Recent Results

The general contractor defendant attempted to defeat the personal injury case of our client by claiming that our client (the employee of a subcontractor on the project) was also technically an employee of the general contractor due to an alleged “co-employee agreement” between the two companies. If this were true, then our client’s only recourse would have been his ongoing workers compensation case (which ultimately paid out less than $1,000,000 in total).

After significant litigation, we were able to show that (1) our client should not have been classified as an employee of the general contractor and (2) even if our client was an employee of the general contractor, the general contractor did not have the correct form of workers compensation insurance to cover our client’s claim, such that the general contractor would be strictly liable for our client’s injuries as a matter of law in such a case. In so doing, we were able to take the general contractor’s insidious efforts to evade liability for their negligence and use their own arguments to solidify their liability, causing them to tender the full $26,000,000 policy limits several weeks before trial.

The Defendants initially contended that they were not liable for any of our client’s damages and would not pay a penny for settlement, vowing to spend millions to defend the case. Nonetheless, our team of attorneys and investigators spent more than 3 years investigating and litigating the matter, defeating multiple motions to dismiss the case until we proved that the premises of the Defendants were negligently designed.
After spending millions trying to defend the case, filing countless motions to dismiss the matter, and taking more than 20 depositions, the Defendants recognized shortly before trial that we were likely to prevail, such that they requested a mediation. In addition to convincing the Defendants to pay our client the unprecedented $20 million settlement, we also insisted that the Defendants make substantial remedial modifications to their property as part of the settlement to ensure that an incident like this could never happen again.

Given that our client was primarily at fault for causing this tragic incident and the police report placed our client at fault for driving off the road and not wearing his seatbelt, all parties initially placed all liability on our client. Ultimately, through aggressive litigation, we were able to show that the dump truck had been negligently maintained in an unsafe condition, which contributing the occurrence of the incident and our client being ejected from the dump truck during the rollover, leading to the remarkable $4,500,000 settlement.

The defendants’ insurance carrier initially expected to pay no more than $250,000 to settle the case of these 80-year-old parents because they had experienced no economic losses as a result of their son’s death and because of their advanced age. But because we demonstrated the unique bond these parents shared with their son by persuasively telling their family story, we were able to significantly increase the value of their case.

After seeing how we would present this elderly couple’s case before a jury, the insurance company knew that taking the matter to trial could result in a substantially higher verdict based on our advocacy. Consequently, the insurance carrier sought an early mediation in the matter and we were able to settle the case for an amount far in excess of our clients’ wildest dreams without them having to go through the pain and ordeal of a lengthy trial.

The HOA President had negligently erected the scaffolding, but the Defendants contended that our client had negligently brought a ladder to the top of the scaffold and was working on the ladder when he fell. The Defendants also argued that our client had actually climbed onto the roof of the building and become dizzy before he fell, such that they believed he was 100% liable for his own injuries, regardless of whether he fell from the roof or the ladder he negligently brought on top of the scaffold.

In the litigation process, we discovered that the HOA had no workers compensation insurance and that the HOA President did not have a contractor’s license for this kind of work. Because work on a scaffold requires a contractor’s license, we used regulations under the Labor Code to show that our client was technically an “employee” of the HOA at the time of his injury, such that this was actually an employment-related injury. However, because the HOA had no workers compensation insurance to pay for employee injuries, this employment-related injury was therefore presumed to result from employer negligence under the Labor Code. Additionally, we showed that these laws prevented the employer from claiming any comparative negligence, assumption of the risk, or co-employee negligence defenses that they would have used to shift the blame to our client, thereby essentially making the HOA strictly liable for our client’s injuries, which included multiple skull fractures and a traumatic brain injury. Through this intricate strategy of legal of reasoning, we convinced the HOA’s insurance carrier of their liability in this matter, even if our client had been on the roof or a ladder on the scaffolding when he fell, such that they paid their full $2,000,000 policy limits.

