Success Stories

Awards and Honors Electrical Injury Construction Accidents Defective Highway Accident Pedestrian Accidents Bicycle Accidents Truck Accident Personal Injury/Wrongful Death

Medical Malpractice Dog bite Elevator Injury Aviation Accident Train Accident Defective Products Nursing Home Negligence/Elder Abuse Employment Law

Awards and Honors

San Francisco Trial Lawyers of the Year

Ron Rouda and John Feder were both nominated for the San Francisco Trial Lawyers Association's "Trial Lawyer of the Year" (2007 nominees), and the Consumer Attorneys of California's Attorneys of the Year awards in 2006.

Northern California Super Lawyers, 2006 and 2007

The firm has been given the highest rating for ability and ethics (AV rating) by the national legal rating service of Martindale-Hubbell.

In 2007, Timothy G. Tietjen obtained a $29 Million Dollar settlement on behalf of an injured worker who suffered electrocution injuries. This is one of the highest settlements in California history for an injured worker.

Electrical Injury

Tuiaki v. Adelphia

2007: $29,000,000 award in Tuiaki v. Adelphia, et al. A 36-year old lineman foreman suffered catastrophic injuries when he came into contact with a 7,200-volt power line. Plaintiff was working from an elevated workbasket installing a fiber-optic cable system. Plaintiff's co-worker was slowly driving the bucket truck around a turn in the highway, while plaintiff elevated his workbasket and the fiber-optic support cable over redwood trees that posed an obstacle to his work. In doing so, plaintiff backed into a power line that contacted the back of his neck and hard hat. Plaintiff suffered bilateral amputation of both arms, burns over 45 percent of his body and paraplegia.

CAL OSHA concluded that the sole fault of the accident was due to plaintiff and his employer, SG Barber. Due to bankruptcy issues facing defendants Adelphia Communications and Mobile Tool International, three separate legal actions were filed and later consolidated as follows: (1) a negligent construction management case against defendants Adelphia, Pauley Construction and FJS (hereinafter referred to as Aconstruction defendants"); (2) a negligent maintenance of premises case against defendants Pacific Gas and Electric Company, Pacific Bell, Western Environmental Consultations (WECI) and Davey Tree Surgery (hereafter referred to as premises defendants"); and (3) a product liability case against the manufacturer/successors in interest of the uninsulated bucket tree from which Plaintiff was working when injured, i.e. Mobile Tool International (MTI), American Premier Underwriters (APU) and General Cable Corporation (hereafter referred to as "product defendants").

As to defendants Adelphia, Pauley and FJS, plaintiff alleged that the construction defendants negligently managed and coordinated the project creating a blueprint for disaster. These defendants failed to provide Amake ready sheets to the SG Barber crews, thereby preventing them from safely planning their work. The Amake ready sheets provided detailed information as to the height of attachment of power and cable at every pole location and notes where trees needed to be trimmed that might pose obstacles for work to be performed. Plaintiff's supervisor had repeatedly asked the construction defendants for the Amake ready sheets but was told that they were not available and was instructed to proceed with the work. Plaintiff also contended that the construction defendants provided a defective work map, which failed to note the location of the power pole on the opposite side of the highway where he was working. Plaintiff claimed that the power line with which he contacted crossed the road diagonally and was out of his field of vision. A properly detailed map would have identified a diagonal crossing power line. Plaintiff finally contended that the construction defendants had ordered work to be performed without utility company approval and took every safety shortcut possible to expedite the completion of this project before Adelphia's looming bankruptcy. Once Adelphia was in bankruptcy, it would not have to pay contractors such as Pauley Construction. Adelphia filed for bankruptcy protection one month after the accident. Pauley Construction lost over $4,000,000 as a result of the bankruptcy.

As to the premises defendants, plaintiff alleged negligence in failing to maintain proper clearances between the redwood trees and power line. The defendants argued that proper clearances had been maintained and that the private property owner upon whose land the redwood trees existed had refused permission to cut down trees, thus asserting that they had complied with all required codes and procedures.

As to the product liability defendants, plaintiff claimed that the bucket truck was defective as it lacked insulation to protect a worker from a foreseeable hazard. Defendants denied its product was defective, asserting that it was standard in the industry to use uninsulated lifts to install telecommunication equipment. In addition, the bucket truck was replete with warnings about the risk of equipment and operating too close to power lines.

Mr. Tuiaki was hospitalized for over seven months and underwent 14 surgeries. His wife, Lupe, age 37, was five months pregnant at the time of the accident, with their second child. Their oldest child was four years old at the time. Mrs. Tuiaki claimed a major loss of consortium due to her husband's severe injuries.

Plaintiff claimed past and future medical expenses and wage loss over $13,000,000, which was disputed by the defendants.

The total settlement package was $29,000,000, broken down as follows: $3,000,000 from FJS Cable, $5,000,000 from the product liability defendants, $5,000,000 from the premises liability defendants, $4,000,000 from SG Barber, $5,000,000 from Adelphia, $14,000,000 from Pauley Construction and a waiver of the $6,000,000 workers' compensation lien.

