 |  |
Over the years, our firm has achieved a level of proficiency that has benefited our clients in many noteworthy respects. Noteworthy examples include: Successful summary judgments avoid the unnecessary wasting of time and expense of further litigation and trial. Whenever possible, we attempt to obtain summary judgments on all or at least portions of the lawsuit. Often, we are successful in this regard. This includes, among others, plaintiffs who have committed arson or staged accidents. - Take-nothing verdicts
- Awards of monetary sanctions
As one example, in a "staged" slip-and-fall case tried by firm partners, the judge awarded our client $25,000 in attorneys fees and the jury awarded our client thousands of dollars for fraud claims-handling expenses. Of note, this is the only case to our knowledge in which both the judge and jury made independent fraud findings and monetary awards in the same lawsuit (i.e., one pursuant to common law fraud elements and the other under the Rules of Procedure prohibiting the filing an unmeritorious lawsuit which is brought for harassment purposes only.) - Victories vs. Arsonists in at least ten arson cases - three since October 2003.
- Affirmative judgments on the issue of concealment/misrepresentation and/or "no theft occurred" in several theft claim lawsuits.
- Favorable case law made:
- Crystal City Indep. School Dist. v. Providence Lloyds Ins. Co., 877 S.W. 2d 872 (Tex. App. - San Antonio 1994, no writ): In 1993 we tried this Southwest Texas case and successfully upheld on appeal our client's dispute with a school district regarding an appraisal having to do with an arson fire that caused more than a million dollars in damages. The Court of Appeals decision in our favor is often cited as a key case to outline how appraisal is properly used in Texas.
- Luker v. St. Paul Guardian Ins. Co., 801 S.W.2nd 614 (Tex. App. - Texarkana 1990, no writ): Although we did not receive a jury finding of intentional destruction by the named insured, this case in East Texas ended by creating some favorable law for our side of the docket regarding bad faith and was a case much cited throughout the 1990s until the law changed again in 1997
- Lundy v. Allstate Ins. Co., 774 S.W.2d 352 (Tex. App. - Beaumont, 1989, no writ): This Southeast Texas case, tried in Orange County, created favorable law regarding the admissibility of opinion expert testimony in arson cases and is now cited in jurisdictions other than Texas.
- Meshkaty v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co.: This Dallas case, which was not appealed to the court of appeals, involved jury questions on the technical requirements of a denial ab initio (back to the beginning) pursuant to the "concealment/fraud" clause, which questions were all answered in our client's favor. The jury found in favor of our counterclaim seeking recoupment for the carrier's expenses and fees, including attorneys fees, back to the time this fraudulent, Persian carpets claim was initially filed. A judgment was granted against the insured in favor of State Farm for those fees and expenses.
Although past accomplishments do not guarantee future results, we believe that they do reflect our tenacity, innovative litigation strategies, and enduring dedication to protecting our clients.
| |