While our client was fortunate not to be burned in her vehicle, she still suffered multiple rib fractures, neck and back fractures, a pelvic ring fracture, a sternal fracture, and a right shoulder tear.

The commercial vehicle defendants initially tried to evade liability based on the imminent peril/sudden emergency defense due to the driver’s sudden black out. Nonetheless, we were able gather sufficient facts to overcome this defense and convince the defendants to pay a $1,800,000 pre-litigation settlement for our much deserving client.

The pitbull owner was insolvent and had no insurance that would cover the injuries inflicted by the pitbull; nonetheless, we were able to still uncover facts indicating culpability on the part of the Hotel where the incident occurred.

Throughout the entire litigation, the Hotel denied liability and filed a Motion for Summary Judgment to dismiss the case, arguing that California law required the Hotel to have prior notice that the Pitbull was dangerous before it could be found at fault. After more than a year of conducting depositions, interviewing witnesses, conducting targeted legal research, and additional litigation, we were able to prove that the Hotel would be at fault for allowing a dangerous animal (like the pitbull) onto its property because it actively invited guests to bring dogs onto the property.

Once the Hotel’s Motion for Summary Judgment was defeated, the Hotel sought a pre-trial mediation resulting in the unparalleled $1,500,000 dog bite settlement for our very deserving client.

The force of the impact sent our client’s car more than 500 feet down the roadway, up the curb, and into a tree. As a result of the collision, our client suffered a subdural hematoma and thyroid cartilage fracture causing her to be intubated and hospitalized in the ICU for 10 days. She then spent another 12 days in the hospital and at a rehab facility. She required a G-tube for more than 6 months after her discharge from the hospital as she continued to struggle with swallowing liquids due to her injuries from this accident. Ultimately, the medical specials related to this incident amounted to approximately $248,000. While these injuries were serious, none were of a permanent and lasting nature, and our client returned to work full-time within 4 months after the accident.

During our pre-litigation investigation, we were able to ascertain facts regarding a prior history of evading the police by this drunk driver in order to establish a powerful claim for punitive damages. Using the despicable conduct of the drunk driver and corresponding threat of punitive damages, we were able to acquire the drunk driver’s full $1,300,000 policy limits less than a year after the accident to the great joy and surprise of our client without the hassle of a lawsuit or further delay.

Our client had suffered a significant neck injury when a vehicle failed to stop at a red signal light. She was originally represented by another attorney for several years before retaining us to help her with the matter. Throughout the time with her prior attorney, she underwent an Epidural that caused her to suffer MRSA in her spine, which lead to her having to undergo an Emergency 10 Level Laminectomy. Thereafter, she continued taking prescription pain medication for years due to the severe pain.

During this time period, the prior attorney had offered to settle her claim for $25,000 without her knowledge. Fortunately for the client, the prior attorney was so bad at his job that the insurance did not accept the offer and pay the $25,000, despite the client’s significant injuries and treatment. After undergoing her deposition with the prior attorney, it became clear to the client that her prior attorney was not competent to handle her case, causing her to fire him and hire Easton & Easton the following day.

Within 6 months of taking over the case, our client obtained additional treatment from an Orthopedic Specialist, who preformed a revision of her prior surgery that completely alleviated the pain she had been living with for years. In addition, we fixed the many mistakes her prior attorney had made in litigation and obtained a signed witness statement from the only impartial witness, thereby resolving the liability dispute in the case. Immediately thereafter, we demanded that the insurance carrier tender the full $1,250,000 policy limits available in the case, which they did.

This case is a profound reminder that quality legal representation can make all the difference. For this client it was the difference between $25,000 and $1,250,000. As she recently told us, the outcome of this case completely changed the course of her life and she will be forever grateful. With her prior attorney, she was headed down a path of no money, constant pain, and likely drug dependency due to her pain; with our representation, she is now pain free, medication free, preparing for law school, and secure in her financial future.

