Brunswick, GA
Personal injury Lawyer at Brunswick, GA
Practice Areas: Personal Injury, Defective and Dangerous Products ... +7 more
OUTCOME: Client recovered over $2.5 million of the $3.1 million dollars at stake.
Represented client in competing claims over correct beneficiary of several ERISA and non-ERISA deferred compensation plans. The client recovered over $2.5 million of the $3.1 million dollars at stake.
OUTCOME: Case dismissed against clients with clients paying no money
Represented a county board of commissioners and that county's solicitor general in a mandamus action. The Georgia Supreme Court affirmed the trial court's grant of the defendants' motion to dismiss. Th ... e Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit also affirmed the dismissal of the plaintiff's due-process claim.
OUTCOME: Case dismissed against clients with clients paying no money
Represented a sheriff's deputy and a county in a wrongful-death action arising out of a motor-vehicle accident. The Georgia Court of Appeals held that the trial court erred in denying the deputy’s and ... county’s motions for summary judgment.
OUTCOME: Case dismissed against client with client paying no money
In this case, law enforcement officers suspected that the plaintiffs were hosting an underage-drinking party, and the officers entered the plaintiffs’ home to arrest the occupants. One of the plaintiff ... s was charged with underage possession of alcohol and the other plaintiff was charged with furnishing alcohol to a minor, maintaining a disorderly house, and obstructing an officer. The trial court found that the officers’ entry into the home was unconstitutional under the Fourth Amendment and the Georgia Court of Appeals affirmed. State v. Ealum, 283 Ga. App. 799 (2007). With the criminal charges dismissed, the plaintiffs sued the officers in a civil lawsuit seeking to recover money damages for the officers’ unconstitutional entry and arrests. BRBCSW defended the civil lawsuit. BRBCSW moved for summary judgment and the district court dismissed all of the claims against the officers. As a result, even though the Georgia Court of Appeals found that the officers violated the plaintiffs' rights under the Fourth Amendment, BRBCSW's defense of the officers in the civil case resulted in the federal court dismissing all of the plainitffs' civil claims and the officers not paying any money to the plaintiffs.
OUTCOME: Case dismissed against client with no payment of money
Represented county sheriff. The plaintiff, a tow-truck operator, actively campaigned for the sheriff’s opponent during the campaign for the sheriff's office, and the sheriff removed the plaintiff from ... the wrecker-rotation list one week after the sheriff defeated his opponent. Notably, plaintiff’s counsel represented a tow-truck operator in a similar case and prevailed in the United States Supreme Court. O'Hare Truck Serv. v. City of Northlake, 518 U.S. 712 (1996). Granting summary judgment for the sheriff, the district court found that the sheriff provided an acceptable basis for removing the tow-truck operator from the rotation list. As a result, the case was dismissed against the sheriff.
OUTCOME: Case settled against clients in echange for clients paying .68% of the plaintiff's medical bills
Represented several defendants in a maritime action where the plaintiff sustained burns to over 90% of his body. The plaintiff sought to recover over $3.2 million in medical bills, over $450,000 for fu ... ture medical care, and pain and suffering damages. Through an extremely aggressive defense, the plaintiff agreed to dismiss the case against BRBCSW's clients in exchange for $25,000, representing 0.68% of the plaintiff’s past medical bills.
OUTCOME: Case dismissed against clients with clients paying no money
The plaintiff sued several employees of the Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT) and two testing companies, claiming that all of the defendants violated the RICO Act and that the testing compani ... es committed state-law torts. The district court dismissed the RICO claims, holding that a RICO plaintiff had to allege that it relied on a false statement to state a wire or mail fraud claim, and the plaintiff had not alleged first-party reliance. The case proceeded to trial against one of the testing companies, who was represented by a different law firm. Before the entry of the final judgment, however, the United States Supreme Court issued an opinion holding that a RICO plaintiff does not have to allege that it relied on a false statement to state a wire or mail fraud claim. Appealing the dismissal of the RICO claims, the plaintiff argued that the Supreme Court’s opinion resuscitated its RICO claims. Faced with this change in the law, Special Assistant Attorney General Todd Carter and Paul argued that the plaintiff waived its right to rely on this new decision because the plaintiff failed to bring the change in the law to the district court's attention before the entry of final judgment. Notably, BRBCSW's clients, the GDOT employees, were the only parties to make this argument in this appeal. In a case of first impression, the Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit agreed with BRBCSW's clients, holding that when there is a relevant change in the law before entry of final judgment, a party generally must notify the district court; if the party fails to do so, it waives arguments on appeal that are based on that change in the law. As a result, all of the RICO claims were dismissed.
OUTCOME: See description
Represented patient of a medical provider who sustained life-changing injuries as a result of the provider's negligence. After hiring a forensic document examiner and proving that the medical provider ... altered the patient's medical records, the case settled for the provider's policy limits of insurance.