Amazingly, Mr. Tuiaki has obtained a general contractor's license and opened up his own business where he actively oversees construction from his wheelchair with the assistance of his wife, Lupe. Mr. Tuiaki is an inspiration to all disabled persons and an example of a person triumphing over incredible adversity.

Electrocution

$17,000,000. The firm negotiated a settlement involving a well-known television reporter in Southern California, who was electrocuted while covering a news story. Adrienne was in a van being driven by her photographer. The driver parked the van on the driveway of an automotive shop, which allowed the microwave antennae to angle toward the power lines as the mast extended up into the sky. Adrienne was unaware of this dangerous condition and was in the process of preparing to cover the story when she suddenly heard her driver and others start screaming for her to get out of the van. Adrienne hurriedly exited the van and as soon as her right foot touched the electrified ground, the electric current flowed through her body, causing her devastating injuries. The broadcasting company for which Adrienne worked had never given its employees training on how to avoid electrocutions or electrical burns during usage of ENG equipment, nor did the company make its employees aware of any ENG emergency procedures to follow in the event an ENG van mast or antenna inadvertently contacted an overhead power line, which would electrify the van.

Construction Site Accidents

Floor Opening:. A 32-year-old plumber suffered multiple severe injuries when he fell 15 feet down through an unguarded floor opening at a construction site. Defendant general contractor's employees cut several holes in the concrete flooring to accommodate air conditioning ducts and a dumbwaiter. Defendant general contractor claimed to have covered the floor openings with plywood and nailed them onto the concrete floor.

On the afternoon of the accident, plaintiff was performing layout work in preparation for installing plumbing. The plaintiff was walking backwards, pulling out his tape measure when he stepped into the unguarded floor opening measuring approximately 30 inches by 30 inches. The plaintiff fell down 15 feet to the concrete floor below, smashing the left side of his body.

Plaintiff contended that the general contractor negligently failed to cover the floor opening, and failed to adequately secure the cover over the opening. The plaintiff further claimed that this was a violation of Cal-OSHA '1632 and gave rise to negligence per se. The plaintiff denied removing the cover.

During mediation, the plaintiff's employer's liability insurance carrier agreed to pay $1 million, and the defendant general contractor's insurance carrier agreed to pay $800,000.

Total Settlement of $1.8 million.

Concrete Hose Malfunctioned: Plaintiff, a 46-year-old laborer, was tending a concrete hose, pouring concrete into panels for tilt-up building construction. Suddenly, the concrete hose emitted compressed air and whipped around, striking the plaintiff and knocking him to the ground. The plaintiff sustained injuries to his spine, brain and shoulder as a result of the accident.

The plaintiff contended that this accident occurred because the defendants allowed the level of concrete in the pump hopper to get too low, thereby allowing air to be sucked into the pump cylinders and causing the compressed air explosion at the end of the hose. Additionally, plaintiff contended that foreign material such as asphalt or old concrete was negligently mixed in with the concrete, thus creating a momentary blockage in the pump and thereby contributing to the accident.

The case was settled through mediation for a total of $1.5 million.

Defective Highway

Our attorneys successfully resolved a multiparty, multiplaintiff case resulting in wrongful death to two different families. A 53-year-old tow truck driver, with a wife and two young children, died in a massive vehicular accident when his tow truck was struck and pushed out of control by a passing vehicle. Because of a defect in the upper highway, the tow truck was propelled up and over an inadequate barrier and onto both the northbound and southbound lanes of the highway below. The truck landed directly onto a vehicle, instantly killing the occupants and the tow truck driver himself. The case was settled against a public entity for an undisclosed confidential amount.

Failure to Install Guardrail

Our firm recovered a $12.5 million settlement in a single vehicle, run-off-the-road accident that left both plaintiffs quadriplegics. In June, 1994, a married couple in their late thirties drove their new Mazda Miata convertible up a steep, narrow, rural mountain road in Santa Clara County. A steep canyon borders the south side of the road.

When they reached the top of the road, the plaintiffs switched places so that the wife could experience driving the new car down the mountain's curvy roads. After maneuvering several curves, plaintiff approached a right-hand curve located about .6 miles down from the top when she lost control of the vehicle. The car spun out of control and left the roadway, plunging 160 feet down a steep embankment, coming to rest upside down at the bottom of the canyon.

Plaintiffs' attorney, Ronald Rouda, contended that for a modest investment, a guardrail would have prevented the vehicle from going over the steep drop-off that resulted in catastrophic injuries. Additionally, he argued that had there been proper warning signs, raised reflective pavement markers, and supplemental delineation outlining the curve, the curve would have been clear, and the danger of going over the steep drop-off avoided.

Pursuant to Government Code Section 830, plaintiffs contended that the county and the city were jointly and severally liable for the dangerous condition of public property. Following the settlement negotiations, attorneys for the county and city commented that the settlement was probably the largest settlement of a dangerous roadway case.

Pedestrian Accidents

Mowatt v. City of Los Angeles
$18,000,000. Mowatt v. City of Los Angeles, et al.

