Skip to main content
Matthew Paul Krupnick

Matthew Krupnick’s Legal Cases

6 total

  • Sam C. v. Ameriprise Auto Insurance

    Practice Area:
    Personal Injury
    Outcome:
    received full policy limits of $100,000.00 plus med pay
    Description:
    We represented a young man who was rear ended in a minor impact. We wound up getting the entire 100 thousand dollar policy with even having him deposed or examined by a defense doctor. The client will wind up with a windfall out of the settlement.
  • Cosmetic Dental Malpractice Victory

    Practice Area:
    Medical Malpractice
    Outcome:
    Over $40,000.00 settlement on case most valued at $10,000 - $14,000
    Description:
    Got client approximately $42,000.00 settlement against top defense firm over dispute as to cosmetic dental procedure. Litigated aggressively until eve of trial until defense made this incredible (confidentially protected) settlement offer that settled the case.
  • Smith v. Lee, et. al.

    Practice Area:
    Litigation
    Date:
    May 24, 2011
    Outcome:
    $75,000.00 (reduced per agreement after Plaintiff received award of $300,000.00)
    Description:
    Plaintiff was rear-ended by driver who disputed liability. Defense did not disclose additional $25,000 in insurance coverage (Allstate) for the owner of the vehicle that hit Plaintiff (on top of the $50,000 that the driver had through a different insurance company). Plaintiff had about $15,000 in medical bills with an injury to his lower back that was basically caused by making a pre-existing birth defect in his low back become painful for the first time in his life. Plaintiff was otherwise a healthy young man. The parties stipulated to binding arbitration in front of the Hon. Judge William Sheffield, Ret., of Judicate West, with a $15,000 low and a $75,000 high (representing the total amount of insurance available). There were no offers until the week before the arbitration, which was the $50,000 policy from Traveler's Insurance. The night before the arbitration the adjuster for the other insurance company called to offer an addition $5,000. Plaintiff, based on advise from his attorney, Matthew Paul Krupnick, rejected the offer and the matter proceeded through binding arbitration. The award was in favor of Plaintiff for the amount of $300,000, which was the amount Mr. Krupnick requested in closing argument (and Judge Sheffield was not made aware of the high/low parameters per the stipulation for arbitration). Therefore, the award was reduced to the maximum amount allowed per the stipulation which as $75,000.00.
  • Hernandez v. HOA (confidential)

    Practice Area:
    Personal Injury
    Date:
    Jan 01, 2011
    Outcome:
    $1,300,000.00
    Description:
    Slip and fall with disputed liability.
  • Hernan* v. HOA (confidential)

