Maynard v. Fisher Roofing, et.al., No. CV2000-010846 (tried to a jury September, 2004, five-week trial):

This class action construction defect case was a multiple dwelling that is commonly referred to as the "second" class action construction defect case actually tried in Arizona. The lawsuit was brought by California attorneys who used experts from the State of California in various areas. The general contractor was sued by the plaintiffs and then, initiated a third-party action against various subcontractors. The demand at one point exceeded $8 million. The total jury verdict was in the area of $450,000. Our law firm defended one of the roofing contractors. Plaintiffs put on expert evidence of approximately $1.2 million in roofing damages. The total jury verdict for roofing was approximately $100,000.

Popevis v. Diversified Roofing, No. CV2000-006709 (tried to a jury February, 2004: six-week trial):

This class-action construction defect case is the first trial known to be tried in Arizona as a class-action construction defect lawsuit. It was brought by California attorneys who used experts from the State of California in the areas of soils, structural engineering, architectural, plumbing and HVAC. The general contractor was sued (Beazer Homes), and the defendant then initiated a third-party action for all of the alleged claimed defective areas made by the plaintiff class. At the conclusion of the class certification, only 276 homeowners of the 365 original homeowners were members of the class. A $28 million demand, which ultimately was reduced to $14 million prior to trial, resulted in a total jury verdict of $750,000. Our law firm defended the roofing contractor who plaintiffs put on evidence of a $1.4 million portion of the total damages. The total jury verdict included $89,500 attributable to the roofing contractor. This roofing contractor was responsible only for the shingles and underlayment and flashing in and around the roofs. This six-week jury trial involved approximately twelve attorneys on behalf of the various defendants. The defendant roofing company had offered $90,000 to settle the case prior to the start of the trial. The $89,500 portion of the verdict attributable to the roofing company was comprised of $80,000 for touch-up/tune-up and $9,500 for various ceiling stains allegedly arising from leakage in various roofs from short underlayment or loose shingles. The plaintiffs put on evidence that some of the shingles on the sample roofs were improperly attached and that the underlayment did not go all the way to the edges of each roof. The defendants put on proof that no portions of the roof sheathing appeared to be damaged.

Smith v. American Park 'N Swap, No. CV98-003983B (tried to a jury November, 2003: one-week trial):

This "mode-of-operation" case was tried after an appeal and remand, followed by a mistrial as a result of plaintiff's counsel's conduct upon remand of the new trial. The case was tried on a "mode-of-operation" theory. There was no notice of any alleged dangerous condition. The plaintiff, in her seventies, sustained a severely-fractured elbow which rendered her a "one-arm" woman, and resulted in a complete elbow replacement following four surgeries for the shattered elbow. She allegedly fell when a vendor in a truck was allowed to move its vehicle during swap meet shopping hours. There were approximately 16,000 patrons on the premises while the truck was allowed to move through pedestrian walkways. There was no contact by the plaintiff with the moving vehicle. The plaintiff allegedly fell over a large patio-style umbrella which was protruding from a vendor space as she attempted to walk past the slow-moving truck. The plaintiffs had alleged that the walkways were not wide enough for vehicles and pedestrians which would require contact, or at least conflict. The defendants' representatives agreed that it was a hazardous condition. However, it was something that rarely occurred and was in essence a violation of the written policies and procedures. This seven-day jury trial resulted in an award for the plaintiff in the amount of $600,000, and the plaintiff's spouse $300,000, with a finding that the plaintiff was 20% at fault, resulting in a net award of $720,000 ($480,000 to the injured wife and $240,000 to the husband on a loss of consortium claim). This case is presently on appeal based upon a jury instruction which required that defendants guard against a mode of operation which allows for dangerous conditions that regularly arise. The defendants argued that it should only be responsible for a mode of operation that was "unreasonably" dangerous.

LaCondo/Kauss v. Plaza Healthcare, No. PB 2002-002119 (tried to a jury September, 2003: 10-day trial):