On the evening of September 23, 2002, plaintiff, 19-year-year old Alice Mowatt, a student from England who was visiting Los Angeles, was crossing Cahuenga Boulevard West at its intersection with Pilgrimage Boulevard. The intersection, near the Hollywood Bowl is T-shaped. The distance across Cahuenga is 60 feet. As Mowatt was crossing the fifth of six lanes of high-speed traffic, having gone nearly 53 feet of the way and walking within the crosswalk, she was struck by Antoly Shevtchenko, who was driving an SUV northbound on Cahuenga. Mowatt sued the City of Los Angeles and the State of California for failing to correct a dangerous condition, as well as Shevtchenko for negligent operation of a motor vehicle. Shevtchenko didn't dispute liability and settled for $175,000, including his policy limits of $100,000 and a personal contribution of $75,000. Meanwhile, the state denied liability but settled before trial for $1.5 million.

As to the City of Los Angeles, the city and state had actual notice of a dangerous condition, including the 55 mph speed limit on Cahuenga with no stop sign or traffic light. Additionally, an off-ramp from the freeway flowed directly into the intersection. The state had ownership and control over the intersection and put in the crosswalk in anticipation of pedestrian traffic. The city had the power to prevent, fix, or guard against the dangerous condition through traffic engineering improvements. The city had received letters and phone calls from citizens who thought the intersection was a danger to pedestrians and requesting an evaluation of its safety, but the city failed to act on these requests or bring them to the attention of the state.

At trial, the City of Los Angeles denied that the intersection was dangerous and argued that in the nine years preceding the accident, some 164 million cars went through the intersection and there were only two pedestrian accidents, both of which were caused by pedestrians who were not paying attention.

Plaintiff countered that the only reason there were not more accidents was that most pedestrians avoided the intersection because it was known to be dangerous. Mowatt, on the other hand, was not aware of the danger because she was a tourist, and she presumed it was safe because of the painted crosswalk.

Alice Mowatt sustained severe brain damage, a fractured lower jawbone, broken teeth and facial lacerations. Her brain injuries caused attention and concentration deficits, memory loss, as well as the loss of her senses of taste and smell. She underwent brain surgery to monitor the pressure buildup in her brain, and she also underwent oral and plastic surgeries. She spent 10 weeks in the hospital. She moved to an assisted living facility, and she will require accommodations permanently, as she needs assistance with daily tasks. As a result of the accident, Alice Mowatt was no longer able to function independently, such as travel to London or simply walk to the grocery store. Prior to the accident, Alice had planned to work in the tourism field after graduation at a prospective salary of about $30,000 per year plus benefits, but following the accident, she no longer was able to pursue this career. She sought past medical expenses of $1,608,000 and future medical expenses of $8,188,329, future lost earnings of $2,229,000 and an unspecified amount for pain and suffering.

Defense counsel contended that Alice Mowatt's condition had improved, and she was able to function more independently than alleged.

The jury found the city 20 percent at fault, the state 48 percent at fault, Shevtchenko 30 percent at fault and Mowatt 2 percent at fault. She was awarded $18,026,206.

Pedestrian v. Auto

The firm successfully resolved a case for $900,000 when a pedestrian was crossing a busy San Francisco street and was hit by a van being driven by an employee of a brokerage firm. Our client was attending a Stanley Kaplan education review class at Golden Gate University on the day of the accident. She crossed at an unmarked crosswalk where Jessie and First Street intersect. The driver of the van was proceeding in the lane marked "bus only" and was traveling at an unsafe speed for the area. Generally, the question of a pedestrian's negligence is determined by an assessment of whether the pedestrian exercised ordinary care under the circumstances. Although a pedestrian has a continuing duty to use Aordinary care, ordinary care does not impose the duty to look continuously in all directions at all times.

Child Struck by Motorcyclist

The firm successfully resolved a matter involving a four-year-old child who was struck by a motorcycle while crossing Folsom Street in an unmarked crosswalk at Mabinin Street. Four-year-old Samantha was in the stroller. The defendant was riding a motorcycle eastbound on Folsom and failed to yield the right-of-way to the pedestrians. The motorcycle slammed into the stroller and then fled the scene. Samantha was thrown 15 feet in the air and suffered facial lacerations, third-degree burns and multiple fractures.

Bicycle Accident

$1,700,000. We successfully resolved a case involving an 80-year-old cyclist who had been invited by a Caltrans employee to participate in a night ride across the Bay Bridge while it was closed for repairs. Plaintiff, at the time of the accident, was physically fit, vigorous and enthusiastic and cycled more than 100 miles per week. Plaintiff's bicycle became caught in an expansion joint causing his tire rim to become bent and his tire to go flat. As a result, he lost control and fell to the ground. When he fell, his helmet cracked and he was rendered unconscious, sustaining a severe traumatic brain injury. Alex has been left a triplegic. This tragic, preventable accident occurred because defendant failed to heed the warnings generated from its own prior studies of bikes on bridges that identified unprotected expansion joints as a hazard to bicyclists.