Our client was a breast cancer survivor who was three months post-op to her breast reconstruction when she was T-boned and her healed incision was ruptured. After the rupture was surgically repaired the day after the collision, this client experienced a breast infection that appeared to resolve a few days later. She then experienced recurrent infections several months later after a trip to Mexico following her nipple procedure. These recurrent infections ultimately lead to various complications and the removal of her breast implant for over a year.

The Defendants’ physicians contented that all of our client’s more serious complications stemmed from the subsequent infections after her Mexico trip, and therefore were unrelated to the car accident. However, we were able to show that a jury was more likely to conclude that our client had developed a biofilm infection after the rupture caused by this incident and that this biofilm ultimately lead to the subsequent infections, such that the Defendants were liable for all of our client’s complications. This convinced them to compensate her for the full extent of her injuries and the case settled one month before trial for $1,240,000.

Despite the defendant’s insurance company initially denying liability due to their insured’s false statement, we were able to convince them that their insured was 100% at fault for causing the accident.

As a result of this accident, our client was thrown through the air onto the asphalt, causing him to suffer significant lower back and shoulder injuries. He underwent several pain management injections before undergoing a Lumbar Fusion Surgery. After demonstrating the significant effect that this accident had on our client’s life and convincing the defendant’s insurance company to accept liability, we were able to settle this matter for $1,000,000.

Our client was on his way to pick up a passenger when the Defendant caused a major collision with his vehicle after running the red light. The severe accident caused our client to suffer life threatening injuries and required several life-saving emergency surgeries. Ultimately, given the grave extent of his injuries and necessary treatment, our client incurred more than $200,000 in medical bills.

Prior to our office’s involvement, our client was represented by another law firm that was only going to settle his case for the third party’s $15,000 auto insurance policy limits because the rideshare company claimed there was no further coverage for the accident. Once our office became involved, we were able to prove that our client was on his way to pick up a passenger at the time of the collision (even though the rideshare company initially disputed this), which then triggered the underinsured motorist coverage of the rideshare service. As such, we turned a $15,000 settlement into a $1,000,000 settlement for this client.

Before this client came to us, his own auto insurance had paid $300,000 to the widow of the other driver, believing that our client was at fault for the accident. When this client came to us more than a year after the accident, he had no memory of the collision and no way to dispute his own fault in the matter. We agreed to take on his case and were able to turn things around by recreating the conditions of the accident with an Accident Reconstruction Expert. In doing so, we proved that the deceased driver had, in fact, been at fault for the collision and recovered $1,000,000 in settlement for our client.

This unsafe lane change caused our client to suffer continuous and persistent neck pain that radiated into her arms. An MRI revealed a 2 mm disc protrusion in her neck and an Orthopedic Surgeon recommended and performed a Cervical Disc Replacement. A year after the surgery was completed, our client continued to suffer from neck pain, at which point she underwent a Cervical Fusion.

At the onset, Defendants refused to offer our client any money, maintaining that the side-swipe accident could not have caused our client to require the Cervical surgeries she underwent. However, after considerable litigation, the Defendant requested a Mediation, where we negotiated the $900,000 settlement for our client.

After participating in conservative and pain management treatment, the mother was recommended to undergo a Lumbar Fusion Surgery. Because she was in the process of beginning the IVF process in order to try to have their last child before it was no longer a possibility, she chose to put her future child’s needs above her own and to continue living with the constant lower back pain throughout her pregnancy.

Despite not yet having undergone the surgery, we were able to convince the insurance carrier that she did plan to undergo the Lumbar Surgery after she gave birth to her third child. Consequently, the carrier agreed to pay her $475,000 in consideration of her expected future medical treatment, yielding a global settlement of $850,000 for all four family members.

