August 2022
Duncan adv. Garcia. (A-18-772771-C) Landscaper's employee ran a stop sign and struck the plaintiff's vehicle head-on; the employee was arrested for DUI after failing field sobriety tests. Liability of the landscaper and employee was conceded. There were over $300,000 in past medical expenses for... Read On
March 2022
Hendrix v. Progressive Direct Ins. Co. (2:20-cv-01856-RFB-EJY). Our client, a prominent insurance carrier, declined a claim by the plaintiff, a driver involved in a motor vehicle accident, against her fault-free passenger's UIM coverage. Our firm successfully argued that under the plain terms of t... Read On
February 2022
Plaintiff slipped and fell at our client's store on a spilled substance. Our client failed to preserve surveillance footage of the cause of the spill prompting the court to impose an adverse inference. Plaintiff was hospitalized and then spent two months in in-patient rehabilitation center due to a fractured pelvis. Although Plaintiff sought more than $770,000 at trial, we were able to persuade the jury to award lower damages. Read On
July 2021
Olympia Companies, LLC et al. v. Michael Kosor, JR. (A-17-765257-C). Plaintiffs' complaint against our client was dismissed in its entirety under Nevada's anti-SLAPP statute, which further entitles our client to recovery of his reasonable attorney fees and costs. Our client was a candidate for t... Read On
August 2016
Our clients' motions in limine resulted in the successful exclusion of plaintiffs' biomechanical engineering and accident reconstruction rebuttal expert, safety expert, and undisclosed character witnesses, as well as the limiting of testimony offered by plaintiffs' alternative accident reconstruction expert and treating physician (regarding Adjacent Segment Disease). Read On
January 2016
Defendant operated a recycling plant in violation of multiple city and county ordinances, resulting in multiple fires causing harm to a neighboring non-profit organization. In a very rare plaintiff's case, our firm successfully represented the non-profit in recovering the harm resulting from the negligently caused fires, as well as damages for nuisance. VERDICT: $225,000 for property damage. Read On
December 2014
Plaintiff’s complaint against our client was dismissed as a discovery sanction. Read On
February 2013
Under applicable Colorado law Plaintiff was not allowed to amend a complaint to include claims for “stacking” of UIM coverages; violations of the Colorado Consumer Protection Act; or to effectively reform our client’s “umbrella” policy to include UM/UIM coverage. Read On
December 2012
Plaintiff suffered life threatening injuries in a multi-car collision, resulting in $790,000 in past medical expenses, and the need for future care for lasting cognitive and physical impairment. Our client was found liable as a matter of law. Plaintiff’s counsel argued for $13.6 M in past and future medical and economic damages in closing argument. VERDICT: $2.75 million for past and future medical treatment, lost wages and pain and suffering—less than half of the plaintiff’s non-negotiable, pre-trial demand of $6.5 million. Read On
October 2012
An adult plaintiff--allegedly molested by a priest while a minor--sued a Catholic diocese for fraud and negligent failure to disclose to him the priest's history of sexual abuse. After a four-week trial, plaintiff's counsel (nationally prominent for handling molestation cases against the Catholic Church) in closing argued for $5.1 M for past and future pain and suffering, medical and economic damages, as well as punitive damages. VERDICT: Jury rejected fraud and punitive damages claim; $400,000 (amended) for negligence. On appeal for lack of personal jurisdiction over the Diocese, the Supreme Court of Nevada reversed the district court's decision. Read On
September 2012
Our client (who died from unrelated causes before trial) caused a traffic accident while intoxicated. The four plaintiffs received a series of spinal injections and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for claimed accident-related injuries. The plaintiffs all made policy limit demands and went to trial anticipating verdicts in excess of our client's auto liability policy limits. At trial, the plaintiffs sought combined damages of approximately $2 M. In a case of clear liability, our evidence focused on the individual plaintiffs' damage claims, and that each plaintiff had overtreated. VERDICT: $31,979.56; $24,777.64 (amended); $83,071.63; and $41,228.00. None of the plaintiffs received an award exceeding pre-trial offers of judgment made by the defense (all of which were well below policy limits). Read On
August 2012
Landscaper's employee ran a stop sign and struck the plaintiff's vehicle head-on; the employee was arrested for DUI after failing field sobriety tests. Liability of the landscaper and employee was conceded. There were over $300,000 in past medical expenses for neck fusion surgery and pain-management. Plaintiff's counsel argued for $6.8 M in past and future pain, suffering, and medical treatment, and asked the jury to impose statutorily-permitted punitive damages against the employee. Our evidence was that there was no objective medical proof of an accident-related spinal injury, or that our driver-client was impaired when the accident occurred. VERDICT: $85,000 for plaintiff's past damages. Loss of consortium claim by plaintiff's spouse was rejected entirely, as were punitive damages. Plaintiff's motion for new trial was denied. Read On
July 2012
Our client's delivery van struck a pedestrian in a crosswalk. The plaintiff alleged significant injuries, supposedly resulting in lumbar fusion surgery and $400,000 in medical expenses. Our proof at trial was that the plaintiff's treatment was due to pre-existing conditions, not accident trauma. Plaintiff's counsel argued liability was clear and asked for a verdict of $3 million. VERDICT: $2450 — The cost of the ambulance service and emergency room visit. Our client received a post-trial order for attorney's fees and costs (which were waived in exchange for plaintiff's agreement not to appeal). Read On
May 2012
Supreme Court of Nevada reversed the lower court’s grant of co-defendant’s motion for summary judgment against our client for indemnity arising out of a third-party’s injury at an excavation site. The Court noted that co-defendant had assumed our client’s duty to safeguard the site and had not returned control of that portion of the project to our client at the time of the accident. Read On
