Hepler Broom, LLC Logo

KATHLEEN S. HAMILTON

Partner

khamilton@heplerbroom.com

314-480-4184

St. Louis, MO

 

Education

  • University of Missouri-Columbia School of Law, J.D., 2002
  • University of Notre Dame, Bachelor of Arts, 1999

Admissions

  • Illinois
  • Missouri
  • U.S District Courts for the
    • Western District of Missouri
    • Eastern District of Missouri
    • Southern District of Illinois

Practice Description


Kathleen S. Hamilton focuses her practice on general trial litigation and insurance defense, including:

  • Premises Liability
  • Professional Liability
  • Construction Law
  • Complex Tort Litigation
  • Catastrophic Trucking Litigation

Ms. Hamilton has represented clients in matters before state and federal courts in both Missouri and Illinois and has tried cases to conclusion as both lead and assistant counsel. She also represents clients in appeals and has successfully argued in front of the Missouri Supreme Court and Missouri Courts of Appeals for the Eastern, Western, and Southern Districts; the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit; the Appellate Court of Illinois for the Second Judicial Circuit; and the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois.  

Bar/Professional Associations


  • American Bar Association
  • Illinois State Bar Association
  • The Missouri Bar
    • Supreme Court’s Joint Commission on Women in the Profession

Awards, Honors & Distinctions


  • Missouri & Kansas Super Lawyers
    • Rising Star (2009-2016)
  • Nominated to fill vacancy on Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District (2021, 2020)

Published Legal Writing


  • Right to Intervene Under Missouri Statute Section 537.065 is Not Retroactive to Trials and Contracts Pre-Dating the 2017 Amended Statute – Even if Judgment Was Not Yet Entered. HeplerBroom Blog (October 29, 2019). (This blog post can be read here.)
  • Change to Law Governing the Admissibility of Expert Witness Testimony. HeplerBroom Blog (September 7, 2017). (This blog post can be read here.)

Legal Lectures & Presentations


  • “Effective Settlement Negotiations and Arbitrations,” National Business Institute (St. Louis MO, 2016).
  • "Stacking Insurance Coverage and Uninsured Motorist Setoffs,” Advanced Uninsured/Underinsured Motorist Law, National Business Institute (St. Louis MO, 2016; Collinsville IL, 2014).
  • “Defense Strategies for Minimizing Reasonable Value of Medical Services after the Affordable Care Act,” Calculating Medical Damages in Injury Settlements Post Affordable Care Act, National Business Institute (St. Louis MO, 2015).
  • “Procedural Tips and Techniques for Handling Subrogation, Rights of Reimbursement and Liens,” Advanced Uninsured/Underinsured Motorist Law, National Business Institute (Collinsville IL, 2014).

Representative/Recent Case Results


  • Secured defense verdict in trial involving personal injury in automobile collision case. Plaintiff had asked for pain and suffering damages of $100,000 to $200,000. Instead, jury returned unanimous verdict that Plaintiff was completely at fault. [Jane Kapp v. James Steingrandt and JDS Cattle Company, Ltd.; No. 4:20-cv-00221-JAR (E.D. Mo. 2021)]
  • Secured summary judgement for client in case where plaintiff sued for personal injuries following hand amputation while operating machinery as part of his employment. The part manufactured by client was not defective and was not designed specifically for use in the machine at issue. Therefore, court found defendant was entitled to summary judgement. (Missouri law, does not impose liability on the manufacturer of a non-defective component part when the end product was designed, assembled, and sold by other entities.) [Timothy Farkas v. Overton Industries, Inc., et al.; No. 4:17-CV-761 RLW (December 2018)]
  • Secured summary judgment for client in case where plaintiffs alleged damage to their multimillion-dollar home arising from the design and installation of an inadequate heating and cooling system in their indoor poolroom. Plaintiffs sought damages based on the alleged breach of contract to perform punch list work at the home after the design and installation of the system occurred. Because the contract at issue expressly disclaimed any liability for work done prior to its execution, and because the undisputed material facts demonstrated that the system was designed and installed in the home prior to that date, the Court found defendant was entitled to summary judgment. [Harold Lewis, et al. v. Sigman Indoor Climate Solutions, et al., St. Charles County, Missouri Circuit Court; No. 1711‑CC00994]. Summary judgement affirmed upon appeal. [Harold Lewis, et al. v. Sigman Indoor Climate Solutions, et al., St. Charles County, Missouri Circuit Court; No. 1711‑CC00994, ED 106899]
  • Secured summary judgment for client in case where plaintiff sued co-employee for plaintiff’s workplace injuries. Judgment was affirmed by Missouri Supreme Court, which found co-employee’s negligence was result of breach of employer’s nondelegable duty to provide a safe workplace; thus, negligence was the employer’s, not the co-employee’s. [Matthew Fogerty v. Larry Meyer, Missouri Supreme Court No. SC96030] Ruling in case changed Missouri law regarding co-employee liability and when one co-employee may sue another.
  • Secured summary judgment for client in case where plaintiff attempted to set forth claim of negligence based on client’s alleged failure to ensure plaintiff’s safety or the structural integrity of a stairwell; court found client owed no legal duty to plaintiff and that the condition of the stairwell was open and obvious as a matter of law. [Joseph Moore, et al. v. Burton Brothers General Contractors, et al., City of St. Louis, Missouri Circuit Court; Case No. 1422-CC08898 (November 29, 2017)]

For a complete list of Representative/Recent Case Results, click here.

HeplerBroom is pleased to announce that its physical offices have reopened. While the health and safety of our clients, employees, and families, remain our top priority, HeplerBroom attorneys and staff are returning to our offices on full-time or modified schedules. Our offices are open to visitors and clients with scheduled appointments, with appropriate screening of visitors and social-distancing protocols. HeplerBroom will continue to follow CDC recommendations for cleaning and sanitizing.

We are very proud of the dedicated efforts of our attorneys and staff to provide great service and work product to our clients during the pandemic. This would not have been possible without the incredible support provided by the HeplerBroom IT Department and other essential personnel who supported our personnel and clients from the office locations while the rest of our teams worked remotely.

If you have questions about visiting our offices, please do not hesitate to contact us. We look forward to seeing you in person again in the near future.