. A unanimous defense verdict was rendered after just 2.5 hours of deliberation, defeating allegations that the product failed to operate in response to a fire that caused the plaintiff to sustain catastrophic injuries.

Successfully defended a product manufacturer in a products liability claim that involved multiple deaths, where plaintiffs sought millions of dollars in compensatory and punitive damages for deaths they attributed to carbon monoxide poisoning from a heater manufactured by our client. The jury found for the defense on all issues.

Won several defense verdicts in jury trials by utilizing advanced fire modeling software to quantify and illustrate the movement of flames, heat, smoke, and other products of combustion during a fire event.

Successfully obtained numerous defense verdicts in fire litigation across the country by demonstrating that the plaintiff intentionally set the fire at issue.

Successfully defended product manufacturers and obtained defense verdicts and judgments in a number of products liability claims that involved multiple injuries and deaths, where plaintiffs sought millions of dollars in compensatory and punitive damages for deaths they attributed to the negligent manufacture and/or design of its products.

Successfully defended ladder manufacturer from manufacturing and design defect claims where plaintiffs sought millions of dollars in compensatory damages for severe and permanent back and neck injuries sustained from a fall from a ladder.

Obtained dismissal of complaint/litigation for product manufacturer wherein 35-year-old woman suffered serious brain damage from a carbon monoxide exposure.

Ligated first amendment speech issues, obtaining a temporary restraining order and preliminary and permanent injunction preventing protests including picketing and libel and slanderous statements, in front of office and near residences of officers and directors.

Retained after a substantial judgment was entered against a corporation when plaintiff attempted to pierce the corporate veil and collect from the officers, directors and shareholders personally. Represented the officers, directors and shareholders presenting evidence and testimony from lay and expert witnesses and were successful in protecting their personal assets and liability.

Successfully defended a company and obtained a complete defense verdict in a suit filed by its former CEO seeking compensatory and punitive damages relating to his employment and his termination from the company.

Represented an Icelandic corporation in a contractual dispute with its German bank.

Obtained summary judgment for a product manufacturer whose product was alleged to have proximately caused five deaths. The court held that the plaintiffs failed to establish a product defect and/or that the alleged product defect was the proximate cause of the plaintiffs’ deaths.

Represented a major technology company in connection with a contract dispute with the State of Rhode Island.

News

Cozen O’Connor Names Four Shareholders to Board of Directors

September 11, 2018

Cozen O’Connor has elected shareholders James H. Heller, Lori Kalani, Howard Maycon, and Martin Schrier to the firm’s board of directors.

126 Cozen O’Connor Attorneys Named to the Best Lawyers in America

August 22, 2018

One hundred twenty-six Cozen O’Connor lawyers from 20 of the firm’s national offices have been selected for inclusion in the 2018 edition of The Best Lawyers in America.

Pa. High Court's 'Roverano' Ruling Likely to Reshape Strict Liability Litigation

August 09, 2018

Jim Heller, chair of the firm's Products Liability Practice Group and vice chair of the Commercial Litigation Department, was quoted in The Legal Intelligencer's article, "Pa. High Court's 'Roverano' Ruling Likely to Reshape Strict Liability Litigation."

Fifty-four Cozen O’Connor Attorneys Named 2018 Pennsylvania Super Lawyers and Rising Stars

June 12, 2018

Super Lawyers has named 54 Cozen O'Connor attorneys to its 2018 Pennsylvania Super Lawyers and Rising Stars lists.

Prescribing Doc's Testimony Key In 2nd Philly Xarelto Trial

April 04, 2018

James Heller, vice chair of the firm's Commercial Litigation Department and chair of the firm's Products Liability Practice, was quoted in Law360's "Prescribing Doc's Testimony Key In 2nd Philly Xarelto Trial."