This wrongful death, nursing home negligence case was brought under the Arizona Elder Abuse and Neglect statute. It was the second trial in the history of the State of Arizona brought under the statute that actually went to a jury trial. The decedent had been involved in a single-vehicle accident and sustained bilateral subdural hematomas, requiring a ventricle shunt and 21 days of hospitalization. The decedent, who was on a mechanical ventilator, was then released to the nursing home. The defendant nursing home continued to treat the decedent after the initial hospitalization. The decedent was then sent back to the hospital to undergo a gastrostomy feeding tube placement. The doctor who performed the gastrostomy was alleged to have misplaced the tube so that it was left out of the stomach. The decedent was sent back to the nursing home and was fed through the misplaced feeding tube. The autopsy revealed that the decedent died from acute peritonitis from the misplaced feeding tube, and the plaintiffs alleged that the nursing staff fell below the standard of care in failing to recognize the feeding tube was not properly inserted into the decedent's stomach. Also, the nursing staff was accused of failing to timely address the respiratory distress and failing to properly document the file. Experts from both sides were called in the fields of nursing standards of care, neurological, a gerontologist, document examiners, radiological gastro-interventional experts, as well as a CPA. Punitive damages were alleged under the statute. Plaintiff had made an $8.6 million pretrial demand. After plaintiff made closing arguments, the case settled for $850,000. The defendants were ordered to make their closing arguments, and the Court allowed the jury to deliberate without knowing about the settlement. On the second day of deliberations, the jury was summoned back into the courtroom where it revealed that it would have returned a verdict for no more than $100,000. The case was forced into settlement because of letters sent by the defendant nursing home private counsel, demanding settlement within policy limits to avoid running the risk of an assignment of claims to the plaintiff for any excess judgment.

Marquez v. Burger King, No. CV2001-018893 (tried to a jury August, 2003: two-day trial):

This personal injury-premises liability case was brought by a 38-year-old automotive parts and service employee who alleged that, as he was standing in line at the defendant's fast-food restaurant, he was struck in the eye by a piece of plastic which had shattered when an employee, in the course and scope of her employment, banged it against a counter in an attempt to shake off water. It had just been removed from a dishwasher and it cracked upon being banged on the counter. Plaintiff alleged he had been struck in the eye by a piece of the plastic tray and that as a result of being struck in the eye, he sustained a corneal abrasion. Plaintiff further alleged that the foreign body accelerated the development of a cataract which decreased his vision. Experts in the field of ophthalmology were brought in to testify. This two-day jury trial resulted in a defense verdict.

Van Zee v. Genuine Auto Parts, et. al., No. CV1999-012747 (tried to a jury June, 2003: two-week trial):

This was a wrongful death action for a 29-year old helicopter pilot working for the armed forces and stationed at Fort Huachuca. The accident took place between Defendants' truck, which was making a wide right turn into a business establishment, and plaintiff's motorcycle, which was attempting to pass on the right. Plaintiff was survived by a wife, and two parents. The verdict was in favor of the plaintiff, assessing $1.5 million to each parent and $2.8 million for the surviving spouse. The matter is presently on appeal for a number of reasons, including: (1) jurors were excused by the Jury Commissioner clerks without filling out required forms and without a required order from the court, which is alleged to be a constitutional defect; (2) the trial judge mentioned "insurance" and insurance-related matters on 92 occasions during voir dire; and (3) various acts of misconduct on the part one of the plaintiffs in connection with inter-relationships with the jurors.

Lute v. Madison, U.S. District Court, for the District of Arizona, No. CIV 98-998-PHX-JAT/CIV 98-1794-PHX-JAT (consolidated); February, 2003:

Mr. Lute sustained tremendous bodily injuries when he was almost cut in half by a bulldozer as he was standing behind his truck. He sued a number of people, including Madison. The matter was prepared for trial. Mr. Lute had medical bills of more than $1,000,000 and future medical bills of $4,000,000. Future loss of wages was $2,000,000. Moments before trial, the case was settled, with this firm (on behalf of Madison) paying $450,000.

Prassas v. National Propane, No. CV1999-00461 (tried to a jury February-April, 2003: eight-week trial):

Wrongful death action filed by wife, mother and three children of decedent, Thomas Prassas, age 40. Mr. Prassas was blown up when he flipped a switch on an underground cellar that was constructed in his back yard at his request. Mr. Prassas did not get a permit and made it clear that no one else working on the job was to have a permit. During trial, defendant National Propane offered $2,000,000. Plaintiff's lowest demand was $7,000,000. The trial lasted eight weeks. Future lost wages were approximately $4.7 million, and the jury's verdict, as to damages, was as follows: Diane Prassas (wife) $7,000,000; Ryan Prassas $500,000; Daniel Prassas $500,000; Kristina Prassas $500,000; and Elaine Chipman (mother) $50,000. As to comparative fault, the jury's verdict against parties and non-parties was as follows: Thomas Prassas 28%; National Propane 14%; Dumler 28%; Ron Drye 19%; Lowell Pratt 9%; Catfish Excavation 0%; and Grogan Electric 2%. The total amount against National Propane (represented by this firm) was $1,197,000.

