Successes
Construction
Defect
In a recent construction defect case, we
secured a nonsuit in favor of our client, a landscape architect,
at the conclusion of the plaintiffs' three-month-long case
in chief. The case then proceeded
to verdict in favor of the remaining subcontractors, but the
judge set aside the defense verdict and granted a new trial.
After filing appeals, the remaining defendants settled; however,
our client retained its nonsuit and did not have to participate
in settlement negotiations or pay any settlement.
Personal Injury
In a unique spoliation of evidence case, Ms. Holweger obtained a verdict
of $662,500 plus pre-judgment interest
of over $39,000 for her client and
its insurance carrier. This was based
on the loss of critical evidence
by the injured worker's employer
and workers' compensation carrier.
The verdict in favor of our client
was for 100% of the amount paid to
the injured worker in a settlement
reached during trial of a personal
injury claim, where the worker, who
sustained brain damage in a construction
accident, had claimed economic damages
alone of over $5 million. Ms. Holweger
conceptualized and developed the
spoliation claim.
Attorney's Fee Award by California Supreme
Court
Mr. Child successfully argued
for a substantial attorney's fee
award to his client and its carrier
before the California Supreme Court
in Employers Mutual Liability
Insurance Company of Wisconsin v.
Tutor Saliba Corp. (1998) 17
Cal.4th 632. Both the trial and appellate
court had denied them attorney's
fees. The Supreme Court held that
Mr. Child's client was entitled to
attorney's fees at trial and on appeal
under a construction contract between
an employer and Mr. Child's client.
At trial, Mr. Child had defeated
the employer's workers' compensation
carrier's claim for reimbursement
of compensation benefits paid to
an injured worker.
Environmental Litigation
Mr. Child, Mr. Marton and Mr. Schatz recently extricated
a client from a high exposure environmental case, based on activities
which occurred on our client's property in the 1970's. The case
involved not only defense of the principal action, but detailed
insurance coverage analysis as well.