Truck Accident

$4,600,000. The firm garnered a settlement on the eve of trial for our client, Joanie, age 38 years, and her two young children, Russell, then age 10 years, and Ryan, then age five years, for the wrongful death of their husband/father, Rex, age 37 years. Rex was returning home from a business trip to Fresno, traveling northbound on I-5, when the defendant, a sleep deprived, inexperienced and improperly licensed truck driver, pulled out in front of him without warning and the car Rex was driving plowed into the 18-wheel tractor-trailer rig. Sanders was traveling on I-5 in San Joaquin County carrying a container bound for his employer's terminal in Oakland. At the time of this accident, Sanders was in the process of making an illegal U-turn from eastbound Highway 580 to head northbound on I-5 utilizing a gravel turn through in the wide median separating the two roads. The median was for official use only, and Jason's use of it was illegal. Rex was traveling within the 70 mph speed limit in the number one lane. The tractor-trailer rig was moving at less than 10 mph and was at a 45-degree angle to the road at impact. The big rig was blocking the shoulder to the west of lane number one, the number one lane, the number two lane and a portion of the number three lane. The rig was 60 feet long. The trailer and container were not equipped with important safety equipment that was intended to reduce the risk of this type of accident.

The defendant had slept for approximately three of the prior 36 hours, in gross violation of the legal limits set forth in the federal regulations. He admittedly falsified his driver's logbook and signed someone else's name to the freight manifest when he delivered a load that morning in Long Beach. He was ticketed that afternoon for speeding at 70 mph, 15 mph over the maximum speed limit for commercial motor vehicles.

Personal Injury/Wrongful Death
Tseyref v. Burlington Coat Factory

$225,000, plus waiver of lien, in Tseyref v. Burlington Coat Factory. Alla Tseyref was employed by Burlington Coat Factory as a sales clerk. On the day of the accident, she was assisting a co-worker in transferring clothing from a lower rack to an upper rack. The upper rack broke away from the wall. She fell while trying to escape the falling rack and clothing, fracturing her wrist and injuring her neck and back. The rack that fell had been installed approximately one and a half years earlier as part of the original construction when Burlington Coat Factory moved into its new store. The manufacturer of the rail system had entered into a subcontract with another company to install its product, the perimeter rail system, in the basement and first floor where Alla's accident occurred. Both the manufacturer and installer were paid a separate fee to supervise the installation of the perimeter rail system. Our expert concluded that the perimeter rail system was negligently screwed directly into the drywall instead of the metal studs. The firm settled her case for $225,000.

High Speed Police Chase Accident

$622,500 settlement in an uninsured personal injury/wrongful death case. An elderly couple, William and Willie, were taking a family friend to dinner for his birthday. Their 62-year-old son was driving his father's vehicle, with the entire family inside, into town for dinner. As they traveled through the streets of San Francisco, they approached the corner of Golden Gate Avenue at the intersection of Laguna Street. Suddenly, out of nowhere, a vehicle being chased by police ran a red light at the intersection and slammed forcefully into the passenger side of the elderly couple's vehicle. The force of this impact threw the father into the passenger window causing severe injuries. The vehicle ended up several feet to the left of its original location. The mother later died from injuries sustained in the accident and age-related causes. It was later determined that the vehicle that was being chased by the police had been rented and the driver did not have permission to drive the vehicle, which was prohibited by the rental contract, therefore, no insurance coverage was available from the car rental company.

Ski/Snowmobile Accident

$1,646,746 Settlement. We recently resolved a personal injury accident arising out of a collision with a snowmobile. A complaint was filed alleging negligence and recklessness against the rider of a snowmobile for injuries sustained while skiing as a guest at a ski resort. Gumer, then a 54-year-old contracts manager, was skiing at a safe speed and in a safe manner with his son when he was struck head-on by defendant's snowmobile coming up the hill. The snowmobile rider was traveling at an extremely high speed when he struck Gumer, who sustained injuries to his right leg and dislocated his left elbow.

Brain Injury

$3,600,000. The firm negotiated a settlement of a case involving a woman who sustained devastating brain injuries while being treated by the defendants for severe burn injuries. Sherri, a 32-year-old mother, while undergoing a prescribed dressing change in a room in the burn ICU known as the hydrotherapy room or tub room, was injured when each of the defendants' personnel failed to properly protect Sherri's airway, depriving her of sufficient oxygen resulting in brain damage. The case was successfully resolved with the hospital, the doctor and the medical group.

Burn Injury

$1,500,000 Settlement. We represented a 17-year-old teenage girl who suffered horrific burns to approximately 25 percent of her body. The teenager was driving a car that had recently had major repair work performed one month before the accident. These repairs were negligently and incompletely performed, thus setting the stage for the car to overheat and stall on the Bay Bridge. When the tow truck driver arrived, he turned the radiator cap on the overheated car causing boiling hot coolant to explode out of the coolant reservoir and spray the teenager who was standing nearby. The tow truck driver failed to advise our client to move away from the vehicle while removing the radiator cap. The case was successfully mediated with a result of $1.5 million.

The firm recovered a $1.5 million settlement in a third party action against an insurance company based on its affirmative action in managing, directing and controlling a hazard located on a property undergoing coverage litigation as a result of a fire that destroyed the home.

