In the December 2011 edition of Verdict Search California Patrik Greigo’s and Michael Morrison’s (of Janssen Malloy LLP) recent jury verdict against the County of Humboldt is listed as the publication’s single selection for noteworthy cases in Humboldt County.
Read the report here: Esquivel v. County of Humboldt jury verdict.
Janssen Malloy LLP partners, W. Timothy Needham, Michael J. Crowley, Patrik Griego and Amelia F. Burroughs have been nominated by Consumer Attorneys of California for the organization’s Consumer Attorney of the Year Award. The nomination arises from the firm’s handling of the seminal jury verdict case of 2010, Lavender vs. Skilled Healthcare LLC. The Janssen Law Firm, along with co-counsel Michael Thamer and Christopher Healey, obtained the largest jury verdict in the United States in 2010, $677 million dollars. The case had a significant impact on the healthcare industry, specifically the skilled nursing facilities throughout the nation.
Janssen Malloy has been working for years to increase awareness of motorcycle safety in our community and recently partnered with Redwood Harley Davidson to sponsor an event to raise money for services for our local veterans.
This past week it came to our attention that Harley Davidson issued a recall for 250,757 touring motorcycles from years 2008-2011 due to a issues with the brakes. Harley officials said the rear brake-light switch could be damaged by heat from the bikes’ exhaust systems. There has been one reported accident attributed to the brake defects.
Janssen Malloy LLP recommends that individuals interested in the difficulties facing persons in our community with traumatic brain injuries attend tonight’s film at Humboldt State University (“HSU”).
HSU’s Disability Awareness events continue with “When Billy Broke His Head,” on Tuesday, October 18th, 2011, at 6:30 p.m., HSU Gist Hall 218. This is a first-person road movie about disability, civil rights and the pursuit of an intelligent life after traumatic brain injury, and includes a post-film interactive workshop, free admission, and refreshments.
The County of Humboldt will have to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars after a jury found it acted negligently in handling a vicious pit bull dog that mauled a veterinary worker in 2008.
While the amount to be received by plaintiff Elena Esquivel, 29, is currently unclear, a civil jury on Friday awarded a total verdict for damages in excess of $548,000, which includes money for past and future medical expenses, pain and suffering and lost wages. However, the jury found Esquivel to be 25 percent responsible in the attack that rendered her left arm permanently damaged, so she will receive a sum around three-quarters of the total award.
On June 8, 2011 Patrik Griego of The Janssen Law Firm achieved a $725,000 award for a client injured in a car accident with an uninsured driver, Mr. Lewison. Mr. Lewison suffered severe back injuries requiring a bi-level spinal fusion. Mr. Lewison’s insurance company initially offered to pay Mr. Lewison $60,000. The Janssen Law Firm rejected that offer and after almost three years of litigation Mr. Lewison’s insurance company offered $725,000 on the first day of arbitration after it became clear that Mr. Lewison would not accept less than full value for his injuries.
News Release – For Immediate Release
June 21, 2011
Contact: Deborah Mathis, Communications Director – (202) 797-8600 or dmathis@publicjustice.net
Six California Lawyers Who Won Historic Verdict for Nursing Home Residents Are Finalists for Trial Lawyer of the Year Award
The same information act used to seek breath testing equipment in Humboldt County DUIs is now being used to seek Bin Laden pictures. In cases involving allegations of driving under the influence we have successfully challenged the results of certain breath and blood testing equipment by requesting all documents concerning testing of those machines for accuracy. We have been able to obtain important testing documents through Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests. It was recently discovered that both the Eureka Police Department and Department of Justice breath testing devices were consistently showing a higher than expected result when tested with a known quantity of alcohol. We used the testing results in one recent case to convince the Department of Motor Vehicles to set aside an action against a Humboldt County resident’s license. The same test results also served as a basis for the Humboldt County District Attorney’s office to dismiss the allegations of driving under the influence.
A Sacramento jury returned a verdict of $16 million in a lawsuit involving a young doctor who was hit by a car and permanently disabled while using a crosswalk the city knew to be dangerous.
Eureka and Arcata residents know that the fate of the young woman who was hit in Sacramento could have easily been visited upon any number of pedestrians attempting to cross our city streets each day.
The United States Supreme Court expanded liability against employers, by holding that employers can be liable under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act for firing a third party as retaliation against an employee complaining of discrimination.
Humboldt County employees now have broader protection against retaliatory firings thanks to a recent decision by the United States Supreme Court. On January 24, 2011, the Supreme Court of the United States issued an 8-0 decision in the case of Thompson v. North American Stainless. This decision held that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”) extends to third parties in certain circumstances. In summary, an employee was terminated because another employee filed a sexual discrimination suit with the EEOC. The employee who was terminated was engaged to the employee who filed the sexual discrimination suit. The Court held that the purpose of Title VII is to provide broad protection against discrimination to employees. The Court went on to state that this protection extended to third parties who were retaliated against in an effort to injure the party complaining of discrimination. Writing for the majority, Justice Scalia stated that Title VII’s anti-retaliation provision extends to anyone within the “zone of interest” that the statute seeks to protect.