Hossack  christopher

Christopher D. Hossack

Senior Counsel


14850 N. Scottsdale Rd
Suite 500
Scottsdale, AZ 85254
Vcard icon Email icon Pdf icon
Fax: +14806841182
Social Media
J.D., Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona, 1973
B.A., Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona, 1970
State Bar Licenses
Court Admissions
U.S. Supreme Court
U.S. Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit
Best lawyers

Christopher D. Hossack

Senior Counsel

Christopher D. Hossack has been a trial lawyer law in Arizona for nearly forty years, beginning as an Assistant Attorney General in the Consumer Protection Division. Following his time as an Assistant Attorney General, Christopher was a Deputy Maricopa County Attorney where he prosecuted criminal cases, including major crimes and homicide cases. In his civil litigation experience, Christopher has primarily defended clients in bodily injury and wrongful death claims. Christopher managed Allstate Insurance Company’s Arizona Staff Counsel Office, and staff counsel offices in Arizona and New Mexico for The Travelers Insurance Company. Christopher has tried more than fifty jury trials to a verdict. He has appeared before many more arbitration panels and administrative tribunals. Christopher’s practice with Clark Hill primarily involves professional design defect and bodily injury defense, with a secondary emphasis in representing design professionals in employment discrimination and wrongful termination cases, and ADA accessibility cases. Christopher is admitted to state and federal courts in Arizona, the United States Supreme Court, and the Ninth Circuit US Court of Appeals. Christopher holds an Av rating in the Martindale Hubbell Law Directory.

Christopher received his undergraduate degree from the Arizona State University in 1970, followed by his Juris Doctor degree in 1973 from the Arizona State University College of Law (now the Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law).

Named among The Best Lawyers in America© for Construction Law by Best Lawyers® (2019-2021)

Represented architects and engineers involved in the design work for cannabis-growing and processing facilities — which involve the same security, technology and engineering challenges found in pharmaceutical plants and other industrial-process facilities — as well as planning for safe decommissioning of these operations. These matters frequently include conducting legal and regulatory risk assessments, negotiation of contracts, insurance and risk management, and construction issues

Tags: Cannabis

Christopher Hossack and Heather Seiferth, with the assistance of paralegal, Therese Mayo, defeated a wrongful death claim filed against one of Clark Hill’s national architect/engineer clients in which the Plaintiffs demanded $3,000,000 to settle our client’s alleged liability. The final settlement demand against all defendants in this litigation was $20,000,000, as the deceased was a young man who left minor children behind at his passing.  

Clark Hill’s client was responsible for drafting, auditing and enforcing safety programs during construction administration work for a mine owner preparing to re-open a copper mine in rural Arizona.  As the construction work was winding down, our client’s services were reduced and the mine owner assumed more responsibility for the completion of construction. On a day when our client’s safety technicians were directed by the mine owner to stand down, the deceased, a rookie miner who had only worked six days in this mine allegedly stepped into an un-barricaded chute and fell to his death.  Plaintiffs sought to hold our client, along with the mine owner and its other contractors, jointly and severally liable for failing to enforce safety rules and MHSA mine safety standards on the day of the accident. The mine owner also demanded indemnification from our client under its contract.  

Shortly before trial was due to start, Chris and Heather persuaded the trial court to reconsider a summary judgment motion that had previously been denied. The motion argued that our client could not have proximately caused this accident because the chute was properly barricaded and marked on the client’s last site visit, and no employee of our client was present on the day of the accident.  After the second argument, the trial judge ruled from the bench to dismiss all claims against our client.  Not only was this architect/engineer firm spared the expense and risk of a three week jury trial, but also the mine owner’s indemnity claim was extinguished by this ruling.

Practice Areas
Construction Law
Areas of Emphasis
Architecture, Engineering & Construction