Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani, LLP. logo.

Charles T. Carson

Partner

Charles “Chuck” Carson has more than 40 civil jury trials as lead counsel along with many more bench trials, appeals, arbitrations, and mediations. Chuck’s litigation experience includes a broad variety of commercial litigation and insurance matters (professional liability, commercial premises liability, product liability, construction law, municipal liability, bodily injury, commercial outdoor recreation activities liability, complex insurance matters before state insurance departments, real estate, environmental torts, and more).

Chuck is a top-rated AV Preeminent® attorney, a distinction awarded by peers and held consistently since the early years of his legal career—an honor achieved by few. His philosophy is that attorneys are paid to think and give advice above all else, and that the best attorneys channel their thoughts into creative advice to help their clients achieve the client’s desired results.

Chuck has years of experience on both sides of disputes, representing businesses and individuals from all walks of life in a wide variety of legal areas, and from that experience the wisdom to counsel clients on the benefits and risks they face in the decisions they make in how to resolve those disputes. Negotiating favorable settlement terms for clients is an important part of effectively representing clients.   He is adept at creating winning arguments on either side of any dispute from the unique facts presented by each client and dispute.

Early in his career, Chuck served as a judicial clerk for a Federal Judge in both the U.S. District Court and the U.S. Court of Appeals settings.  That formative experience provided a daily opportunity to observe and learn from the most effective arguments and advocacy styles of top attorneys, engage in substantive legal discussions with multiple prominent federal judges, and assist in the preparation of judicial opinions and rulings.

As lead counsel in more than 40 civil jury trials, Chuck has demonstrated a consistent ability to persuade juries, with the juries in 90% of those cases reaching verdicts in line with his closing arguments.

  • Filed a motion for summary judgment that resulted in dismissal of a seven-figure wrongful death claim by heirs of a worker who was crushed to death by an interior warehouse wall that collapsed.
  • Prevailed on a dispositive motion that resulted in dismissal of a claim where client admittedly caused $300,000 damage to a neighbor’s property.
  • Settled for very favorable terms a seven-figure wrongful death claim against client by heirs of a teenage boy who died of a drug overdose in client’s hotel.
  • Settled for very favorable terms a seven-figure wrongful death claim against college student client for, after drinking alcohol at a restaurant, crashing his vehicle into a light pole at a high rate of speed and instantly killing one of his passengers.
  • Settled for very favorable terms a claim against elevator company client by an elevator passenger for significant injuries she suffered when the elevator suddenly shot up and crashed into the top of the elevator shaft.
  • Obtained dismissal for construction signage client of a claim for significant damages arising from a driver who claimed that confusing construction signage caused her to drive off the freeway and strike a concrete barrier at night.
  • Successfully teamed with San Francisco attorneys to represent local school student parents in a national media covered politically charged lawsuit brought by the father of the school board president, which involved student parent free speech rights and a nine-hour evidentiary hearing that led to a precedent setting Arizona anti-SLAPP decision by the Court in favor of clients.
  • Settled for very favorable terms a tenant lawsuit against landlord client for significant health problems to adults and child due to mold infestation.
  • Represent clients in several seven-figure and eight-figure professional liability claims.
  • Settled for very favorable terms a claim against boring company client for boring through an underground utility’s fiber optic line.
  • Long history of consistently achieving successful awards at arbitrations and negotiating favorable settlements at meditations in a wide variety of cases.
  • Berry v 352 E. Virginia, 228 Ariz. 9, 261 P.3d 784 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2011) established Arizona law re determining the prevailing party and the meaning of “judgment finally obtained” statutory language for purposes of awarding ARS Section 12-341.01 attorney fees and awarding Rule 68 Offer of Judgment sanctions in the circumstance of competing claims, counterclaims, and setoffs all tried together.

Admissions

  • Arizona
  • California
  • Nevada
  • U.S. District Court, District of Arizona
  • U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois

Education

  • J.D., University of Illinois Chicago Law School
    • Represented law school in International Jessup Cup Moot Court Competition in International Law
    • Represented law school in National Client Counseling Competition
    • Participated in Advanced Trial Advocacy Program
  • B.A., Finance-Investment, University of Illinois Urbana
    • Varsity football

Honors

  • AV Preeminent® Peer Review Rated by Martindale-Hubbell® since early in his career