Jane Doe v. Commercial Truck Driver: The attorneys at MRJ recovered a $3,000,000 settlement on behalf of a 22-year-old woman for the wrongful death of her mother. The Decedent, a 51-year-old off-duty postal worker, was broadsided at an intersection by a commercial delivery truck. The truck driver and his employer denied liability, claiming the truck driver had the right-of-way. The attorneys at MRJ conducted an immediate and extensive factual investigation into the accident, that included: locating and obtaining written statements from all known witnesses; obtaining video-tape footage of the accident scene from a witness’ camera phone; locating and documenting the condition of both vehicles prior to any repairs; and obtaining a DMV “abstract” for the truck driver. As a result of MRJ’s investigative efforts, it was confirmed the truck driver intentionally accelerated through the intersection against a red traffic signal and did not possess a valid driver’s license. The settlement occurred at mediation, just one month after filing of the complaint. The evidence generated by MRJ’s investigation was provided to the local District Attorney’s Office to assist with the prosecution of manslaughter charges against the truck driver.
John Doe v. Negligent Driver: The attorneys at MRJ recovered a $2,950,000 settlement on behalf of a 52-year-old furniture mover as a result of a motorcycle versus automobile accident. MRJ’s client was riding his motorcycle home on a two-lane highway when he was cut-off by a 20 year-old woman, operating her father’s truck, attempting to make a left-turn into the lane occupied by the motorcyclist. As a result of the accident, MRJ’s client sustained significant injuries to his left ankle and knee, two fractured ribs, fractured shoulder, and a facial laceration. After nine months of recovery, the ankle had not sufficiently healed and developed an infection resulting in a below-the-knee amputation. MRJ’s extensive investigation discovered that, despite a contrary report to the investigating officer, the 20-year-old driver was on her cell phone at the time of the accident and had a significant accident history. It was also determined the truck she was driving was occasionally used to operate her father’s business and was covered under a commercial auto policy.
Mary Doe v. Property Owner: The attorneys at MRJ recovered a $200,000 settlement on behalf of a client who fell on a property in a dilapidated and dangerous condition. MRJ’s client was visiting the Lake Tahoe area with her children when her leisurely weekend was abruptly cut short by the fall. The property owner immediately denied liability prior to MRJ’s involvement. MRJ’s investigation of the accident revealed that the subject property was inadequately maintained and the paths of ingress and egress were compromised. Further investigation indicated that the subject property had also been red-tagged by a local government agency as a result of its dangerous characteristics.
John & Jane Doe v. Negligent Drifter: The vehicle occupied by Mr. & Mrs. Doe was struck head-on, in their own lane of travel, by an oncoming vehicle. MRJ’s investigation into the accident indicated the accident was caused by the other driver (operating a high-performance, all-wheel drive, Subaru WRXi equipped with a video-camera on the rear deck) who was engaged in a “drifting” maneuver. “Drifting” is a racing technique whereby the driver intentionally causes his vehicle to lose traction, then slides the vehicle around a corner, while the front tires are pointed in a direction opposite of the turn. MRJ was successful in obtaining a confidential settlement from the other driver’s insurance carrier for the maximum policy limits available, and then recovered an additional $75,000 from the Does’ own insurance carrier under their underinsured motorist (UIM) coverage.
John & Jane Doe v. XYZ Limo Co.: MRJ’s clients were crossing an intersection, lawfully in the cross-walk, when struck by a limousine driver attempting to make a left-turn. The limousine driver and his insurance company initially denied the claim, arguing MRJ’s clients were crossing the intersection against a red light. MRJ’s investigation of the intersection determined the limousine driver could not have been telling the truth given the timing and sequence of the lights. The investigation further determined the limousine driver was unfit for operation of a commercial vehicle. MRJ obtained a confidential settlement for its clients totaling approximately five times the combined medical bills.