Travis James Little

Travis Little

I advise and represent people who have been seriously injured, including those who have experienced injuries due to dangerous conditions on commercial and residential premises. Sometimes we take challenging cases no one else will take because we know which cases can be won and how to win those cases. In this particular case, we filed a lawsuit based on the reviewer’s recollection that there was no notice or warning whatsoever of the hazard that caused the fall. This is a matter of public record and is contained in the principal allegations of the complaint. All cases are fact specific, but generally, cases involving ample warnings are challenging for plaintiffs to win. This is because the black-letter Georgia law is that a plaintiff may only prevail in premises matters if the owner or occupier had superior knowledge of the hazard compared to that of the plaintiff. Hypothetically, a warning sign puts all parties on the same footing by alerting the guest to be on guard for hazards. In this case, we filed a motion asking the judge to compel the defendants to give us the video. Unfortunately, the video did not match the anonymous person’s version of the events. The video showed that he/she walked past a bright yellow caution sign that warned of a wet and slippery floor. Then, moments later, he/she walked past the sign again. This time, he/she fell. Both of these traversals took him/her within inches of the sign. After spending hours analyzing the video, relevant case law, and possible theories of recovery, we met with the client and two family members for several hours and discussed options. I am not permitted to disclose the legal advice we provided in that meeting or what the reviewer’s response was to that advice. Following that meeting, it is a matter of public record that we notified the court that we would be withdrawing, subject to any objection by the reviewer. The reviewer did not object to our withdrawal. We fulfilled all legal and ethical requirements to our client during our withdrawal and complied with all procedural requirements of the Rule 4.3 of the Georgia Uniform Superior Court Rules. We absolutely kept our word to provide the best legal advice possible and to provide our services 100% free of charge unless we obtained a recovery. Indeed, despite spending thousands of dollars and dozens of man-hours on the reviewer’s case, the reviewer paid us nothing for our work. Nor did we ask for any compensation. The truth is that since we work on contingent fee basis, we can only pursue legitimate and meritorious cases. We will not give a client false hope or waste a client’s time, the court’s time, and our own time and money pursuing cases that are frivolous in nature. This reviewer had the opportunity to speak with at least a half dozen other attorneys to get a second opinion of his/her case. We handled this case with the utmost respect and deference for the reviewer and his/her mental, physical, financial, and emotional health. Note: We just noticed this review, which was posted almost 14 months ago. At around the same time this reviewer posted the above review, he/she also filed a formal complaint against us with the Georgia Bar. The Georgia Bar promptly investigated and summarily dismissed the complaint as baseless.