The home was located in a densely populated inner-city neighborhood full of children. Following the fire, a claims representative met with the homeowners to discuss the total loss of the dwelling and to make arrangements to demolish and rebuild the home. The insurance company immediately engaged its preferred contractor to perform temporary emergency repairs to the property, which included installing a temporary plywood cover over a swimming pool excavation that was under construction in the backyard at the time of the fire.

The house was to be rebuilt in eight to 12 months, however, when the insurance company disputed the homeowners' claim, protracted litigation ensued lasting over five years. The coverage litigation was finally resolved by arbitration in 1995. By the time a decision was rendered in favor of the insured, the temporary emergency repairs made to the property five years earlier were dilapidated. The insurance company failed to warn the insured that the protection undertaken to secure the property from hazards were only temporary.

Shortly thereafter, a small child playing on the temporary plywood barrier guarding the pool excavation fell through and suffered catastrophic brain injuries. The excavation was filled with stagnant groundwater and rainwater. Plaintiff's body was found in 5'10" of dark murky water. The insurance company was liable for the plaintiff's injuries based on its negligence in failing to warn of a dangerous condition.

SUV Accident - Underinsured Coverage

The firm successfully obtained a confidential settlement with an insurance company under their underinsured provisions for Benjamin, a then 21-year-old mechanical engineering student at Berkeley. Benjamin and his friends had spent the day enjoying the outdoors. When returning home, Benjamin's friend, Lance, was driving. Benjamin was in the backseat with his girlfriend and another female friend. Lance fell asleep at the wheel, and the SUV slid out of control, crashing through a call box and flipping onto its left side. Ben's injuries consisted of fracture of both of the bones in his left forearm, a fractured left femur and a significant closed head injury. His face had been fractured in multiple places, as well as his left clavicle and left first rib. X-rays showed contusions to his left lung. As severe as his physical injuries were, of greater concern were his head injuries. His neurological disorders consisted of severe cognitive impairment, including decreased short-term memory, processing speed and initiation and a flat affect.

Negligence Entrustment of Vehicle

The firm represented the parents of a young woman, who was killed, and her brother, who survived but suffered serious personal injuries, when the son of a famous television producer deliberately drove his parents' car into a group of students at the University of Santa Barbara. The firm was able to prove that the parents of the driver had negligently entrusted their car to their son, who had a history of violence. The driver was found not guilty by reason of insanity in the criminal case arising from the incident. The case settled for a confidential sum.

Medical Malpractice

Kaiser Arbitration Award

$400,000 arbitration award for wrongful death and negligent infliction of emotional distress. On December 16, 2004, 22-year-old Angelica was scheduled for an induction of labor on her due date representing 40 completed weeks of pregnancy. Angelica was a patient of Kaiser Permanente, and was a high-risk patient because she was a type one, class C, insulin dependent diabetic, diagnosed at age 10.

Three days earlier, December 13, 2004, Angelica had been examined by a Kaiser nurse practitioner. She performed a nonstress test that demonstrated a healthy baby boy. Angelica's cervix was long, closed and showed no signs of going into labor. As a result, an induction of labor was confirmed for December 16, 2004, her due date.

Angelica phoned labor and delivery at 5:30 p.m. to receive instructions regarding her induction of labor. She reported to the phone nurse that the baby was not moving as well. Kaiser disputed that Angelica conveyed this information. The nurse she spoke with advised her that there were no beds available, and asked her to call back at 9 p.m.

Angelica called back at 8:50 p.m. Again, she told the phone nurse that the baby was not moving as well. Kaiser again disputes that Angelica conveyed this information. The phone nurse told Angelica that there were still no beds available. The nurse offered to call her when there was room in labor and delivery.

Between 10:00 p.m. and 10:30 p.m., Angelica was contacted and told to come to labor and delivery. Angelica arrived at the hospital between 10:45 and 11:00 p.m. She was placed on the fetal monitor that revealed a fetal heart rate of 130 to 140 with minimal variability. At 11:45 p.m. a significant late deceleration occurred, and the staff called for an emergency cesarean delivery. At 12:25 a.m., on December 17, 2004, baby Jesus was born. There was an initial heartbeat, but none by one minute. Baby Jesus died just after his birth.

On Angelica's behalf, the firm contended that Kaiser doctors failed to meet the standard of care because they failed to deliver her baby by 39 completed weeks in light of her type one, class C, insulin dependent diabetic status. Further, it was contended that Kaiser breached the standard of care by failing to inform Angelica of the risks of delivering past 39 completed weeks, and failing to have a discussion with Angelica regarding the risks and benefits related to the timing of delivery, and spontaneous labor versus induction of labor. The arbitrator agreed that Kaiser failed to secure an informed consent to proceed to 40 completed weeks of pregnancy, and awarded $250,000 to the parents for the wrongful death of Jesus and $150,000 to Angelica for negligent infliction of emotional distress.