Valdez v. Philip Services and Saewert, No. CV2000-006204 (tried to a jury March, 2003: one-week trial):

Mr. Saewert was employed by Philip Services, driving a large truck through a construction zone at a very slow rate of speed. Mr. Valdez was placed as a laborer on the line dividing the construction zone and the one-way lane of travel through the construction zone. Immediately before impact, Mr. Valdez stepped out with his left foot, and the Saewert vehicle ran over Mr. Valdez's left foot. The accident caused approximately a 50 percent amputation of the left foot. Past specials were approximately $150,000. Future specials were approximately $300,000. Defendants Philips/Saewert had filed a Rule 68 offer of judgment in the amount of $50,000. The verdict was $1,000,000 for plaintiff; 1% assessed against Philips/Saewert; 4% against plaintiff; and 95% against plaintiff's employer, who was not a party to the case, but who was listed as a non-party. This firm's client was responsible for $10,000 of the $1 million verdict.

Johnson v. AT Services, No. CV2001-090918 (tried to a jury January, 2003: approximately one-plus week):

Wrongful death case where Mr. Johnson, age 50, was killed on Interstate 17. Defendant's driver had pulled over and backed up to assist a disabled vehicle occupied by Mr. Johnson and his friend. Mr. Johnson was out of the vehicle, and defendant's driver, Espinosa, lost control, causing Mr. Johnson to run out onto the freeway where he was hit by a vehicle and killed instantly, leaving a wife and a teenage daughter. A directed verdict was granted in favor of AT Systems, the employer. The jury rendered a verdict in favor of Mrs. Johnson against Espinosa (who would not attend the trial) in the amount of $1,000,000, and in favor of decedent's daughter in the amount of $500,000. One percent comparative fault was assessed against plaintiff.

Tam v. Graham; and Lee v. Graham, No. CV99-15476 (consolidated); tried to a jury October, 2002: three-week trial):

This was a vehicular accident where Mr. Tam and Mr. Lee were on North 7th Avenue in Phoenix, Arizona, with their disabled vehicle. It was approximately 1:00 in the morning, and Mr. Tsosie had recently left Graham Central Station (Graham) after drinking many beers and shots at "Nickel Beer Night." Mr. Tsosie collided with the rear of the disabled vehicle and spun to the left, striking Mr. Tam and Mr. Lee. Mr. Lee was killed, and a wrongful death action was brought on his behalf. Mr. Tam sustained a brain injury that was essentially totally disabling. Prior to trial, offers were made in the $200,000 to $250,000 range to each plaintiff, and immediately before trial started, the attorneys for plaintiff Tam accepted $225,000 in full settlement. The case proceeded to trial on the Lee wrongful death claim. Mr. Tsosie's blood-alcohol was in the 2.2 to 2.4 range and all of his alcohol was consumed at Graham. After a two to three-week trial, and immediately before final argument, counsel for Lee approached defense counsel and the Lee wrongful death claim was settled for $265,000.

Cashway Concrete adv. Katherine Seaton, No. CV98-22795 (tried to a jury December, 2001: one-and-a-half-week trial):

This lawsuit arose from the claims made by the Estate of Katherine Seaton, a 72-year-old volunteer for the American Red Cross. The Seaton Estate sued the American Red Cross and Cashway Concrete. Katherine Seaton died five months after a high-impact collision between an American Red Cross van in which she was riding as a passenger and the rear end of a stopped cement truck. Our client had stopped its cement truck in the middle of the roadway in a rural setting. The Red Cross van made contact at approximately 65 miles per hour. Ms. Seaton incurred broken bones, head injuries and internal organ damage as a result of the collision. The seat belt defense was not accepted by the court because of the large amount of intrusion into the Red Cross van. The American Red Cross defended the case by blaming the cement truck driver for stopping the vehicle without flashers and for failing to pull off the side of the road where there existed a 30-foot dirt shoulder with ample room to safely come to a stop. The jury concluded that the American Red Cross was the sole cause of the accident and awarded $500,000 compensatory damages on behalf of the plaintiffs. Cashway was assessed zero fault for causing the accident by a verdict of 8-0.

Leonhardt v. Garcia and Southwest Ambulance, No. CV98-91690 (tried to a jury June 19 through July 3, 2001: two-and-a-half-week trial):

