Grand Rapids, MI
Personal injury Lawyer at Grand Rapids, MI
Practice Areas: Personal Injury, Insurance
OUTCOME: settlemed
Client had her axillary artery in her shoulder severed during a arthroscopic tendon repair causing permanent nerve injury in an retiree. Defendant paid $75,000 prior to attorney being retained and ano ... ther $225,000 after the attorney became involved. No suit was filed.
OUTCOME: settled just prior to trial for $270,000
Defendant was giving Plaintiff’s 4 year old grandson a ride on a skidloader prior to delivering a wood stove to Plaintiff’s home. Defendant went to hand the grandchild back to plaintiff, but did not sh ... ut down the skid loader prior to reaching the child across the cab. The child kicked the gear lever causing the skid loader to lurch forward running up Plaintiff’s leg. Plaintiff suffered a medial plateau fracture to his knee and injury to his foot requiring arthroplasty. He was then completely disabled from returning to his job as on over the road driver for a scrap metal company. The medical was not disputed. Plaintiff asserted that Defendant was negligent for failing to shut down the skidloader before handing the child across the cab to Plaintiff. The owner/safety manual contained warnings about such possibility. Case Evaluation was $195,000
OUTCOME: settled for $520,000
Plaintiffs were hit head on while traveling on a highway when the minor defendant, deceased, fell asleep at the wheel and crossed into oncoming traffic. The custodial grandfather and one grandson were ... killed, while another grandchild was seriously injured. The grandmother suffered multiple traumas required multiple surgeries and suffered cognitive impairment for an extended period of time. The primary issue was whether the Defendant’s Mother’s insurance policy would cover the Defendant when he was driving a vehicle owned and insured by the father. Plaintiff asserted that the Defendant would have additional coverage under the mother’s policy due to the nature of the joint custody of the minor defendant. Defendant and Citizen’s asserted that under these circumstances the defendant would be excluded from coverage under the mother’s policy. Both sides had outside counsel review the policy language and render opinions on coverage
Ad
Transform legal challenges into solutions.
Connect now to review your situation.
