The Litigation Counsellor®

Lies, scandal, greed, and conspiracy – all elements of a box office hit. Add gold, oil, African warlords, government corruption and throw in a U.S. basketball star, and you have the stranger than fiction civil tale which recently riveted a Dallas County jury. The jury awarded Southlake Aviation and its owner, David Disiere, $32.4 in damages against Houston based oil company, CAMAC International, subsidiary CAMAC Aviation and Mukaila Aderemi “Mickey” Lawal, Vice President of African Operations for CAMAC Aviation.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit has upheld an award of $1 million to Anthony Zeno, a high school student who suffered shocking racial harassment over the course of several years at Stissing Mountain High School in Dutchess County. The appellate panel concluded that the jury’s award, one of the largest ever rendered for racial harassment, was fair and reasonable given the nature and duration of the egregious conduct involved.

A man suffered knee injuries after being rear-ended while stopped and waiting to make a turn. Plaintiff was struck from behind and by a vehicle driven by Defendant and sustained a torn meniscus as well as scarring around the popliteal tendon. After the accident, Plaintiff underwent two arthroscopic surgeries to his right knee. Plaintiff sued for medical damages, physical impairment and pain and suffering; Defendant admitted fault and the trial went to damages. Plaintiff was a high school cross country runner prior to the injuries. The defense argued that Plaintiff's activities as a runner caused or contributed to his condition, as well as attempting to run after the collision.

A Plaintiff-receptionist sued her former employer for compensation that she earned during her time as a receptionist but that she was not paid for. Plaintiff was terminated due to illness, and sued for unpaid compensation, liquidated damages, fees and interest. In court, Plaintiff presented evidence that she worked an average of 18 hours of overtime each week. She also claimed that she only took 20 minutes for lunch, stayed even longer on Friday nights and took calls over the weekend related to the business. The court awarded damages as well as attorney fees and costs.

A 20-year-old man murdered a 19-year-old female college student who had stopped at a convenience store on her way home from work to buy snacks. The college student, while at the convenience store, was approached by the 20-year-old assailant, who asked to use the college student's phone and for a ride. The clerk on duty at Defendant-convenience store interacted with the assailant for a period of time before the female student arrived, learning that the assailant had previously engaged in violent altercations earlier that evening. The college student ended up leaving the store with the assailant in her car, and thereafter the assailant raped, strangled, and set the female student's body on fire. Suit was brought against Defendant-convenience store for premises liability, arguing that the clerk knew of the assailant's recent violence and had the ability to remove him from the premises in a number of ways or follow store policies regarding customer safety. The defense maintained that the assailant was considered a customer, and that the female student had not complained that she felt bothered by the assailant. Further, the assailant did not act inappropriately toward other female customers. The suit comes as one of the first verdicts rendered in a case following the Texas Supreme Court's decision in Del Lago, a case concerning liability of premises owners for criminal acts of third parties.

A 21-year-old man sued a church where he attended a band concert after the man was injured in a mosh pit--an area where concert attendees crash into each other. Plaintiff entered the mosh pit and was knocked down. Another individual fell on top of Plaintiff, causing a fracture to Plaintiff's wrist. Plaintiff underwent open reduction and internal fixation of the fracture. A second surgery was also required after the initial fixation failed. Plaintiff alleged that Defendant-church failed to supervise the event, allowing the formation of the dangerous mosh pit. Defendant argued that Plaintiff assumed a risk of injury and that it halted the activity as soon as it was detected. The jury found Defendant-church 65% negligent and Plaintiff 35% comparatively negligent.

This action involved the dissolution of a business enterprise, whereby Plaintiff and Defendant jointly purchased real estate and formed a company for the rehabilitation and sale of properties. At issue were joint funds and assets including real estate proceeds, life insurance policies and bank accounts. In a counterclaim, Defendant alleged that Plaintiff had taken a large salary from a real estate purchase discount, had not turned over Defendant's interest in the sale of a restaurant, unilaterally cashed in a life insurance policy on Defendant's life, and deposited insurance proceeds from a jointly-held property damage claim into an account held by Plaintiff and her mother. Plaintiff maintained that the business proceeds were used for rehabilitation projects and other legitimate business reasons. The case was tried as a bench trial. Defendant was awarded on her counterclaim.

Woman Falls Getting Out of Rental Truck

A 43-year-old construction worker was injured on the job when he was struck by lumber that had fallen from six floors above. Plaintiff?construction worker suffered injuries to his back and shoulder, and sued the general and subcontractors involved with the construction project. Plaintiff claimed that the incident occurred because he was not provided with the proper, safe equipment as required by the statute under Labor Law § 240(1). Plaintiff won summary judgment on liability and the parties settled before the matter could proceed to a trial on damages.

Settlement: $2,500,000

A 35-year-old wife and mother of two died from adult respiratory distress syndrome after doctors failed to provide proper medical treatment. The deceased's husband, individually and as administrator of the deceased's estate, sued Defendant--medical hospital and relevant medical personnel involved in his late wife's care and treatment leading up to her death. Prior to trial, the hospital settled and Plaintiff discontinued the claims against many of the doctors employed by the hospital. Plaintiff presented evidence that the deceased suffered from temporal arteritis, a condition that rapidly depleted her immune system. Although the deceased was placed on steroidal treatment, Plaintiff asserted that the deceased's doctors failed to ensure that the deceased receive consistent doses of the steroid treatment, and that proper steroidal treatment would have boosted the deceased's immunity sufficiently to save her life. The jury found that the doctors responsible for the care failed to dose the deceased consistently, and that in addition to other deviations from accepted standards of medical care, the deviations in this case caused the death.

An 86-year-old Plaintiff injured her hip and head after slipping and falling on a plastic drop cloth hung from the ceiling in her apartment building. Plaintiff fractured her right hip's femoral head and suffered a laceration of her head. Plaintiff claimed that she could not take part in many of the activities that she enjoyed before the injuries--namely taking long walks, playing with her grandchildren, and sleeping without pain. Plaintiff sued the contractor replacing windows in the apartment, as well as the owner of the building itself. The jury found liability at 60% for Defendant?building owner and 40% for Defendant?window replacement contractor.

A class action lawsuit was filed in 2005 on behalf of call center telemarketers claiming that they were not paid for overtime worked. The suit was brought by a pair of employees at the company, and eventually grew to include hundreds of unnamed workers. The workers claimed they regularly worked more than 40 hours a week but were not paid overtime. Defendant?business process outsourcing company denied the allegations and did not admit to any violation of law.

A 56-year-old female Plaintiff was injured when she fell at a party held on Defendant--restaurant's premises. Plaintiff claimed that she lost her balance, fell and struck her head after opening a door to a landing. Plaintiff suffered a fractured skull, brain contusion and intracranial bleeding. A portion of Plaintiff's skull had to be surgically removed to relieve pressure. The injuries left Plaintiff with limited ability to care for herself and requiring nursing assistance. Plaintiff sued for premises liability and claimed that the configuration of the door and landing constituted a dangerous condition.

Two Plaintiff--brothers brought a lawsuit against Defendant--supervisor and other members of their Defendant--employers' upper management for repeatedly making anti-Hispanic remarks. The brothers jointly sued under the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination. At trial, counsel for Plaintiffs pointed to the lack of evidence to support Defendants' supposed reasons for terminating Plaintiffs based on performance issues. The jury found Defendant--supervisor and Defendant--employers liable.