Jane Doe v. The Breast Center, Mills Peninsula Hospital

This case involved the medical negligence of a mammography technician during the administration of a mammogram. The plaintiff was referred for a mammogram. At that time, she had just completed chemotherapy following a modified radical mastectomy and breast reconstruction as a result of breast cancer. The plaintiff informed the technician at the time of the mammogram that she had a saline breast implant on the right side. She also informed the technician that she felt uncomfortable having her right breast photographed due to the recent breast reconstruction. The technician ignored the plaintiff's concerns, despite the fact that there was no breast tissue to photograph in her right breast. During the procedure, the right breast was squeezed so tightly that the plaintiff's implant was damaged, and second surgery was required to replace the implant. The case was settled through mediation for a confidential sum.

Failure to Monitor

$1,534,000. Medical malpractice/wrongful death. Plaintiff, age 44 years, suffered from severe back pain. His pain had been so severe that he had endured back surgeries in 1994, 1995 and 1998. Over the years, Plaintiff had been prescribed numerous medications to help control his pain including OxyContin and Actiq. Unfortunately, he also had become dependent on prescription pain medications. In order to get his life back, Chris began looking for a safe inpatient detoxification program that would assist him with his addiction. He looked into several addiction centers across the nation and discovered a relatively new procedure that was being performed at a number of facilities across the country known as ultra rapid opiate detoxification (UROD).

The difference between typical treatment programs and UROD is that UROD offers the possibility of breaking the addiction cycle in 24 to 72 hours as compared to the two to three-week stay at a clinic because all of the withdrawal symptoms would be controlled with anesthesia. Chris found the most attractive of these programs to be one offered by the Waismann Institute in Beverly Hills. When Chris called the Waismann Institute, he was told that if he underwent the procedure, it would occur at the Roe Hospital and Medical Center under the care of a doctor trained in the Waismann method. Chris had been told that the Waismann's had invented the procedure. Chris underwent several tests, including heart stress tests, to ensure that he could tolerate the procedure. He passed the tests, and the procedure was scheduled. After the procedure, Chris was placed in ICU where he was monitored. Despite the fact that his heart rate hovered in the 40s and low 50s, plaintiff was transferred to the general ward, where he was not properly monitored. On January 21, 2004, plaintiff's heart rate spiked to 110 and then crashed to 52 only two hours later. No one contacted the physicians. The nurses' notes reflect that at 8:00 a.m., plaintiff was complaining of nausea and shortness of breath. He also had diarrhea. It was clear from these notes that plaintiff was suffering from typical withdrawal symptoms, symptoms that UROD was designed to prevent. At 8:45 a.m., a nurse's assistant helped Chris wash himself and got him back into bed. Fifteen minutes later, an LVN found Chris unresponsive. A code blue was called, and Chris was pronounced dead 45 minutes later. Had he been properly monitored, Chris would, in all medical probability, have survived the procedure.

Dental Malpractice

$350,000 total settlement. The firm settled a series of dental malpractice/fraud cases against a single dentist involving nine different patients. The cases involved negligent dental work as well as improper billing practices and fraudulent inducement.

$50,000. The firm successfully settled a dental malpractice action relating to poorly placed dental implants on plaintiff's front teeth, as well as inappropriate and negligent gum surgery, which had caused receding gums and the need for future treatment.

Prescription Error

$500,000 settlement in a wrongful death case. Jennifer, a wife and mother of three young children, had a history of suffering from migraine headaches. One evening, she was suffering from a debilitating migraine, and her husband took her to Novato Hospital for treatment. The attending physician, who had previously treated Jennifer, prescribed a new medication for pain and ordered six milligrams of a powerful narcotic, which was three times the recommended dosage. Jennifer was discharged from the hospital 11 minutes after receiving this new medication. Her husband drove her home, and Jennifer went to bed. Her husband found Jennifer the next morning. An autopsy determined that the most likely cause of death was an excessive amount of the narcotic drug.

Cancer Misdiagnosis

$1,100,000 settlement against Kaiser. When she was 43 years old, Sandy was seen by a physician at UCLA who noted a density in the right lower left area of her lungs and some questionable granulomas in an MRI and chest X-ray taken of her. The physician gave the films to Sandy and urged her to be seen by a pulmonologist to evaluate them. Sandy subsequently consulted with a pulmonologist at Kaiser Oakland. The pulmonologist reassured Sandy that even in light of her family's history of lung cancer, she was fine and there was no need for any follow-ups.

Three years later, Sandy began coughing and had a prolonged period of malaise and illness. Chest X-rays taken at the time revealed that Sandy now had a large tumor in her lung, exceeding five centimeters in size. The tumor was in the exact location of the prior density that appeared in the earlier films, but Sandy's cancer was now in stage four, and her prognosis was grim. Had the cancer been caught when she was 43, it would have been operable and she would have had an 85-95 percent chance of survival. The firm resolved Sandy's medical malpractice case, her husband's loss of consortium cause of action, and the future wrongful death action, in addition to obtaining compensation for future lost earnings. Sandy died when she was 48 years old.

Dog Bite

Our attorneys settled a case involving a minor who was bitten by a neighbor's dog leaving a permanent scar on the young girl's face. The owners had previous knowledge of the dogs' aggressive behavior leading to settlement on behalf of plaintiffs.