As a result of this accident, our client suffered significant lower back and neck injuries. However, she already had a significant prior medical history, including MRIs and chiropractic care. Despite this, we were able to demonstrate how the accident had exacerbated those prior injuries, which ultimately lead to her requiring a Cervical Disc Arthroplasty.

After demonstrating the significant exacerbation that this accident had caused our client, we were able to resolve this matter for $792,500.

This monster storm was deemed to be one of the strongest storms to hit Southern California in years, throwing down numerous trees and knocking out power to a multitude of residents.

Easton & Easton was able to overcome a very powerful “Act of God” defense considering the severity of the snowstorm, and also overcame our client’s delay in medical treatment. Ultimately, after taking numerous depositions, and fiercely litigating the matter, Easton & Easton was able to resolve the case for $750,000.

The vehicles collided at a high rate of speed, totaling our client’s vehicle.

The severe impact caused our client to develop lower back pain that radiated into her lower extremities. After completing physical therapy, she eventually underwent a Lumbar Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion. Upon demonstrating the life-altering impact this had on our client’s life, the we were able to acquire a $750,000 settlement for our client pre-litigation, per her request.

The police determined that our client was traveling too fast for the street conditions and found him partially at fault along with the other driver. As a result of this accident, our client sustained a fractured wrist requiring an ORIF Surgery to repair the distal radius. Subsequently, he recovered well with only minor restrictions of the wrist. Despite the comparative fault of our client and good recovery, we were able to obtain $600,000 for him in settlement.

Our client was a passenger in a vehicle being driven by her boyfriend at the time while they were both intoxicated. Our client told the police officer at the hospital while she was still intoxicated that her boyfriend had intentionally tried to crash their vehicle.

Based upon her initial statement, her ex-boyfriend was charged with assault with a deadly weapon, which complicated our case against him regarding our negligence claim given that insurance proceeds cannot be paid out for intentional torts. His insurance carrier initially contended that it could not be responsible for our client’s injuries in this matter, but we were ultimately able to convince the insurance carrier that our client’s initial statement was incorrect and made while she was still inebriated. Once they accepted responsibility, we then negotiated the substantial $530,000 settlement pre-litigation for our client’s injuries and her pain and suffering throughout this ordeal.

Throughout litigation, the Defense disputed liability and the nature of her injuries. However, after extensive depositions and discovery, we were able to show that employees of the grocery store knew about the upraised flooring before our client fell and therefore should have repaired the condition. Consequently, the Defense requested a mediation, where we negotiated the $500,000 settlement for our client.

Initially, the Police Report was against our client because the police officer thought our client had jaywalked at the time of the accident. However, Easton & Easton acquired nearby surveillance video showing that our client had actually crossed the street in an unmarked crosswalk, which was permitted under the law. Using this information, we persuaded the police officer to change his opinions and were able to convince the Defendant’s insurance company to accept liability.

Our client sustained a depressed fracture of his right medial tibial plateau in his leg and a left trimalleolar ankle fracture. Despite only incurring $29,875 in medical bills, we were able to convince the Defendant’s insurance carrier to pay their $500,000 policy limits to our client.

After conservative care failed to resolve our client’s injuries, she stopped treating for her injuries for more than a year before finally proceeding with a Lumbar Fusion Surgery.

Throughout the litigation of this matter in Federal Court, the Defense disputed liability and the nature of our client’s injuries, especially the large 1-year gap in her medical treatment. However, after conducting several depositions and significant discovery, we located a former employee of the restaurant who had been working at the time of the incident and who provided us with a key witness statement that helped us refute the Defendants’ liability defense. Consequently, the restaurant requested a mediation, where we ultimately negotiated the significant $450,000 settlement. Due to the notoriety of the restaurant chain and the substantial size of the settlement, the Defendant required that its identity remain confidential.

