Photo of Ciara Harper

Ciara Harper

Ciara knows that strong client defense is a continual and multi-faceted process. It involves a constant intersection of listening to each client’s individual business goals, thorough research, great preparedness and deft strategy. She believes in using cost-effective technology, such as eDiscovery, to streamline legal work and keep clients working without interruption during litigation. Ciara serves large and small clients across industry sectors, providing due diligence and serving on the legal team that provides end-to-end litigation solutions including:

  • Mediation
  • Arbitration
  • Pre- and post-judgment remedies
  • Appellate work

Clients appreciate that she is able to customize innovative solutions to their local matters while being part of a large legal team with a national footprint, working with firm attorneys in specialty centers and jurisdictions across the country.

Follow:Read more about Ciara HarperCiara's Linkedin Profile

On December 2, 2025, Bayer announced that the Solicitor General of the United States,
D. John Sauer1 has recommended the United States Supreme Court take up the Monsanto Co. v. Durnell2 appeal on the Roundup product litigation. The Supreme Court previously invited the Solicitor General to weigh in on the views of the United States.3 In response, Mr. Sauer’s office authored their own petition for a writ of certiorari, agreeing with Monsanto Company (“Monsanto”)’s arguments that the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (“FIFRA”)4 preempts state-law failure-to-warn claims concerning Roundup.

The Kansas Supreme Court recently delivered another strong endorsement of the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA), further solidifying its role as a shield for lawful commerce in the firearms industry. In Johnson v. Bass Pro Outdoor World, LLC et al., the Court held that the PLCAA bars product liability and negligence claims against manufacturers and sellers when an injury results from a criminal misuse—even if the shooting was in some respects accidental.1

The United States Supreme Court building

On May 16, 2024, the Supreme Court of the United States (“SCOTUS”) unanimously held that when a district court finds that when a lawsuit involves an arbitrable dispute and a party has requested a stay of the court proceeding pending arbitration, the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) compels the court to issue a stay and the court does not have discretion to dismiss the action.  Smith v. Spizzirri, 601 U.S. 472 (May 16, 2024) (citing 9 U. S. C. §3). 

On August 15, 2023, the Missouri Supreme Court in State ex rel. Monsanto Co. v. Mullen, No. SC99942 (Mo. Aug. 15, 2023) (en banc), clarified competing interpretations of Mo. Rev. Stat. 508.010.5(1) (2016) with regard to the proper venue for defendant corporations sued by plaintiffs alleging first injury outside the state of Missouri. In the opinion, the Missouri Supreme Court held that venue is determined based on the location of the defendant corporation’s registered agent at the time the suit is filed, rather than the registered agent’s location on the date of a plaintiff’s first alleged injury, resolving an ambiguity contained in the statute.

On June 1, 2021, the United States Supreme Court announced it would not accept Johnson & Johnson’s petition for certiorari seeking to overturn a $2.12 billion dollar damages award rendered in Missouri to twenty-two Missouri women who alleged their ovarian cancer was caused from microscopic asbestos fibers in the company’s baby powder and other talc products.