Our firm negotiated a settlement of $355,000 for a client in a dog bite case. Hope, a 39-year-old female residing in Danville, California, sustained serious disfigurements to her face when a one-year-old boxer that she was trying to aid at the time lashed out and bit a large portion of the right side of her nose. California Civil Code ' 3342 provides for strict liability on the dog's owner when the dog bites a person.

Elevator Shaft Injury

$7,000,000 settlement. Christine, a 31-year-old design principal, was severely injured when she fell 18 feet down an empty elevator shaft. The building where the accident occurred was a 48-unit residential apartment building that was marketed to our client and other prospective tenants as executive style suites. It was a refurbished old San Francisco apartment building containing the original Otis elevators installed in 1916. The elevator had been maintained by the same company for 11 years prior to the accident. Christine opened the lobby elevator hall door and stepped in, but no elevator car was present.

Significantly, Christine's accident occurred just one week after the resident building manager of the apartments narrowly escaped the same fate when he too opened the right lobby elevator door and almost fell down the elevator shaft. After experiencing this near miss into the abyss, the building manager reported to the maintenance company that the hall door of the right lobby elevator could be opened without the elevator car being present at the landing. The maintenance company dispatched one of its service technicians to the apartments that afternoon. The service technician inspected the right lobby elevator door, but could not duplicate the problem and made no repairs to it. Before leaving the building, the service technician verbally told the resident building manager that the elevator door interlocks were obsolete and need to be replaced with new locks. The service technician testified that the building manager's response was that upgrades were not in the budget. However, the building manager denied having made such a comment to the service technician.

The next day, the maintenance company mailed a repair proposal to the resident building manager reminding him that, sometimes the hall door can be opened without the car being at that floor, which is extremely dangerous. The resident building manager received the repair proposal the next day. The repair proposal requested the resident building manager's authorization for the installation of new door locks on each floor of the right passenger elevator for a total cost of $2,900. The resident building manager set the repair proposal aside, went on vacation and gave no instructions to anyone to follow up on the repair proposal. The resident building manager did not alert any tenants or the acting building manager about the extremely dangerous condition described in the repair proposal.

Neither defendant made any effort to follow up on the repair proposal even though both had actual or constructive knowledge that a dangerous condition existed that could injure a passenger. Neither defendant deactivated the elevator or warned about its use until after Christine's fall.

Discovery revealed that the building owner and the elevator contractor had known for years that the door locks were worn and obsolete. Despite the worn and obsolete condition of the door locks, the building owner did not authorize the funds to upgrade the right passenger elevator.

During the investigation that followed the accident, it was determined that Christine's accident was caused by a combination of a sagging door hanger track, loose hoistway entry door and worn door interlocks. A couple of weeks after the repair proposal had been made, a state elevator inspector was able to duplicate the problem that the resident building manager had reported to the maintenance company and concluded that the electrical contacts in the door lock were able to make a circuit, thereby calling the elevator away from a floor even though the door was not positively locked shut, a violation of California elevator safety orders.

Aviation Accident

Hot Air Balloon Crash. We represented the surviving daughter of a couple who were killed in a hot air balloon crash when the gas tank on board the hot air balloon exploded after the balloon struck a high-voltage power line. This was a products liability case against the manufacturer and seller of the hot air balloon and the gas tank. Through extensive testing, we were prepared to prove that the fuel tank should have been protected by an insulation shield that would eliminate or reduce the risk of a tank explosion in the event of a power line strike by a hot air balloon. Rather than risk a jury verdict, the defendants agreed to settle for a confidential sum that included a large immediate cash payment with substantial annual cash payments continuing for the lifetime of the daughter of the decedents.

Train Accident

Our attorneys recovered $2.3 million on behalf of a railroad worker. Plaintiff, a 35-year-old, was switching railroad tanker cars in the course of his employment with a contractor working for the railroad when he was struck by an approaching train and dragged over 60 feet. Plaintiff sued the contractor and its parent company alleging common carrier liability under the Federal Employers Liability Act (FELA), 45 U.S.C. '51 et. seq. and the Safety Appliance Act (SAA), 49 U.S.C. '1 et. seq., and negligent hiring and training of employees.

Plaintiff alleged that he had been inappropriately hired and promoted because he had never worked for the railroad and had received inadequate training. Additionally, plaintiff contended that the accident was caused by inadequate communication by co-workers, and his co-workers' failure to keep a proper lookout and follow his instructions. The case settled prior to trial and the defendant's insurance carrier funded the $2.3 million settlement.

Product Liability

The firm obtained a successful six-figure settlement against a manufacturer and distributor of infant carriers. In that case, a newborn slipped out the side of the infant carrier sustaining skull fractures. Several similar accidents were uncovered in the U.S.A. The terms of the settlement were confidential. The design of the infant carrier was changed to prevent future injuries.

$1.8 Million Dollar Settlement. Loss of an eye, LaPlante v. Chicago Pneumatic.

