LIFEGUARD NEGLIGENCE - $600,000
University of Arizona graduate student nearly drowned at the Student Recreation Center. Plaintiff was a regular lap swimmer at the recreation center. On the day in question, Plaintiff went under for unknown reasons. Plaintiff's standard of care expert testified that lifeguards failed to respond appropriately. Plaintiff's investigation established that security guard ran to the outdoor pool after spotting lifeguards hovering over the pool and prodded them to rescue student. As a result of this long delay, Plaintiff was pulled out of the water only after she was in full cardiac arrest and comatose. She remained comatose for approximately 30 days, when she emerged from the coma. While she was reasonably functional, she was no longer able to continue her studies. Plaintiffs' team of a water safety expert, labor market expert, neuropsychologists and economists proved that, as a result of the lifeguard's negligence, Plaintiff would no longer be able to pursue her chosen career in water resource management. We recovered $600,000 for the Plaintiff.
INSURANCE BAD FAITH -DISABILITY - $710,000
Governmental employee's disability benefits terminated due to insurance company error. The insurance company accidentally relied on a third party's records to terminate benefits. We filed an internal appeal to bring the error to the Company's attention. In the appeal submittal, Plaintiff also provided the insurance company with physician reports from all of Plaintiff's treating physicians establishing disability. Despite the error and updated reports , Company upheld the decision to terminate. We sued the insurance company and associated with Friedman, Rubin and White of Bremerton, Washington. Had the company not terminated benefits, the company would have had to pay an additional $82,000 over the course of 5 years. We, associated with Friedman, Rubin and White of Bremerton, Washington, recovered $710,000 for the Plaintiff.
INSURANCE BAD FAITH - MEDICAL - $250,000 AND REINSTATEMENT
Plaintiff's medical insurance was cancelled after she was diagnosed with cancer. Company claimed that policy would never have issued if Plaintiff had not misrepresented her health condition. Plaintiff claimed that she had answered the questions truthfully and revealed that she had chronic migraines and was on medication. After reviewing the application and correspondence, We discovered that the insurance application did not provide an opportunity to reveal any of the allegedly disqualifying conditions. For instance, the company claimed that endometriosis should have been revealed but failed to ask about any problems of the reproductive system. Similarly, the application did not ask if she was a smoker yet the company claimed that she should have revealed that she had discussed smoking cessation with her physician. After litigation and extensive discovery, Plaintiff recovered $250,000 and immediate reinstatement of her health insurance policy.
MEDICAL MALPRACTICE - $550,000
Our client, a 52 year old man, underwent cataract surgery. After surgery, Plaintiff's intraocular pressure rose to levels with potentially immediate damage to the optic nerve. Plaintiff returned to surgeon, who prescribed medication to lower intraocular pressure and instructed Plaintiff to return in 5 days. Plaintiff continued to suffer pain and returned as directed. After approximately 15 days, Plaintiff was referred to a retinal specialist, who immediately rushed Plaintiff into emergency surgery. By then, Plaintiff had suffered irreversible optic nerve damage. Plaintiff's standard of care expert was the Chair of the American Academy of Opthalmology's Drafting Committee for Preferred Practice Patterns for Cataract Surgery and the former editor-in -chief of the Journal of Opthalmology. Plaintiff established that the defendant surgeon fell below the standard of care by failing to remove sufficient cortical matter to prevent the sharp increase in intraocular pressure and further failed to timely treat during the post-operative complications. We recovered $550,000 for this client.
MEDICAL MALPRACTICE-$75,000
Our client was a 39 year old woman who underwent bilateral cataract surgery. Defendant surgeon implanted lenses of differing powers in each eye. Plaintiff did not tolerate said lenses. After being sued for negligence, surgeon claimed he intended to implant lenses such that one eye would be far-sighted and the other eye near-sighted. Plaintiff then amended the complaint to bring a claim for battery as Plaintiff had specifically rejected Defendant's suggestion to implant lenses in that manner. Plaintiff needed to undergo surgery to replace one of the lenses. We recovered $75,000 for Plaintiff.
BICYCLE AUTO ACCIDENT - $310,000
Our client, a 69 year old man, collided with a pick up truck that stopped suddenly in his path. Unable to avoid a collision, Plaintiff suffered a punctured lung, broken scapula and fractured hip. Due to a lifelong healthy lifestyle, Plaintiff made excellent progress in recovery and was able to resume most of his leisure activities after his period of convalescence. We recovered the policy limits of $100,000 from the Defendant Driver and $210,000 from the Plaintiff's Underinsured Motorists Coverage.
AUTO ACCIDENT - Uninsured Motorists Coverage Policy Limits
Plaintiffs were a couple in their fifties headed to the gym on Sunday morning when they were hit in a head-on collision by a drunk driver. Plaintiff wife suffered aches and bruises. Plaintiff husband developed post-traumatic migraines and other symptoms of traumatic brain injury. UIM insurer offered $24,000 for husband and $16,000 for wife's injuries. After arbitration, Plaintiff husband was awarded $210,000; Plaintiff wife was awarded $40,000 for her own injuries and $25,000 for loss of consortium.