    Practice Area:
    Personal Injury
    Date:
    Jan 01, 2011
    Outcome:
    $1,300,000.00
    Description:
    KRUPNICK & KRUPNICK COULDN'T BE PROUDER OF THE $1.3 MILLION DOLLAR SETTLEMENT OBTAINED ON A HOTLY DISPUTED SLIP/TRIP AND FALL CASE!! AGAINST ALL ODDS, MATTHEW KRUPNICK WITH HIS AMAZING TEAM SETTLED A PREMISES LIABILITY CASE INVOLVING A HOTLY DISPUTED LIABILITY FIGHT THAT SEEMS TO BE THE TALK OF THE TOWN (AT LEAST IN THE LITIGATION WORLD ANYWAYS). THIS WAS A CASE WHERE OUR CLIENT SLIPPED ON WHAT THE DEFENSE CALLED “AN OPEN AND OBVIOUS, TRIVIAL ISSUE/DEFECT”. ESSENTIALLY, OUR CLIENT STEPPED ON AND THEN FELL DUE TO A TREE DROPPING ON A COMMON AREA AT HIS APARTMENT BUILDING. WE SUED THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION BASED ON THEIR NEGLIGENCE IN ALLOWING THESE TREE DROPPINGS (CIRCULAR, SPIKEY THISTLE TYPE DROPPINGS THAT START GREEN AND SPIKEY AND TURN BROWN AND WILTED OVER TIME) TO REMAIN AN ONGOING PROBLEM DESPITE BEING WELL AWARE OF THEIR PRESENCE AND THE POTENTIAL FOR ACCIDENT OR INJURY. BUT THE DEFENSE HUNG TIGHT TO THEIR ARGUMENT THAT IT WAS A TRIVIAL ISSUE AND THAT THE PLAINTIFF (OUR CLIENT), WHO LIVED THERE, SHOULD HAVE BEEN AWARE OF THE EXISTENCE OF THESE TREE DROPPINGS. WELL, AFTER CARE PREPPING (WHICH IS CRITICAL IN ALL CASES, ESPECIALLY FOR DEPOSITIONS), OUR CLIENT, HIS GIRLFRIEND THAT HE LIVED WITH, AND AN INDEPENDENT WITNESS, ALL HELPED TAKE AWAY THE ARGUMENT THAT THE ACCIDENT WAS EVEN PARTIALLY OUR CLIENT’S FAULT. STILL, THE DEFENSE AND EVEN SOME PLAINTIFF'S LAWYERS QUESTIONED WHETHER IT WAS FINANCIALLY INTELLIGENT TO LITIGATE THE CASE WITH THE UNDYING DETERMINATION MR. KRUPNICK EXUDED. SO, WITH A STROG POSITION ON LIABILITY IN OUR MINDS, WE NOW HAD TO ARGUE DAMAGES. SADLY, OUR CLIENT, WHO HAD BEEN HEALTHY AND HADN’T TREATED WITH A DOCTOR IN WELL OVER TEN YEARS PRIOR TO THIS, HAD TO HAVE A BACK SURGERY (A LUMBAR FUSION), AND WHILE THE SURGERY HELPED HIS BACK, IT APPEARS IT HAD A FREAK SIDE EFFECT AND CAUSED MORE INJURY TO OUR CLIENT'S FOOT, MAKING HIS DAMAGES EVEN MORE SEVERE. WHILE THE CASE COULD HAVE BEEN WORTH 5 MILLION, IT COULD ALSO HAVE BEEN WORTH ZERO WITH A JURY. YOU JUST NEVER KNOW THESE DAYS. SO AFTER A GOOD BATTLE, WE SETTLED IT FOR $1.3 MILLION DOLLARS. THE CLIENT WAS MORE THAN HAPPY AND WE WERE PLEASED TO HAVE HELPED HIM GET THE MEDICAL TREATMENT HE NEEDED AND HAVE PLENTY OF MONEY LEFT AFTER ALL OF HIS MEDICAL NEEDS WERE MET. WITH A 1.3 MILLION DOLLAR OFFER, IT WAS SIMPLY TOO HARD TO RISK A POTENTIAL ZERO AT TRIAL (AS THESE CASES IN PARTICULAR, ESPECIALLY WITH AN ARGUMENT THAT THE DANGEROUS CONDITION WAS OPEN AND OBVIOUS, MR. KRUPNICK WAS IN AGREEMENT WITH HIS CLIENT THAT IT WAS WISE TO TAKE THE SETTLEMENT (ON THE EVE OF TRIAL). WHILE WE HAVE HAD BIGGER SETTLEMENTS AND VERDICTS, WE COULDN'T BE MORE PROUD THAN WE ARE WITH THE RESULTS OF THIS MOST DIFFICULT CASE. THE KRUPNICK FIRM’S SUCCESS ON THIS CASE IS ONE THAT HAS SHOWN ALL OF THE BIG LAW FIRMS AND INSURANCE COMPANIES THAT THEY CAN AND WILL FIGHT AND SUCCEED FOR ALL CLIENTS, EVEN ON THE MOST DIFFICULT OF CASES.
  • Harris v. Police Department

    Practice Area:
    Civil Rights
    Date:
    Apr 02, 2013
    Outcome:
    Successful Jury Verdict
    Description:
    We represented older African American client who was brutally handcuffed and detained for hours by police (SWAT Team Style with guns pointed at his FACE for no reason) in his own home for reasons wholly unrelated (and at that time, unknown) to client. Client was never even arrested, but did sustain a broken wrist from handcuffs, a broken clavicle, as well as a re-breaking of a broken clavicle that had just healed. Client had also just made huge recovery from a massive stroke, and was unarmed, and wearing nothing but thin shorts when he was brutally manhandled by police after the cops were repeatedly and frantically admonished by the client and his children, who had to watch their father be subjected to this cruel abuse, that our client not only had the clavicle injury, but also just had a massive stroke and could therefore not comply with the absurd requests the officers were making (which in light of his visibly obvious handicaps, were impossible for him to do). After years of litigation and offers of ZERO dollars by the police department and the City, our firm brought in three other incredible firms for the trial and ultimately there was an award of approximately 1.6 million dollars (after being reduced by the Judge after a motion for new trial was brought by the defense). Because this Civil Rights case allows for attorneys fees, a motion was set and the court was going to rule on a request by all of us Plaintiffs lawyers for about 2 million dollars in fees ON TOP of the 1.6 million dollars already awarded to our client. Prior to the Court's ruling on the attorney fee motion, the defense opted to settle (after a post-trial mediation took place at the defenses' request) for an amount that is confidential, but is going to ultimately total over $2.5 million dollars between attorneys fees and the clients jury award. It has never felt so good to make a person a millionaire as it did in this case, with our client who comes from very humble means and is still in shock at the outstanding results we obtained from him and the fact that he is literally a millionaire now. It must be said, the money is well deserved and we cannot say that justice never prevails as it sure did in this case.