On August 8, 1996, plaintiff Jennifer Leonhardt was driving her vehicle southbound at a large intersection in Mesa, Arizona, in the process of making a left turn to go eastbound. At the same time, Joseph Fierros was going northbound in the curb lane at a rate of speed in excess of the speed limit of 40 miles per hour. Mr. Fierros also violated a stop light. As he entered the intersection, he was going approximately 43 to 48 miles per hour, and he collided almost head-on with the Leonhardt vehicle, who was going approximately 20 miles per hour as she was completing her left turn. The force of the impact stopped the Leonhardt vehicle, immediately spun it to the left 180 degrees and caused it to rotate in a large partial circle for approximately 135 feet. After this accident, Mesa paramedics arrived, put a soft collar on Jennifer Leonhardt's neck, put her on a spine board, applied a headblock (which is a cardboard box) over her head, and applied three-inch tape across the forehead of the headblock onto the spine board, and they also applied three-inch tape across the chin area of the headblock onto the spine board. Ms. Leonhardt was then taped and strapped to the spine board and the gurney and placed in a Southwest ambulance being driven by Mr. Garcia. Mr. Garcia drove for approximately one-quarter mile and entered the next large intersection on a red light, after stopping before entering the intersection. He moved out toward the middle of the intersection and either stopped or slowed while all vehicles stopped at the intersection. One vehicle, being driven by Heather Hurst, did not stop. It was going 40 miles per hour in a 35-mile-an-hour zone. It collided with the right rear of the ambulance, causing a flat tire and minor damage. After this accident, Ms. Leonhardt was Air-Evac'ed to Scottsdale Memorial Hospital, a Level-1 facility, where she was X-rayed, found to have a fractured sternum and a fractured left clavicle. Approximately 45 minutes after she arrived at the hospital, she started having problems with her left side and eventually had a stroke, was sent to surgery, had a portion of her brain removed and was diagnosed as having a dissected right carotid artery. Plaintiff filed suit against Southwest Ambulance and their driver, Mr. Garcia. Damages alleged by plaintiff were approximately $1.1 million in lost wages and within a range of $6 million to $13 million in future lost healthcare. Motions in limine prior to trial by defendant brought the future healthcare down to the $6 million to $8 million range. Plaintiff called a medical biomechanical expert from Atlanta, Georgia, who was a former medical examiner (Dr. Burton), and who testified that the second accident was the cause of Ms. Leonhardt's dissected right carotid artery. Defendant called an expert (Dr. Bowles) from San Antonio, who was a medical doctor and an engineer, and who testified that the first accident caused the dissected carotid artery. The jury was also given an instruction on "indivisible injury". Plaintiff made no real pretrial settlement demand due to the fact that there were past medical bills of approximately $800,000 and the fact that plaintiff was receiving $135,000 per year for home healthcare in addition to medical care. Defendant filed an Offer of Judgment in the amount of $450,00l.00 prior to trial. After a two-and-a-half-week trial, the jury arrived at a unanimous defense verdict after two hours of deliberation. They determined that the first accident caused the dissected right carotid artery and that they did not need to reach the issue of comparative fault in connection with the second accident. The jury rejected the "indivisible injury" instructions.

Lynch v. Econo-Lube, No. CV99-10156 (tried to a jury May 1-2, 2001: two-day trial):

Plaintiff, retired truck driver in his 70's, fell from his custom van while it was raised 4 to 6 feet off the ground in an Econo-Lube port bay. Plaintiff claimed Econo-Lube abandoned him in the work bay area after he indicated to the manager of the Econo-Lube that he was entering his van in order to obtain warranty papers. After he entered the van, without giving notice to the mechanic on duty, the manager left the scene and the mechanic raised the van without knowing that the plaintiff was inside the van. The plaintiff fell from the van after backing out the side portion hidden from the mechanic's view. Plaintiff fell four feet, crushing his knee. The plaintiff had two surgeries with past medical expenses in the amount of $48,000. He had future medical expenses (future knee replacement anticipated) in the amount of $50,000. Demand: $100,000. Offer: $33,000. Plaintiff asked the jury for an award of $100,000 in medical bills, $350,000 for pain and suffering. Result: plaintiff's verdict in the amount of $300,000 with 35% attributed to the plaintiff and 65% to the defendant. Total judgment: $195,000.

Rukasin v. Lewin, No. CV 333603, Pima County, Tucson, Arizona (tried March 22, 2001: three-day trial):

Plaintiff, male, age 50, a pharmacist, alleged he was stopped for a red light, when defendant rear-ended him. Plaintiff alleged that although he appeared uninjured at the scene, his knee began troubling him on the day of the accident. This was corroborated by several witnesses. Plaintiff called an accident reconstructionist, who testified the force of the impact was sufficient to cause plaintiff's knee injury. Defendant admitted negligence, but argued the impact to plaintiff's vehicle was insufficient to cause injury. Defendant argued neither vehicle sustained sufficient property damage and that there was only minor contact between the vehicles as a result of defendant's foot slipping off the brake pedal. Defendant also argued that plaintiff advised defendant he was not injured and did not want a police report made of the accident. Defendant's accident reconstructionist testified that there was a 1.1 G force applied to the rear of the plaintiff's vehicle. Plaintiff claimed a torn medial meniscus. He claimed a permanent impairment of 5 to 7 percent the lower left extremity. Defendant argued that since plaintiff rode horses, his injury was more likely to have occurred getting on or off a horse than by the minor impact. Plaintiff's medical expenses: $10,127, plus $578 property damage. Plaintiff made a pretrial demand of $50,000. Defendant offered $2,500 prior to trial. Three-day jury trial. Jury out four hours. Found for defendant 7-1.

