Skip to main content
Gary Steven Craw
Avvo
Pro

Gary Craw’s Legal Cases

11 total


  • DeHerrrera v. Gross, M.D.

    Practice Area:
    Medical Malpractice
    Date:
    Oct 10, 2008
    Outcome:
    Verdict for our Client, the Plaintiff, for Wrongful Death from Medical Malpractice
    Description:
    Medical malpractice jury trial. Our client, the Plaintiff, claimed her father suffered a wrongful death after routine surgery. She claimed the death was the result of malpractice and a lack of informed consent.
  • Logan v. Tycer

    Practice Area:
    Car Accidents
    Date:
    Apr 20, 2007
    Outcome:
    Verdict for our Client, the Plaintiff, for substantial compensatory and punative damages
    Description:
    Jury Trial of a Car Accident & Injury Claim. Our client, the Plaintiff, was driving when she was sideswiped and forced off the road by another driver going the other direction. The other driver fled the scene.
  • Wise v. Dunnan

    Practice Area:
    Personal Injury
    Date:
    Dec 04, 2008
    Outcome:
    Verdict for our Client, the Plaintiff, for substantial damages.
    Description:
    Jury trial of motor vehicle accident and injury claim. Plaintiff, our client, suffered a number of injuries, including soft tissue injuries and TMJ, when another driver going the other direction made a left turn in front of her that resulted in a collison.
  • Estate of B. Butt

    Practice Area:
    Probate
    Date:
    Jan 19, 2006
    Outcome:
    Verdict for Our Client, the Defendant, in this Will Contest case.
    Description:
    Jury Trial of a WIll Contest. A Will of Mrs. Butt, a widow, left most of her estate to our client, a local church. The Plaintiffs were helpful friends and neighbors of Mrs. Butt. They challenged the Will claiming that a subsequent Will, actually a holographic codicil (handwritten amendment to the Will made by Mrs. Butt), changed the Will and left all of Mrs. Butt's Estate to the Plaintiffs instead of the church. Legal issues of Sound vs. Unsound Mind, whether there was Undue Influence and the validity of a holographic codicil were tried to a jury.
  • Warner v. Farmers Insurance Exchange

    Practice Area:
    Insurance
    Date:
    Feb 01, 2007
    Outcome:
    The Appellate Court Remanded the Case for Entry of Judgment in Favor of our Clients, the Warners, on Whether there was Umbrella Coverage
    Description:
    Trial of an Insurance Coverage Dispute under a $2 Million Umbrella Policy. Farmers denied coverage and sued our clients for a declaratory judgment that there was no coverage under their umbrella policy for a horrific motor home roll-over accident. After trial, the trial judge ruled in in favor of Farmers finding there was no coverage under the umbrella policy. We appealed the case. The Court of Appeals reversed the trial judge's ruling and directed the trial judge to enter a judgment in favor of our Clients, finding as a matter of law that there was indeed coverage under Farmers umbrella policy. That ruling resulted in our Client's receiving the entire umbrella policy of $2 Million.
  • Consonero v. Broska

    Practice Area:
    Motorcycle Accident
    Date:
    Oct 19, 2001
    Outcome:
    Verdict for our Client, the Plaintiff, for substantial compensatory damages.
    Description:
    Jury Trial of Motorcycle Accident & Injury Case. While our Client, the Plaintiff, was driving his motorcycle through an intersection, a pickup truck on a cross street ignored a Yield sign and went through the intersection. This caused our Client to have to lay down his motorcycle to avoid a direct collision with the truck. Our client injured his knee and required surgery.
  • Durni v. McMurphy

    Practice Area:
    Personal Injury
    Date:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Outcome:
    Settlement for Plaintiff, our Client, for $1,050,000.00.
    Description:
    Our client suffered horrible, incapacitating injuries in a one car roll-over accident. Both our Client and the other occupant of our Client's car had been drinking. The dispute centered on whether our Client, or the other young man, was driving the car at the time of the crash. After numerous depositions were taken, the case was resolved and settled in favor of our Client. We had the settlement proceeds paid into a Special Needs Trust for our Client, in another State, to preserve his eligibility for ongoing Medicaid assistance for his future health care needs. The trust was approved by the Courts and was set up in another state where our Client and his family had moved after this accident.
  • Eckis v. State Farm

    Practice Area:
    Insurance
    Date:
    Apr 09, 1999
    Outcome:
    Verdict for our Client, the Plaintiff, for substantial compensatory damages and attorney fees.
    Description:
    Jury Trial against State Farm for Bad Faith Breach of Insurance Contract. After a car accident, State Farm paid our client, the Plaintiff, PIP (medical bill) benefits as required by her insurance policy for about 5 months. Then State Farm threatened to cut-off payment of further PIP benefits unless our client signed their release form. State Farm's release would let it's adjustors talk privately and directly to our Client's treating doctors. Some of those doctors had advised our Client that State Farm adjustors had called and put pressure on them to conclude treatment before medically appropriate. Our Client refused to sign State Farm's release form. State Farm then cut-off payment of any further PIP benefits. We sued State Farm for Bad Faith Breach of Insurance Contract. After a two week trial, the jury awarded our Client substantial damages. In addition, the trial judge ordered State Farm to pay a substantial portion of the attorneys fee incurred by our Client.
  • Eckis v. Willmart

    Practice Area:
    Car Accidents
    Date:
    Jul 23, 1999
    Outcome:
    Verdict for our Client, the Plaintiff, for substantial compensatory damages.
    Description:
    Jury Trial of a Car Accident and Injury Claim. Our Client, the Plaintiff, developed Chronic Pain and Fibromyalgia after a motor vehicle collision. She claimed that the other driver turned left in front of her as she was going through an intersection with the right of way. The other driver claimed that she faced a sudden emergency because the Plaintiff stopped, and then unexpectedly and suddenly proceeded through the intersection. Our client offered to settle the case for $100,000, but the other driver's insurance offered only $55,000. The jury returned a verdict in favor of our Client for $276,000.00.
  • Vecellio v. Wynkoop

    Practice Area:
    Motorcycle Accident
    Date:
    Jan 17, 1997
    Outcome:
    Verdict for our Client, the Plaintiff, for a gross amount of $209,398.
    Description:
    Jury Trial of a Motorcycle Accident and Injury Case. Our Client, the Plaintiff, was driving his motorcycle through an intersection. At the same time another motorist's car was entering the highway from a merge lane. While merging from the on-ramp into the through lanes of traffic the other driver's car pulled in front of our Client's motorcycle. This caused a collision in which our Client was thrown from his bike and injured. Before trial the other driver's insurance offered $50,000. Our client would have settled the case for $100,000. The jury returned a verdict in favor of our Client for more than $209,000 before a 30% reduction for pro rata fault.