Premises Liability 

Jane Doe et al. v. Marin General Hospital

Plaintiff suffered severe second degree burns to her genital area in an accident involving a hygenique surgigator. Shortly after giving birth to a baby girl, the plaintiff was assisted to the bathroom to clean her genital area. The plaintiff was still under the effects of the epidural anesthesia she had received in anticipation of delivery. The plaintiff was instructed to use a "warm water" shower type device called a hygenique surgigator to clean herself. As instructed, she sprayed her genital area with a hand held spray device and cleaned herself. A few hours later, as her anesthesia wore off, the plaintiff discovered that her "crotch was on fire," and that she had suffered severe burn injuries to her vaginal and perineal areas. As a result of the burn injuries she sustained following childbirth, the plaintiff was transferred to the St. Francis Hospital burn unit where she was treated for 12 days. The product liability/premises liability action was brought against the manufacturer of the surgigator device, Andermac, and Marin General Hospital, the owner of the product, and the premises where the accident occurred. The case was settled at a mediation on behalf of the plaintiff for physical injury and emotional distress damages. The plaintiff's husband's emotional distress case was also settled through mediation.

Slip and Fall Cases

$1 Million Dollar Settlement. Slip and fall accident, Reid v. Shorenstein.

$6.9 Million Dollar Verdict. Slip and fall case in 1992, Stewart v. American Poultry.

Reid v. Shorenstein Company, L.P.

Plaintiff slipped and fell on a wet tile walkway in front of the defendant's premises located at 1300 Clay Street in Oakland. Mr. Reid suffered multiple severe injuries to his right leg that resulted in three surgeries, and left him disabled after the accident. Mr. Reid was employed by a courier service. At the time of the accident, he entered 1300 Clay street to file some papers with the bankruptcy court. As he was exiting the building on this rainy day, he took 2-3 steps and slipped on the wet tile outside of the building. He fell heavily on his right leg. Mr. Reid fractured his patella, and broke pre-existing hardware that had been in his femur since 1981. The defendant, Shorenstein Company, had actual knowledge prior to this incident that its tiled walkways throughout the Oakland City Center were extremely slippery and dangerous when wet. Through extensive discovery, plaintiff's counsel discovered that there had been over 50 documented slip and fall accidents on wet tile, and 4 previous lawsuits against the defendant. Additionally, the co-efficient of friction tests performed on the walkway were dangerously low documenting an unsafe walking surface. The case was settled at a private mediation for $1,000,000.

Go to Top

Nursing Home Negligence/Elder Abuse

Nursing Home Understaffing

Our firm negotiated a settlement of $2.9 million in an elder abuse case involving nursing home negligence. The case involved an 80-year-old gentleman, Rossie, who suffered from Parkinson's disease and other health issues. Rossie was left unattended in his wheelchair to smoke a cigarette. A short time later, Rossie was discovered in his wheelchair engulfed in flames. Once extinguished, Rossie was rushed to the hospital with 20 to 25 percent of his body severely burned.

The nursing homes' chronic understaffing resulted in Rossie's neglect. Neglect of the elderly is specifically defined in Welfare and Institutions Code '15610.57. Rossie's injuries were primarily caused by the defendant nursing home's reckless neglect. The risk of death or serious injury to Rossie while smoking unsupervised was readily apparent, as the defendant had been warned by Rossie's family that Rossie enjoyed smoking, but required supervision when doing so because of the Parkinson's disease.

Employment Law

Race Discrimination

The firm recently settled a case involving the wrongful termination of an African-American plaintiff because of his race. Plaintiff was terminated after experiencing a pattern of harassing and discriminatory conduct at a well-known national company. The case was settled shortly before trial.

Gender Discrimination

$140,000 settlement in a case where our female client was constructively discharged from her employment after repeatedly experiencing hostile remarks, anger, and disparate treatment from her male supervisor that was severe and pervasive.

Slip and Fall Down Apartment Stairs

$200,000 settlement: On Thursday, December 1, 2005, the plaintiff, a 47-year-old computer software developer, left his apartment located in Pacifica, California. It was a typical misty gray morning as Bruce descended the outdoor exterior stairway from his apartment. He was on his way to work as a computer data storage company engineer. As the plaintiff descended the stairs, he was near the bottom when his left foot slipped out from under him. He lost his balance, but then managed to catch himself before falling by grabbing the 2x4 guardrail on his left. In the process of grabbing the guardrail, Bruce wrenched his body severely re-injuring his left shoulder. At the time, plaintiff was approximately five months post-surgery for a left rotator cuff tear. As a result of slipping on his apartment stairs, Bruce re-injured his left shoulder requiring a second shoulder surgery to re-repair his left rotator cuff. The left shoulder re-injury left the plaintiff with a weak left shoulder as well as numbness and tingling in his left arm. Additionally, Bruce suffered a herniated disc at L5-S1 and underwent a disectomy.

Plaintiff's counsel successfully argued that defendant and owner of the apartment complex painted the exterior apartment stairways just 5-6 weeks before the plaintiff's accident. The paint was not a slip-resistant paint, and defendant failed to place skid-resistant strips on the stairs. Additionally, defendant was on notice of a prior fall.