Igou v. Butler International, No. CV 327151, Pima County, Tucson, Arizona (tried to a jury November 22, 2000: three-day trial):

Plaintiff, female, age 42, an LPN, was rear-ended by defendant. Defendant was in the course and scope of his occupational duties for the insured, and admitted negligence, but argued that since the impact was between 5 and 15 miles per hour and caused minor damage to plaintiff's vehicle, the impact could not have caused the extent of permanent injury claimed by the plaintiff. Plaintiff alleged she sustained a shoulder injury. Plaintiff's treating physician was of the opinion that the rotator cuff surgery that he performed, two and one-half years post-accident, was causally related to the impact of the collision. Compensatory damages were requested by the plaintiff in the amount of $12,000 plus $1,100 lost wages. Plaintiff made a pretrial demand of $30,000. Defendant offered $10,000. During closing, plaintiff asked jury to award plaintiff $50,000. Jury awarded plaintiff $19,180 compensatory damages, unanimously.

Smith v. Southwest General Ambulance, No. CV 98-13998 (tried to a jury May 2 through May 9, 2000: one-and-a-half-week trial):

Plaintiff, in his thirties, a firefighter, was in the course and scope of his duties, using a fire rescue unit owned by a local fire department. The fire rescue unit had recently been repaired by defendant. Plaintiff alleged he was acting as a "spotter" as the unit was being backed into the bay at the firehouse, when a noxious, pungent cloud was discharged from the tailpipe of the rescue unit. Plaintiff, who was standing near the tailpipe, inhaled the fumes. Plaintiff alleged defendant's repair of the rescue unit was negligent and the air conditioning hose ruptured, discharging Freon into the exhaust system. Plaintiff alleged that the heat of the exhaust system changed the Freon into Phosgene (similar to mustard gas used in World War I). Defendant insured argued the air conditioning unit was not functioning, and, therefore, could not have discharged Freon. Defendant also argued the noxious fumes were most likely heated diesel fuel. Plaintiff alleged he developed reactive airways disease similar to a permanent condition of asthma. Plaintiff's treating physician testified plaintiff had no symptoms of such a disease before the incident and developed the reactive airways disease as a result of inhaling Phosgene. Plaintiff claimed $6,000 in medical expenses plus $250 per month future medical expenses, for prescriptions and quarterly exams. Plaintiff made a pretrial demand of $175,000—defendant offered $10,000. During closing arguments, plaintiff's counsel asked the jury to award $2,600,000. Result: Jury, out three-plus hours, found for defendant unanimously.

Hillgren v. Ohio Casualty, No. CV 97-01945 (tried to a jury May, 1999; two-week trial; insurance bad faith):

Plaintiff, a mortgage holder and listed on the homeowner's policy as a mortgage holder, held a second mortgage after selling her home to the named insured on the homeowner's policy. The homeowners abandoned the house, and there was damage to the extent of approximately $40,000. Plaintiff filed a claim, alleging vandalism etc. Defendant denied the claim, and plaintiff pursued the matter through the Insurance Department and finally filed a bad- faith lawsuit. Plaintiff alleged contract damages, bad faith and sought punitive damages. Demand was $250,000. After a two-week trial, the trial court submitted the issues of contract, bad faith and punitive damages to the jury. The morning before the verdict, the parties entered into a high/low agreement of $50,000 to $250,000, including all attorney's fees, costs, etc. The jury verdict was $19,000 on contract, $50,000 on bad faith and $200,000 on punitive. The matter was resolved under the high/low agreement for $250,000.

Morey v. Combination Plumbing, Inc., No. CV 96-16814 (tried to a jury April, 1999; one-week trial; construction defect):

Our client, Combination Plumbing, installed plumbing in a very expensive home. During the owner's absence, a leak occurred apparently at the toilet in a guest room. State Farm paid property damage of approximately $550,000 and filed suit against the plumber and the manufacturer of the toilet flex tubing. Originally, plaintiff alleged both negligence and breach of contract and, in addition, they sought attorney's fees. There were no serious settlement negotiations prior to trial, and the demand was approximately $550,000 plus attorney's fees. Result: Directed verdict for Combination Plumbing and the flex-tube manufacturer.

