Disclaimer: We are proud of our results, but past results can never predict what will happen in an individual case. The details of every case will be different, and so the results listed here cannot indicate what we can do in your case. Although I get informed consent on these matters, I take my client’s privacy seriously, so I won’t list items that will reveal their identities.


M vs. U – $2.1 million judgment – my client sued a law firm/loan modification firm after they botched his loan modification and cost him the sale of his house. This firm had defrauded thousands of its clients and we were able to prove fraud, as well as breach of contract.

G vs. E – $ Confidential settlement – my client sued his former employer after they lied about the terms of his employment, then fired him after he moved to the new job. At the beginning of the case, they offered a nominal amount to settle the case, which we rejected. After beating their national trial firm at every step of the case, they settled the case on the Friday before trial started for a confidential amount in the mid-six figures. (Several law firms had rejected this case because the contract was only via email and text messages, so they felt my client had “no case”.)

H vs. C – $ Confidential settlement – obtained settlement for victim of sexual assault from persons or entities which could have prevented the assaults, or who knew about them and failed to provide required assistance after the fact.

N vs. D – $ Confidential settlement – my client sued a medical device manufacturer after a medical device implanted in him malfunctioned. The manufacturer claimed that they had no liability and their product had performed normally, but we were able to resolve the matter in a confidential settlement. (This case had been rejected by other law firms, because they felt there was “no case.”)

G vs. N – $100,000 – obtained insurance policy limit for a shoulder injury sustained in a car accident.

V vs. P – $100,000 – obtained insurance policy limit for injuries sustained in an auto accident. My client was a passenger in a vehicle driven recklessly. We sued the driver of her car and were able to get the entire insurance policy limit for her injuries.

A vs. C – over $50,000 – my client sued a financial service provider because of a fraudulent loan that would have cost them over $55,000 in fees and costs. We were able to get the original loan product they had been sold saving them over $50,000.


S vs. R – my client was sued for over $325,000 for equipment it purchased at auction. The equipment actually belonged to a third-party (the plaintiff in this case), and the auction was invalid. Because my client believed it was in the right, but did not want to spend a ton on this, we offered a nominal sum to settle. That offer was rejected. So, we filed a motion and the Court agreed with us that we were in the right and dismissed the case.

M vs. R – my client was sued for over $400,000 in regard to a business deal that went bad. The other side refused to settle the case. They were so confident in their case they thought they could get a judgment without trial. After we beat them on their motions, we were able to get them back to the table and settled the case for an amount my client thought was fair.

K vs. J – my client manufactured sporting equipment. After a person was injured while misusing the equipment, he sued my client and the organization he was working with when he was injured. The man was seriously injured and wanted nearly $1 million for his injuries. The other defendant claimed my client should pay most of the claim. After defeating all of the motions and proving that the equipment was in good shape, and that it was designed and manufactured correctly, we settled my client’s share for a small payment.

B vs. S – my client was a sports equipment manufacturer sued by their insurance company for over $1 million. The insurance company wanted all their money back on a claim they had paid because of an error in the application paperwork. After depositions all over the country in two different languages, we were able to show that any errors were the insurance broker’s fault, and we were able to settle the case to my client’s satisfaction.