Lucas Ryan Harrison


Lexington, KY
D 859.201.3954
[email protected]


  • University of Kentucky (B.S.) Political Science and History double major, 2017
    • Magna cum Laude
  • University of Kentucky College of Law, 2017

Lucas Ryan Harrison is an Associate in the Lexington, Kentucky office at Freeman Mathis & Gary. A graduate of the University of Kentucky (B.S), he earned his law degree at the University of Kentucky College of Law in 2017. Before joining Freeman Mathis & Gary, Mr. Harrison regularly appeared in circuit courts across the Commonwealth of Kentucky defending individuals, businesses, and governmental entities in matters ranging from premises liability issues to complex commercial motor vehicle accidents.

Mr. Harrison’s practice focuses on the defense of claims in the areas of tort and catastrophic loss and commercial and complex litigation. This includes the defense of claims concerning premises liability, transportation, product liability and mass tort. Mr. Harrison has significant experience with commercial transportation claims and complex premises liability litigation including claims involving traumatic brain injuries and complex regional pain syndrome.

Bar Admissions


Representative Cases & Clients

Donna House v. Restocon Corporation, Inc.; Franklin Circuit Court, 19-CI-00268:

Mr. Harrison won summary judgment on behalf of Restocon, a general contractor relating to claims brought by the plaintiff that the client was negligent in its repair of a parking garage. The plaintiff alleged the client was negligent in its ongoing repair of the parking garage, including the garage’s lights near an elevator on one of its floors. Due to the allegedly poor lighting, plaintiff fell on the lip of a curb and suffered substantial injuries.

Through deposition testimony provided by the plaintiff, it was established that she walked through the area at least fifty times over a span of two years prior to her accident. She stated the lights immediately above the area where she suffered her fall had never worked over the two years prior. Additional discovery established that the client was not working on the level where the accident occurred and its work elsewhere in the garage had no impact upon the lighting where plaintiff had suffered her injury.

George Crigger, Jr., and Coty Y. Crigger v. Kelly Mallicoat et al.; Scott Circuit Court, 18-CI-00314

Mr. Harrison defended an individual driver involved in a ten-vehicle auto accident on I-75 North and won summary judgment regarding the lack of affirmative evidence presented by the plaintiff along with reliance upon the Sudden Emergency Doctrine. The client was second in a line of vehicles who were traveling though heavy rain when they came upon a large pool of water stretching across the entire roadway. Each vehicle hydroplaned through the area and subsequently lost control, resulting in the multi-vehicle accident. The driver and passenger of a vehicle who followed the client through the water filed suit against every individual identified in the police report as being involved in the accident in any capacity.

The deposition testimony of the several involved drivers assisted in the identification of the client’s location in the chain-reaction accident. Photographic evidence also established the plaintiff’s vehicle never impacted the client’s vehicle. These factors, along with Plaintiff’s lack of affirmative evidence and/or expert proof establishing any causal relationship between the client’s vehicle and the Plaintiff’s involvement in the accident, led to the Court granting summary judgment.