Carter v. Malone, dba Contemporary Homes, No. CV 96-15871 (tried February, 1999; two-week trial; construction defect/soil subsidence):

Plaintiff, a medical doctor, built a home in Yuma, Arizona, at a cost of approximately $1,000,000. Shortly after the home was finished, various portions of the home, guest house, pool and boat house started to collapse due to alleged construction defects, improper excavation, grading, soils testing and soil subsidence. Plaintiff sued the general contractor, represented by this firm. The general contractor built the house on a cost-plus basis.

Plaintiff originally alleged both negligence and breach of contract and, prior to trial, dropped negligence allegations and relied only on breach of contract so as to enable them to make a claim for attorney's fees. Plaintiff alleged that the contractor was responsible for excavation and grading and making certain that the house was constructed so as not to settle as alleged. Contractor defended by alleging that he built the house in a workmanlike manner, that plaintiff had knowledge the property was originally used as a dumping area for construction debris, and that the plaintiff covered that debris over a two-year period with fill dirt. Defendant also alleged that the soils engineer who conducted soils testing prior to construction was a non-party at fault and in part responsible.

Settlement demand prior to trial was $230,000 plus attorney's fees. Settlement offer prior to trial was $100,000. Result: Defense verdict in favor of contractor.

McCormick v. Newport Plastics, No. CV 95-90197 (tried March, 1998; one-week trial; product liability/hazardous material):

Plaintiff alleged that defendant sold a defective five-gallon drum used to carry a 93 percent concentration of sulfuric acid. Plaintiff alleged that, as he was carrying the five-gallon drum, the handle assembly broke, causing the drum to hit the ground. As the drum hit the ground, the cap came off, splashing sulfuric acid on plaintiff. Plaintiff suffered burns to the back of both legs, resulting in infection, leaving residual scarring and hypo-pigmentation. Plaintiff sustained third-degree burns, was more susceptible to skin cancer, and claimed nerve damage in his legs. Pretrial demand: $100,000. Offer: $5,000. During closing argument, plaintiff asked the jury for $100,000. Result: directed verdict in favor of defendant.

Taulton v. Cox Communications, No. CV 96-17935 (tried December, 1997; one-week trial; personal injury/trip and fall):

Plaintiff alleged defendant's employee laid a cable across plaintiff's mother's driveway, which resulted in a loop of cable projecting above the ground, in the lawn. Plaintiff tripped over the cable loop and sustained an anterior cruciate ligament tear of the left knee, requiring reconstructive surgery. Pretrial demand: $225,000. Offer: $15,000. Result: Jury awarded plaintiff $91,000 compensatory damages and found plaintiff to be 37 percent at fault, a non-party to be 8 percent at fault, and defendant to be 55 percent at fault, thereby reducing plaintiff's award to $50,050 from defendant.

Lejcar v. AGV, S.p.A. and Kawasaki, No. CV 95-12484 (tried August and September, 1997; two-week trial: personal injury/product liability/defective helmet retention system/inadequate warning and/or labeling):

Plaintiff, male, engineer, age 51, sustained a brain injury, alleging that a helmet manufactured, distributed and sold to him by defendants was defective in design and/or manufacture. Plaintiff claimed $314,000 in medical expenses plus $1.5 million in future lost wages. Pretrial demand: $6 million. During trial, plaintiff demanded $875,000. Offer: none. Result: unanimous defense verdict.

Egnor v. Lindco, No. CV 94-01693 (tried April, 1997: one and one-half-week trial):

Plaintiff construction worker lost both thumbs when his safety vest was caught in a rotating piece of equipment distributed by Lindco. Plaintiff claimed Lindco sold a defective product without transmitting copies of the operating manual and without giving sufficient warning of the hazard of the product. Plaintiff had medical expenses of $99,000. Plaintiff asked the jury for an award of $99,000 in medical bills, $500,000 for pain and suffering, $25,000 in past loss of income, and an unknown reasonable amount for future loss of earning capacity, and other general damages. Result: defense verdict.

Quickville and Brown v. USF&G, No. CV 93-0349 (tried July and August, 1996 in Yavapai County Superior Court, Prescott, Arizona: two-week trial):

Plaintiff claimed bad faith and breach of contract for defendant's failure to pay substantial fire loss. Claim approximately $500,000 and insurance bad-faith claim. Jury trial resulting in defense verdict, plus attorney's fees awarded to Defendant.

Jeremias v. Preston, No. CV 94-18608 (tried during May, 1996: five-day trial):

Plaintiff claimed that he was rearended by defendant. Defendant denied liability, advancing the defense that the car in front of plaintiff slowed for a school zone and was rearended by plaintiff. Defendant argued that it was only after the impact between plaintiff and this non-party vehicle that he rearended plaintiff's vehicle. Plaintiff sustained lumbar strain and sprain, a torn rotator cuff of the right shoulder, and carpal tunnel syndrome. Plaintiff did have surgical repair of the torn rotator cuff. Plaintiff had approximately $23,000 in medical expenses plus required future medical care. Pretrial demand: $100,000. Offer: $30,000. During closing arguments, plaintiff's counsel asked the jury to award $225,000. Result: Jury awarded plaintiff $20,000 and found plaintiff to be 50 percent at fault, reducing plaintiff's award to $10,000.