James Heller Named to Product Liability Advisory Council

March 28, 2018

James Heller, chair of Cozen O’Connor's Products Liability Practice Group and vice chair of the Commercial Litigation Department, was admitted as a sustaining member to the Product Liability Advisory Council, Inc. (PLAC).

$28M Philly Xarelto Verdict Ripe For Reversal, Attys Say

December 06, 2017

James Heller, chair of the firm's Products Liability Practice Group and vice chair of the Commercial Litigation Department, was quoted in Law360's article, "$28M Philly Xarelto Verdict Ripe For Reversal, Attys Say."

Xarelto User Faces Hard Sell In 1st Philly Mass Tort Trial

November 03, 2017

James Heller, chair of Cozen O'Connor's Products Liability Practice Group, was quoted in Law 360's article, "Xarelto User Faces Hard Sell In 1st Philly Mass Tort Trial."

With Upcoming Xarelto Bellwether It's All Eyes on Philadelphia

November 02, 2017

James Heller, chair of Cozen O'Connor's Products Liability Practice Group, was quoted in The Legal Intelligencer article, "With Upcoming Xarelto Bellwether It's All Eyes on Philadelphia."

100 Cozen O’Connor Lawyers Named to the Best Lawyers in America

August 23, 2017

Lawyers were selected for inclusion in the 2018 edition based on a rigorous peer-review that has been developed and defined for more than 30 years.

3 Trial Losses Won't Doom Xarelto Patients

August 23, 2017

James Heller, chair of Cozen O'Connor's Products Liability Practice Group, was quoted in Law360's article, "3 Trial Losses Won't Doom Xarelto Patients."

Gown Verdict Says Jury Can Be Swayed Without Physical Injuries

April 12, 2017

James Heller, of Cozen O'Connor's Commercial Litigation department, was quoted in a Law360 article that discusses a recent jury verdict that shows that juries can bring back large verdicts despite an absence of physical injuries.

Risperdal Plaintiffs Gain Leverage in Wake of $70M Verdict

July 08, 2016

Jim Heller, chair of Cozen O'Connor's Products Liability practice, discusses the Risperdal mass tort in the Legal Intelligencer.

Jim Heller Discusses Philadelphia Pelvic Mesh Verdict

February 11, 2016

Jim Heller, chair of Cozen O'Connor's Products Liability practice, discusses the impact of the Philadelephia pelvic mesh verdict on Johnson & Johnson in Law360.

James Heller Discusses Recent Pelvic Mesh Mass Tort in The Legal Intelligencer

January 01, 2016

James Heller, vice chair of Cozen O’Connor’s Commercial Litigation department, discusses the first case to hit trial from Philadelphia’s pelvic-mesh mass tort program in The Legal Intelligencer.

Jim Heller Discusses Johnson & Johnson’s Children’s Motrin Verdict in Law360

October 06, 2015

Jim Heller discusses the recent decision by a Pennsylvania federal court in which the jury found that Johnson & Johnson’s over-the-counter Children’s Motrin did not cause a child to develop a life-threatening skin disease.

Jim Heller Discusses Johnson & Johnson's Children's Motrin Trials in Law360

September 04, 2015

Jim Heller discusses Johnson & Johnson’s upcoming Pennsylvania federal court trial alleging children are developing a skin condition after taking the company’s pain reliever, Children’s Motrin.

Jim Heller Discusses Recent Risperdal Settlement in The Legal Intelligencer

June 01, 2015

Jim Heller discusses the third settlement in Philadelphia’s Risperdal mass tort, Walker v. Janssen Pharmaceuticals, which was settled for a confidential amount the day opening arguments were scheduled, and the possibility of this leading to a global resolution to the litigation.

Jim Heller Discusses Risperdal Trials in Law360

May 26, 2015

Jim Heller discusses arguing to the jury whether Risperdal caused any of plaintiffs' injuries or damage rather than arguing their warning labels were sufficient.

