We'll help you find the right solution for your needs
Does this sound like your topic?
|Award name||Grantor||Date granted|
|Rising Star||Washington Law & Politics Magazine||2012|
|Rising Star||Washington Law & Politics Magazine||2011|
|Rising Star||Washington Law & Politics Magazine||2010|
|Rising Star||Washington Law & Politics Magazine||2008|
|Rising Star||Washington Law & Politics Magazine||2004|
|Rising Star||Washington Law & Politics Magazine||2003|
|Partner||Johnson, Graffe, Keay, Moniz & Wick, LLP||2008 - Present|
|Associate||Johnson, Graffe, Keay, Moniz & Wick, LLP||1998 - 2007|
|Association name||Position name||Duration|
|Washington State Society of Health Care Attorneys||N/A||2012 - Present|
|Defense Research Institute||Medical Liability and Health Care Law||2011 - Present|
|Primerus||Member||2006 - Present|
|Oregon State Bar||Member||2006 - Present|
|Defense Research Institute||Member||2005 - Present|
|Washington Health Care Risk Management Society||Member||2000 - Present|
|Washington State Association for Justice||Member||2000 - Present|
|Washington Defense Trial Lawyers||Member||1999 - Present|
|United States District Court for the Western District of Washington||Admitted to Practice||1999 - Present|
|Washington State Bar Association||Member||1998 - Present|
|Tacoma Pierce County Bar Association||Member||1998 - Present|
|Washington State Healthcare Risk Management Society||Immediate Past President||2008 - 2009|
|Washington Health Care Risk Management Society||President||2007 - 2008|
|Washington Health Care Risk Management Society||President-Elect||2006 - 2007|
|American Inns of Court||Member||2001 - 2003|
|American Bar Association||Member||2000 - 2006|
|Sarrett v. Zhou||defense verdict for client|
|Simpson v. Thorslund, 151 Wn. App. 276, 287, 211 P.3d 469 (2009).||Client prevailed at trial and on appeal.|
|Bolan v. Buck||Defense verdict for Mr. deMaine's client|
|See all legal cases|
|Willamette University College of Law||Law||JD - Juris Doctor- cum laude||1998|
|University of Washington||N/A||BA - Bachelor of Arts||1995|
|Health Law Class||Medical Malpractice: A Practitioner's Perspective||2016|
|Radio Interview||Medical Malpractice||2014|
|Annual Meeting||Dental Malpractice Claims||2011|
|King County Dental Association Educational Meeting||Employment Law||2008|
|WHCRMS Annual Conference||Legislative Update||2007|
|Annual Northwest Dental Convention||Employment Litigation||2007|
|WHCRMS Monthly Meeting||Trial Consultants: Privileged Information?||2006|
Posted by Rrooney
Phil was extraordinary. Details matter in litigation and he absolutely understands that.
His preparation before trial was impressive. There was no stone unturned. Every deposition and piece of evidence was assessed and reassessed to find any potential inconsistency to strengthen our case. This is the type of preparation that finds success in all endeavors and particularly in litigation.
In the courtroom, in large part due to his preparation and thorough understanding of the case at hand, he was completely at ease and unflappable. This was not lost on the judge, jury or plaintiff's attorneys. Because he had such a command of the facts and the issues he immediately established himself as the most credible of the attorneys involved. His credibility enabled him to be the more persuasive litigator and he easily controlled the outcome of the case. Defense verdict in 36 minutes.
Posted by anonymous
Phil was always pleasant, informed, capable and intelligent from pretrial preparation to the resolution of the trial. I always felt confident with my legal team with Phil in the lead. Phil helped make an otherwise unpleasant experience almost enjoyable. It certainly helps that the case settled in my favor.
Posted by Alan
Mr. deMaine did a fantastic job on a complex malpractice case. He was very helpful in all aspects of the trial and did a particularly good job preparing me for the deposition and cross examination. This was a difficult case to defend but the verdict was for all of the defendants.
James Holland, Car accident Attorney
Relationship: Opposing Counsel on matter
Phil and I worked as opposing counsel on a contentious case. I found Phil to be a strong adversary who carefully and ethically fought for his client's rights. He also is willing and able to listen to reason and work a matter through to a mutually beneficial conclusion - a trait which serves his clients well. Phil has strong legal acumen and a good grasp of the factual and emotional issues involved in each case and presented at each trial. This ability allows Phil to see around corners and reach an early resolution based on an accurate assessment of the probable outcome range.