McKinney, Miller and Wallace v. Hilton Hotels Corporation, No. CV 94-17874; CV 95-01679 (consolidated) (tried during April, May and June, 1996: seven-week trial):

Four people were riding in a bell cart operated by a bellman employed by the Hilton Resorts at a local Phoenix resort. The bell cart was manufactured by Club Car and distributed by Simpson Norton, who were also defendants. Apparently, the brakes went out due to the fact that they had not been adjusted properly. Linda McKinney, age 30, died, and her husband brought a wrongful-death claim. Karin Miller was also a passenger, age 30. Karin Miller sustained very serious injuries, including, but not limited to, reflex sympathetic dystrophy. She had medical bills of approximately $200,000 and future medical and lost wages of approximately $5 million. During much of the time, Karin Miller was confined to a wheelchair or motorized cart. Mark Miller, who was also a passenger in the bell cart, sustained minor injuries and brought a lawsuit for his injuries and loss of consortium due to the injuries of his wife. Jeffrey Wallace, age 30, was also a passenger and sustained a broken leg, aggravated tendonitis, a knee injury and emotional problems. The lawsuit was tried against all three defendants. All defendants together offered $6 million prior to trial. During final argument, attorneys for the various plaintiffs asked the jury to render a verdict in favor of all plaintiffs in the amount of $45.5 million. The jury deliberated approximately one and a half days and awarded verdicts of $l million for Mr. McKinney on the wrongful-death claim, $350,000 for Jeffrey Wallace, $250,000 for Mr. Miller and $7 million for Karin Miller. Punitive damages was an issue, but a motion for directed verdict at the close of plaintiffs' case was granted removing punitive damages from the case.

Arevalo v. Classic Floor, No. CV 96-08544 (tried March-April, 1996: two-week trial):

Plaintiff overcome by fumes as a result of defendant's floor cleaning material applied to a Drug Emporium floor the night before. Plaintiff alleged that she passed out and fell, thereby injuring herself. Plaintiff saw 26 doctors and was diagnosed with reflex sympathetic dystrophy and fibromyalgia. Medical bills, approximately $25,000. In final argument, plaintiff's attorney asked for lost wages in the amount of $l50,000 plus medical bills plus pain and suffering and future damages. Result: Defense verdict.

Soliz v. Sahuaro Petroleum & Asphalt Company, No. 268221 (set to be tried March, 1996 in Pima County Superior Court, Tucson, Arizona):

Plaintiff claimed that 18-wheeler driven by Sahuaro Petroleum employee merged into his car and caused an accident with plaintiff's resulting injuries. Plaintiff claimed that the accident resulted in permanent low-back pain, exacerbation of his pre-existing diabetes, neck pain, chest pain, aggravation of pre-existing heart problems, and injuries with resulting surgery to both shoulders. Plaintiff had approximately $35,000 in medical bills. Plaintiff claimed that the accident caused him to retire early from his insurance sales job. Demand: $1,000,000. Offer: $25,000. Result: Judge involuntarily dismissed plaintiff's case on the morning of trial due to plaintiff's inability to proceed with the trial.

Kurgan v. Rollerblade, Inc., No. CV 93-05487 (tried November and December, 1995: 14-day trial):

Plaintiff skating and collided with side of truck, wearing no helmet. Plaintiff alleged defendant's warnings re safety gear were insufficient. Serious brain injury, fractured skull, blind in one eye, and will be in convalescent home for lifetime. Medical bills: $420,000. Plaintiff's attorney asked for $17 million in final argument. Offer: $500,000. Result: defense verdict.

Honesty v. R.E. Monks Construction, No. CV 93-07030 (tried in September, 1995: two-week trial):

Construction-site accident. Plaintiff, while driving semi-tractor/trailer loaded with dirt down a dirt road built and maintained by defendant, hit a rut in the road, lost control and crashed in the desert. Neck and low back injuries, permanent impairment. Medicals: $45,000; wage loss approximately $400,000. Demand: $500,000. Offer: $131,000 (structure). Result: Defense verdict.

Dienes v. Hohmann, No. CV 93-15511 (tried in August, 1995: one-week trial):

Plaintiff shot in neck in altercation with defendant and defendant's friend. Defendant's friend shot plaintiff, but plaintiff claims defendant was jointly liable and "acting in concert." Scar resulting from tracheotomy due to breathing problems. Demand: $200,000. Offer: $60,000. Defense verdict.