Deposition testimony revealed that the truck driver had used his Jake Brake (air brake) during this turn, which is prohibited on wet roads like those of the date of the incident. Once this fact was elicited at deposition, the insurance carrier had no defense in the case. Our client sustained a small laceration to his face and a fractured elbow requiring ORIF Surgery to repair. Ultimately, we were able to obtain $440,000 for our client.

Prior to our entrance into the case, our client was represented by another law firm for almost two years of litigation and the Defendant’s top offer was only $200,000. Our client’s prior attorney tried to pressure her into accepting the Defendant’s $200,000 offer because he believed she would lose the case completely at trial, which prompted her to hire our firm just before trial was set to begin.

After entering the case, we were able to briefly postpone the approaching trial so that we could conduct further depositions and several surprise inspections of the grocery store, which we used to show that the store had a habit of allowing fallen produce to remain on the floor of the store for extended periods of time. After showing the additional evidence we had gathered in preparation for trial, the Defendant sought further settlement negotiations on the day before trial and the case settled for $400,000.

However, in 2015, we acquired $325,000 (more than 6 times the medical bills) for a client who was knocked down by a neighbor’s Dalmatian/Pitbull mix who was trying to attack the client’s small Bichon/Poodle mix. When our client was knocked to the ground, she injured her hip and ultimately required two arthroscopic hip surgeries to repair the condition.

Because there had been no bite in the incident, the dog’s owner (the defendant) was not strictly liable. Matters were further compounded because: (1) no one knew how the defendant’s dog had escaped the yard at the time of the incident, (2) the defendant was out of the country traveling in Europe at the time of the incident, and (3) the live-in dog-sitter that the defendant had hired to watch her dog was not present at the home at the time the dog somehow got out of the yard. As the burden of proving the defendant’s negligence fell on us, this was initially a very daunting task under the circumstances. But after more than a year of litigation and depositions, we were able to acquire evidence and testimony showing that the defendant’s gate was likely faulty and she had not properly instructed the dog-sitter on how to safely confine her dog in the yard, thereby leading to a significant mediated settlement of $325,000.

The actor wielding the stick was trying to strike the bars of a jail-façade to scare our client, but missed the bars and broke the stick across our client’s neck. Unfortunately, our client and her friends did not get the name of the actor/employee who struck her and no incident report was made. Because multiple companies were involved with running the event, it later became impossible to determine precisely who was responsible for the employee that caused this incident.

Our client underwent two years of physical therapy, two Cervical Medial Branch Nerve Blocks, and an RFTC Ablation to resolve her injuries. As the Defendants took several depositions of our client’s friends who were present at the time of the incident regarding the issue of liability, we used these depositions to establish the pain and suffering of our client and the impact this incident had taken on her social life. A Mediation was completed shortly before trial and the case settled for $250,000.

As our client approached the gore point, he was unaware that roadwork had occurred and the asphalt had been ground down on the on-ramp and gore point because there were no warning cones or roadwork signs.

As cyclists are not permitted to ride on freeways and the gore point is considered part of the SR-73 freeway, the State of California contended that it did not need to place any warnings at the gore point. The State of California’s Safety Expert testified at his deposition that cyclists needed to merge into the middle lane of the roadway in order to stay off the freeway on-ramp lanes. When it was pointed out that vehicles on Newport Coast Drive were traveling in excess of 60 MPH, the State’s Expert realized his ridiculous position. Through further litigation, we showed that the only reasonable path for cyclists on this roadway was to pass through the gore point, resulting in a settlement of $175,000 one month before trial.

While liability in food poisoning cases is usually fiercely disputed by such establishments, we were able to use circumstantial evidence regarding our clients’ travels and other meals that day to pinpoint the cause of the food poisoning to the hotel’s room service. Although our clients’ only incurred a couple thousand dollars in medical bills after a short stay in the hospital, we demonstrated how this incident completely disrupted their ability to visit their children and grandchildren throughout the Christmas holiday. Based on the pain and suffering of this event, room service provider ultimately paid our client’s $80,000 without filing a lawsuit.