Jim Heller Discusses Risperdal Litigation Defense Strategies in The Legal Intelligencer

March 31, 2015

In an article titled “Defense Focus in Risperdal Cases May Shift to Causation,” Jim Heller, chair of Cozen O’Connor’s Products Liability Practice Group, discusses the two defenses available to Janssen Pharmaceuticals following verdicts in the first two Risperdal cases: the first for failure to warn and the second for causation. As for whether Janssen should drop its failure to warn defenses entirely, Jim said, “I abandon defenses when the jury gets angry at the evidence … here I don't think that either jury has gotten angry. But I clearly would focus my defense on causation.”

Jim Heller Discusses GM’s Defective Ignition Switch in Fortune Magazine

June 05, 2014

In an article titled ''Could GM be charged with murder?'' Jim Heller, chair of Cozen O’Connor’s Products Liability Practice Group, discusses a defective ignition switch in millions of General Motors’ cars that has led to at least 13 deaths since 2001. The Department of Transportation has fined the automaker $35 million for inaction regarding the switches, and the Department of Justice may impose an even bigger fine on the automaker. Given that people died as a result of the defect, could the U.S. government opt to charge GM with murder too?

Jim Heller Comments to Reuters on GM Recall Process

March 31, 2014

Jim Heller, chair of Cozen O’Connor’s Products Liability Practice Group, commented on GM’s recall of 1.6 million cars. Jim commented in a Reuters article picked up by many publications including CNBC.

Jim Heller Discusses the Impact of Public Relations on the NFL Concussion Settlement

August 31, 2013

Jim Heller, chair of Cozen O’Connor’s Products Liability Practice Area and vice chair of the Commercial Litigation Department, discusses the impact of public opinion and the media on the NFL Concussion settlement in a Philly.com article ''Public relations was an incentive in NFL concussion deal.''

Jim Heller Discusses the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act in Inside Counsel

January 17, 2013

In an article titled, ''Cheat Sheet: A Guide to Navigating Two New Federal Consumer Safety Measures,'' Jim Heller, chair of Cozen O'Connor's Product Liability Practice Group, advises companies on combating negative consumer reports, and complying with the regulatory requirements of the CPSIA.

Cozen O’Connor Attorneys Named 2009 Pennsylvania Super Lawyers By Law & Politics

May 28, 2009

Cozen O’Connor is proud to announce that 52 attorneys from the firm’s Philadelphia and West Conshohocken offices have been named 2009 Pennsylvania Super Lawyers by Law & Politics, and will appear in the June 2009 issues of Philadelphia magazine and Pennsylvania Super Lawyers.

Lacrosse Equipment Manufacturers Facing Challenges [The Legal Intelligencer]

February 10, 2015

In an article titled ''Lacrosse Equipment Manufacturers Facing Challenges,'' James Heller, chair of Cozen O'Connor's Products Liability Practice Group, and Christopher Passavia, an associate in the Commercial Litigation Department, discuss the National Operating Committee on Standards for Athletic Equipment (NOCSAE) and their abrupt announcement in November 2014 that it had voided the manufacturer's certification of two of the nation's most popular lacrosse helmets (Cascade's R model and Warrior's Regulator model). The announcement quickly led to the filing of two putative class action consumer lawsuits against Cascade, one of which is pending in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, and a lawsuit by NOCSAE against Warrior in federal court in Missouri.

An Attack on Plaintiffs' Use of Consumer Complaints [The Legal Intelligencer]

February 11, 2014

In products liability actions, plaintiffs use prior consumer complaints as evidence that a defect existed or that the defendant ignored a known defect. Precluding these prior consumer complaints is important to the defense, because this evidence has significant potential to prejudice the jury and lead to the imposition of liability in cases where plaintiffs have failed to produce sufficient proof of a defect. For these reasons, defendants must challenge the admissibility of prior consumer complaints. Defendants should argue that the communications are not substantially similar to the facts, circumstances and defects claimed in the case at issue (and are, thus, not relevant), and are inadmissible hearsay.