OUR VERDICTS & SETTLEMENTS

CONFIDENTIAL V. PROGRESSIVE INSURANCE COMPANY
$105,000.00 recovery for a driver injured in a head on motor vehicle accident caused by an uninsured driver. (2015)

CONFIDENTIAL V. CONFIDENTIAL
$50,000.00 personal injury settlement for an injured Plaintiff whose vehicle was  struck due to Defendant running the red light. (2014)

CONFIDENTIAL V. POGHOSYAN
$100,000.00 personal injury settlement for a Plaintiff whose vehicle was rear-ended and pushed into another vehicle, resulting in back injuries. (2014)

CONFIDENTIAL V. KNIGHT
$79,000.00 personal injury recovery for a passenger injured in a motor vehicle accident, where Defendant lost control of his vehicle, struck a several vehicles, a light pole, then plaintiff's vehicle, which landed in a ditch upon impact. (2014)

CONFIDENTIAL V. MACHEN
$100,000.00 personal injury settlement for injuries sustained by a plaintiff who was crossing the street and was struck by a hit and run driver. (May, 2013)

PEREZ V. NORTHERN REFRIGERATED TRANSPORTATION
Case Conclusion Date: May 18, 2011       
Practice Area: Wrongful Death     
Outcome: Defense Verdict against a $23.9 million dollar jury demand     
Description: Defended against a $23.9 million dollar jury demand by the Panish, Shea & Boyle, and McNicholas & McNicholas law firms. After 3 months of trial, obtained a defense verdict on behalf of a major refrigerated transportation company whose truck driver struck and killed a pest-control operator while backing up his truck in a Southern California warehouse bay. The jury returned a $3.2 million verdict, 51% against the warehouse, 49% against the decedent himself for comparative negligence, 0% against the client Northern Refrigerated Transportation Company and its driver.  This case was particularly gruesome because plaintiff got his head caught between the trailer light assembly and the dock as the driver tightened against the dock. (Perez v. Northern Refrigerated Transportation, Orange Co., CA May 2011).

SALGADO V. GARCIA, ET, AL.
Practice Area: Trucking Accident     
Outcome: Defense Verdict against a $3.9 million dollar demand. 
Description: Defended a trucking company in a personal injury lawsuit with a demand of $3.9 million where defendant's truck entered the freeway in front of plaintiff's vehicle which resulted in 8 surgeries and over $600,000.00 in past medicals. After a five week trial, and two weeks of deliberations, the jury found negligence against the truck driver, but returned a complete defense verdict on substantial factor. (Salgado v. Garcia Trucking Co., San Bernardino Co., CA, February 2011).

GARCIA V. MITSUBISHI, ET AL.
Practice Area: Personal Injury     
Outcome: $700,000.00 settlement     
Description: Obtained a settlement of $700,000.00 for injuries sustained by a California plaintiff who was calculating warehouse inventory while on top of a forklift which malfunctioned and dropped him onto a concrete floor.     

CHANG V. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, HARTMAN TRUST, ET AL.
Practice Area: Personal Injury     
Outcome: $435,000.00 Settlement     
Description: Obtained a settlement of $435,000.00 for injuries sustained by plaintiffs whose car was hit by the trunk of a large tree growing on private property that fell across a California highway easement and onto their car's front window.  

CONFIDENTIAL V. AAA AUTO TRANSPORT, INC.
Practice Area: Collection/Breach of Contract   
Outcome: $60,000.00 Settlement    
Description: Obtained a settlement of $60,000.00 from an out of state corporation for breach of contract and accounts stated.
(855) 900-0202 / (818) 905-0200

DISCLAIMER
The information on this attorney/law firm website is for general information purposes only. Nothing on this or associated pages, documents, comments, answers, e-mails, or other communications should be taken as legal advice for any individual case or situation. The information on this website is not intended to create, and receipt or viewing of this information does not constitute an attorney-client relationship. Nothing on this or associated pages, including documents, comments,  testimonials or endorsements, answers, e-mails, or other communications, constitute a guarantee, warranty, or prediction regarding the outcome of your legal matter.