Automobile Accidents

  • Automobile accident in which plaintiff suffered a neck injury leaving the client in chronic pain, resulting in a recovery of $750,000.
  • Automobile accident in which plaintiff suffered a neck injury preventing his continued employment as a pipe fitter, resulting in a recovery of $675,000.
  • Automobile accident in which plaintiff suffered multiple fractures, resulting in a recovery of $405,000.
  • Automobile accident and dram shop liability wrongful death claim resulting in recovery in excess of $275,000, and waiver of over $500,000 in medical bills.
  • Automobile accident in which multiple plaintiffs received injuries, resulting in a policy limits recovery of over $300,000.
  • Automobile accident in which plaintiff suffered a back injury, treated by multiple injections and minimally invasive spine surgery, resulting in a policy limits recovery of $100,000 and an underinsured motorists recovery of $150,000, for a total recovery of $250,000.
  • Automobile accident in which plaintiff suffered an eye injury, resulting in a recovery of $250,000.
  • Automobile accident in which plaintiff suffered shoulder injury, treated by surgical repair, resulting in a recovery of $227,500.
  • Automobile accident in which plaintiff suffered a neck injury, treated by surgical fusion, resulting in a recovery of $200,000.
  • Automobile accident in which plaintiff suffered a neck injury, treated by surgical fusion, resulting in a recovery of $200,000.
  • Automobile accident in which the plaintiff suffered neck and shoulder injuries, resulting in a recovery of $195,000.
  • Automobile accident in which plaintiff sustained non-surgical neck injury, resulting in recovery of $170,000.
  • Automobile accident in which plaintiff suffered debilitating headaches, resulting in a recovery in excess of $165,000.
  • Automobile accident and dram shop liability in which plaintiff suffered a non-surgical closed head and neck injuries resulting in a recovery in excess of $155,000.
  • Automobile accident involving a back injury, resulting in a recovery for the plaintiff of $140,000.
  • Automobile accident in which plaintiff sustained a shoulder injury, resulting in a recovery of $120,000.
  • More than 20 other automobile accident cases in which plaintiffs’ recovery was in excess of $100,000.

Medical Malpractice

  • Psychiatric Malpractice, resulting in recovery of $650,000.
  • Unlicensed Medical Malpractice, resulting in judgment for plaintiff of $349,132.05.
  • Medical Malpractice, improper placement of a subclavian catheter, resulting in recovery for the plaintiff of $300,000.
  • Medical Malpractice recovery for retained instrument following surgery of $150,000
  • Chiropractic Negligence policy limits resulting in a recovery of $100,000

Premises Liability

  • Slip and Fall injury, resulting in a recovery of $135,000.
  • Landlord liability for unsafe deck resulting in a recovery in excess of $100,000.

Disability Insurance

  • Recovery for plaintiff with bipolar disorder of $100,000 from disability insurer who had denied his claim.
  • Recovery for plaintiff with chemical sensitivity of $177,825 from disability insurer who had denied her claim.

Other

I represented plaintiffs in lawsuit on behalf of over 200 mobile home park residents challenging rezone of Mobile Home Park to allow big box commercial development. This resulted in settlement in which Mobile Home Park residents purchased the property thus securing their long-term residential interests.

I participated in path-breaking litigation Birklid v. Boeing in which the Washington Supreme Court redefined the “deliberate intention” to injure test, allowing the first recovery for intentional injuries on the part of a Washington workers in over 75 years.

I was plaintiff’s Counsel in Dreier v. United States, 106 F.3d 844 (1996), in which the Ninth Circuit allowed the widow of a serviceman killed on the base at Fort Lewis to sue the government, expanding the exceptions of the “incident to military service” bar first announced in Feres vs. United States.
Dreier v. United States, 106 F.3d 844 (1996).

I successfully argued the appeal in Mckibbin v. City of Seattle, in which the Washington State Court of Appeals, Division I, ruled that no notice of a defect in a street drain was required to the City where the negligence alleged was the City’s failure to adhere to the industry standard at the time of reconstruction of the street drain.

I successfully argued the appeal in Farole v. Pratt, in which the Washington State Court of Appeals, Division I, ruled that amendment of a complaint related back to the time of filing where there was no prejudice to the defendant in defending the claim on the merits and the insurance company had notice of the claim well prior to the filing of the complaint.