Wednesday, December 11, 2019
Winning in Unusual Way! from 2015
In another instance of trial, after cross examining the other party, the opposing counsel suddenly called a recess.
After 7 years of never being able to get a dime out of the ex, who had already filed bankruptcy, my client, having previously used 3 different lawyers, [w/o a good result], ended up contacting attorney herein --- for trial.
The opposing attorney stopped the trial and offered a combo of about $23,000 combined cash/property $100,000, and attorney fees of $6,000. This likely meant that if they had NOT stopped the trial, my client would had gotten spousal, but we would have had to chase him forever across the USA to get it. Client elected to take the offer. Because attorney herein cornered the ex spouse on the stand for what appeared to be potential bankruptcy fraud, the rest is history......
In another instance, a civil case by a former wife against former husband and girlfriend, the husband had already been convicted of homicide (and was on appeal, he lost); the case then went to jury on issue on civil liability as to both husband and girlfriend. Keeping in mind husband was already convicted of first degree murder, the jury decided that husband was only 60% at fault in civil case.
Normally the civil case has much less burden of proof, so finding the husband only 60% and not 100% evidently meant, jury wanted to punish the girlfriend because they took 40% and assigned it-- NOT-- to the husband. This verdict was reported in Verdict Search, a national reporting source for large verdicts nationwide. Counsel representing the girlfriend was from insurance defense firm.
Currently, the former wife has not been able to collect much on the verdict [of millions] after paying fees/costs and it is anticipated she will not be able to collect in the future. Very interesting case, which also involved animals (pet dogs) owned by the husband/son. Son was stabbed when father went to check on condition of dogs; father claims son ran into the knife by lunging forward.
In a very unusual scenario, attorney was substituted into a case with a client who did not reside locally; a hearing on an issue was set for a date only several days away, at which time attorney believed the hearing could be continued. It seems the hearing was in fact a trial (according to Judge) -- and the client was not present and Judge did not want to continue the issue. Attorney went forward on the issue, with no witness or client. Using only cross examination, Attorney actually won the trial--much to surprise of witnesses present and including opposing counsel.
This is very uncommon, but imagine how your case might work out if attorney can do this, without even having a client or a witness?
Attorney thinks it's fair to say, you would be in good hands. Especially if other attorneys have failed in the past on your case.
Note: All of these scenarios are actual cases but by no means are such outcomes considered standard. Each case has different facts and various laws which will apply; each case can vary tremendously, and attorney is not representing that such outcomes are common. However, attorney does have a very high percent of cases that settle or result in what the client wanted.