MacDougall v. Rural Metro, No. CV 92-21054 (tried in December, 1994: two-week trial):

Plaintiff, a restaurant manager, alleged that she was stopped for a traffic signal and rearended by defendant. Claimed injury to low back, resulting in bulging disks. Demand: $250,000. Offer: $100,000. Jury award: $32,000.

Bucci v. TCR, No. CV 93-11065 (tried in April, 1995: two-week trial):

Construction-site accident. Plaintiff thirty-year-old and crushed right heel. Past and future medicals approximately $130,000. Demand: $500,000. Jury award: $105,000.

Goldwater v. Gain, No. CV 93-16021, consolidated (tried in January, 1995: one-week trial):

Vehicular intersection accident, two deaths, liability and damages bifurcated. Defense verdict on liability trial.

Vallejos v. Realty Center, No. CV 92-11917 (tried in October, 1994: 14-day trial):

Plaintiff was 12-month-old child who lost 10 toes in bathtub scalding incident. Plaintiff claimed defendant apartment had defective hot water system and excessively hot water. Medical bills: $250,000. Claim ranged from $6 million to $1.5 million prior to trial. $300,000 offer. Result: defense verdict.

Cruz v. Von Wahlde, No. CV 92-09821 (tried in October, 1994: two-week trial):

Construction-site accident. Claim by plaintiff for personal injuries and claim by general contractor against sub-contractor for indemnity, resulting in defense verdict against plaintiff and defense verdict on indemnity against general contractor.

Little v. Phoenix South, No. CV 91-23178 (tried in June, 1994: one-week trial):

Claim of personal injuries to wife of custodial patient. Demand: $500,000, resulting in directed verdict for defendant.

Leavy v. Parsell, No. CV 92-17125 (tried in September, 1994: one-week trial):

Automobile accident/intersection. Demand: $100,000, resulting in defense verdict.

Hamblen v. TCR, No. CV 90-14259 (tried in February and March, 1994: three-week trial):

Plaintiff was working on a construction project when a roll of roofing paper fell three stories and struck him in the head. Plaintiff alleged neck and back injuries, was found to be totally disabled by Social Security and had medicals of approximately $50,000. Plaintiff sued general contractor, represented by Struckmeyer and Wilson, and the roofing contractor, who was uninsured and did not appear at trial. Offer: $50,000. Plaintiff had demanded $595,000. Defense verdict as to general contractor.

Zukerman v. Sleppy, No. CV 90-16947 (tried in January, 1992: three-day trial):

Plaintiff rearended by defendant. Claimed neck, back surgery. Offer: $32,500. Plaintiff requested jury to award $200,000. Court ordered jury to award plaintiff "some damages." Jury awarded plaintiff $1.

New World v. Fidelifacts, No. CV 90-26128 (tried in February, 1992: two-week trial):

Professional malpractice of private investigation firm. Alleged improper credit report. Plaintiff asked jury to award $2,000,000. Offer: $40,000. Defense verdict plus attorney's fees awarded to defendant.

Riggs v. Nautical, No. C-589660 (tried three years before Callender case):

Plaintiff, a young man in his early twenty's, alleges that he was served a "bucket of booze" by defendant. After drinking the bucket, he dove into the lake near the shore and, as a result, became a quadriplegic. Offer: $300,000 -- $1,000,000 policy. Defense verdict.

Callender v. Nautical, No. CV 90-07697 (tried in June, 1992: three-week trial):

Plaintiff alleged that the defendant improperly served him a "bucket of booze" intended for a minimum of four people. After drinking the bucket, he dove from a boat into Lake Havasu head-first. As a result, he became a quadriplegic. Offer: $300,000 -- $1,000,000 policy. Defense verdict.

Shott v. Garcia, No. CV 91-90166 (tried in August, 1992: one-week trial):

Defendant rearended plaintiff. Offer: $32,500. Verdict for plaintiff of $1,500.

Bondioli v. Buffalo, No. CV 90-10750 (tried in June, 1993: three-week trial):

Plaintiff doctor cut his hand, including nerves and tendon, on an allegedly defective product manufactured by defendant. Plaintiff claimed permanent injury and loss of substantial income. Jury requested by plaintiff to award $1.3 million. Offer: $150,000. Defense verdict.

Trimmer v. Southmark, No. CV 91-91851 (tried in September, 1993: one-week trial):

Plaintiff was a police officer, chasing a suspect across Southmark's apartment complex, when he fell or jumped into a sunken patio. Plaintiff claimed serious back, neck injuries and a fractured vertebrae. Offer: $30,000. Defense verdict.