Las Vegas, NV
Speeding and traffic ticket Lawyer at Las Vegas, NV
Practice Areas: Speeding & Traffic Ticket, Car Accidents, Personal Injury
OUTCOME: Case Dismissed
This was a "Speed Contest" case where my client was accused of "Street Racing." The case was dismissed after I filed a motion based on a lack of any allegation of fact in the complaint that would suppo ... rt the crime alleged.
OUTCOME: illegal parking
Violation reduced to illegal parking, fine reduced to $90 from $258
OUTCOME: illegal parking
Violation reduced to illegal parking, fine reduced to $90 from $258
OUTCOME: Case Dismissed
Client was charged with SPEEDING 1-10 - The case was dismissed
OUTCOME: Defense Verdict on Summary Judgment
Judge Flanagan granted summary judgment and dismissed the lawsuit filed by survivors of two passangers who died when the experimental plane they were riding in crashed while on a sightseeing flight at ... the Grand Canyon. Jerry Howle, a Reno forensic psychiatrist, had taken his son, Albert Glenn Howle, his fiancee and her maid of honor for a flight May 15, 2004. All four died in the crash the day before the wedding. Families of the bride-to-be, Milena Stanoycheva, and her friend, Ania Dolinska, sued Lancair, manufacturer of the plane kit, contending it was defective. I represented Lancair, along with Mitch Cobeaga. We argued that the Plaintiffs were unable to produce any evidence that the crash occurred as a result of any defect. Washoe District Judge Patrick Flanagan agreed that the expert the family hired was unable to specify any part of the plane that failed. The expert could not tie anything done by Lancair to the accident, it could have been any one of a number of things. There was nothing to show there was any mechanical problem or defect. Howle's aircraft had been built from a kit by an amateur enthusiast named Stuart Bachman, who started it in 1997 and flew it for the first time in 2000. Howle bought the plane from Bachman in 2002. The plane crashed about an hour into the flight 45 miles northwest of Grand Canyon National Park Airport on the Hualapai Reservation in Arizona.
OUTCOME: Defense Verdict - Upheld on appeal
What happens when a Plaintiff’s lawyer fails to gather the evidence? Another case I was assigned early on in my career involved a small store that was destroyed in a fire not long after a new telephone ... system was installed by Sprint (the local phone company at the time). Throughout the course of litigation Plaintiff’s counsel did little discovery. Plaintiff’s theory of the case presented at trial was that the power strip that was installed with the telephone system malfunctioned and caused the fire. This theory was supported (somewhat) by testimony from the fire marshal who investigated the fire, as well as an independent fire expert. Both experts testified that the fire originated in the area of the power strip, and explained how the failure of the power strip would be consistent with the burn pattern found at the scene. We represented the Defendants in the case and presented testimony from our own independent fire expert. Our expert testified that the burn pattern was consistent with a fire that could have originated in the plastic garbage can, perhaps from a non-extinguished cigarette butt, that was found, cigarette butts and all, melted in a pile below the power strip. Alternatively, the burn pattern was consistent with a short in the coffee maker power cord (which had mysteriously disappeared after the fire) that was plugged into the power strip. At the end of the day, the jury concluded that the power strip may have failed, but it may not have. Plaintiff failed to meet the burden of proof and lost the case. Shortly after trial, Plaintiff filed a notice of appeal. I represented Sprint at the mandatory settlement conference and prepared the appellate briefs in the case. The case was ultimately decided without oral arguments, wherein the Supreme Court upheld the jury verdict in an unpublished opinion.
OUTCOME: Defense Verdict
What happens when a Plaintiff exaggerates his or her injuries? When I came out of law school, my first job as a licensed lawyer was as a litigator at an insurance defense law firm. One of the first cas ... es that was assigned to me, under the supervision of one of the firm’s partner’s was Zimmerman v. Adams. We represented Dr. Adams is a lawsuit where she was accused of rear-ending Mrs. Zimmerman. By the time I starting working on the case, it was nearly ready to go to trial. Most of the discovery was complete and we were working on pre-trial motions. When the day for trial finally arrived I was nervous because I had never been to trial and had no idea what to expect. Dr. Adams was nervous because she knew the Plaintiff was going to be asking the jury to award a substantial amount of money. The partner I worked for was nervous because that is what trial does to a lawyer, even one as seasoned as the partner. The evidence presented at trial was clear, Dr. Adams had rear-ended Mrs. Zimmerman. Mrs. Zimmerman’s car sustained about $900.00 in damage (which was previously resolved by the insurance company) and Dr. Adams’ car ended up with a small scratch on the front bumper. The case, of course, was about what Mrs. Zimmerman was claiming about her bodily injury. At the end of the trial, the jury returned a defense verdict, concluding that Mrs. Zimmerman’s claimed injuries could not have been related to the accident. I almost felt bad for Mrs. Zimmerman. I knew that Mrs. Zimmerman probably had, at least at one point, a legitimate claim. It would have been totally believable that she suffered some minor injuries and had to endure several months of treatment for soft tissue injuries as a result of this incident. However, she claimed at trial that over $130,000.00 in medical bills were related to the incident, including an expensive surgery on her back. Obviously Dr. Adams’ insurance company did not buy Mrs. Zimmerman’s claims, and refused to settle the case before trial. The jury did not buy it either, and she lost her case, leaving her with nothing but a bunch of unpaid medical bills.
Ad
Transform legal challenges into solutions.
Connect now to review your situation.
