Winning Verdicts

Listed below are some of Steve’s many jury trial verdicts, including Steve’s million dollar verdict in Distinctive Homes International  v. Carreau.

Beach v. Wal-Mart

Plaintiff Beach claimed she slipped and fell on water adjacent to a frozen food freezer that had been caused by Wal-Mart associates working in the area.  The entire accident scene was recorded on video surveillance.  Employees documented that there was water on the floor after plaintiff fell.  One of the key issues involved whether or not Wal-Mart had notice of the water on the floor prior to plaintiff’s fall.  Steve introduced evidence showing the significant efforts undertaken by Wal-Mart to inspect and maintain its floors.  Also in dispute was the cause of plaintiff’s left and right knee injuries.  Steve called orthopedic surgeon Stephen Dow MD, who testified that some of the injuries were inconsistent with plaintiff’s mechanism of injury.  The jury returned a defense verdict in favor of Steve’s client Wal-Mart.

Monroe v. Pella Corp.

Steve represented Pella Corporation when they were sued by plaintiffs under Nevada’s construction defect statute, Chapter 40.  Plaintiffs claimed that Pella windows installed in their 7,000 sq.ft. home were defective, necessitating replacement of all of the windows in their home at a cost of several hundred thousand dollars.  The lengthy trial involved numerous expert witnesses.  Steve brought working windows into Court to show that the windows performed properly.  The jury returned a defense verdict in favor of Pella Corp.  Subsequently the Court awarded over $100,000 in fees and costs to Steve’s client Pella Corp.

Distinctive Homes International v. Carreau

In a lengthy and complex trial Steve represented Distinctive Homes who had acted as real estate broker for the owners of the Tahoe Keys Marina.  Distinctive Homes had found  a buyer for the property and a contract of sale was executed, but one of the sellers refused to go forward with the transaction.  The buyer brought an action for specific performance.  Distinctive Homes brought an action for recovery of its $1 million commission, the reluctant seller counterclaimed for fraud and breach of duties.  The jury returned a verdict finding in favor of Distinctive Homes, awarding the $1 million commission to Steve’s client.  Subsequently, the Court awarded over $300,000 in fees and costs to Steve’s client.

Camara v. Winco

Mrs. Camara claimed to have sustained serious injury at Winco when a long row of nested shopping carts bumped her butt.  The prime issue was whether such a minor impact could cause serious injury.  Steve called biomechanical expert Dr. Aaron Souza and University of Nevada Reno medical school professor Dr. John Peacock, who testified that the impact would only cause minor discomfort.  The jury returned a verdict of $2,458, which was less than Winco’s $3,000 offer.  The Court subsequently awarded Winco a portion of its fees and costs.

Trapletti v. Sparks Nugget

Mrs. Trapletti claimed Steve’s client, the Sparks Nugget, negligently left a high chair in a walking path that resulted in her falling and sustaining serious injury.  Steve reconstructed the accident scene in the courtroom to show that the high chair was visible and that it was Ms. Trapletti’s failure to pay attention that resulted in her fall.  The jury returned a defense verdict in favor of Steve’s client and the Court subsequently awarded over $50,000 in fees and costs in favor of Steve’s client.

Corrigan v. Sam’s Club / Wal-Mart

Plaintiff was hit in the eye when one checker threw a set of keys to another checker.  Plaintiff claimed a serious injury to her eye, including glaucoma.  In a battle of medical experts, Steve’s experts testified that any injury was minor and did not cause glaucoma.  Plaintiff sought over a hundred thousand dollars.  The jury awarded $23,500 to plaintiff, which was less than the $30,000 offer made by Sam’s Club.

Herb v. TA Operating Corp.

In this case the plaintiff claimed to have slipped and fallen in the diesel refueling lane of Sierra Sid’s/TravelCenters of America’s Sparks Nevada truck stop.  Plaintiff sought over a million dollars in damages due to a fractured wrist and alleged she was unable to return to work as a truck driver.  The trial involved disputes about the adequacy of the lighting, the cause of the diesel fuel spill, the condition of the concrete and plaintiff’s contributory negligence.  The jury returned a defense verdict for Steve’s client, TravelCenters of America.

Minette v. Samproni

In this case Steve was defending the Reno RV Park.  Plaintiff claimed that she slipped and fell sustaining a broken leg when the RV park’s sprinklers came on during the winter.  The plaintiff had water meter usage records establishing a significant amount of water use at the RV park.  Steve by searching other trailer parks in the area, found witnesses who testified they had been approached by the plaintiff and asked to testify to the water sprinklers running in the winter, in exchange for monetary compensation.  The jury returned a verdict in favor of Steve’s client.

Shoemaker v. Winco

In this case Steve was defending Winco Foods against claims of false arrest, false imprisonment, slander and punitive damages.  The plaintiff claimed that she was falsely detained for shoplifting.  The employee who had stopped the plaintiff had been deployed to Europe in the military and was not available for the criminal trial, so the charges were dismissed.   An arbitrator in the Court’s mandatory non-binding arbitration program had found in favor of plaintiff and the results of that arbitration were read to the jury.  In a heated trial, Steve argued that in fact the plaintiff had shoplifted a bottle of Excedrin and that Winco’s actions were justified.  The jury agreed and returned a defense verdict for Winco.  Winco had made a statutory offer and therefore they were awarded their attorney’s fees and costs.

Brown v. Wal-Mart

This trial occurred in Elko, Nevada.  Mrs. Brown claimed to have slipped and fallen on liquid near the Wal-Mart checkstands.  Steve called all of the present and former cashiers to establish that they were watching the area but did not see any water and thus had no notice of a dangerous condition.  Also in issue was the cause of Mrs. Brown’s knee injury.  The jury returned a defense verdict in favor of Wal-Mart

Arreygue v. Wal-Mart

In this case Mrs. Arreygue claimed to have sustained injuries when plastic containers fell from a high shelf in Wal-Mart.  During the trial Steve argued that the containers fell when she attempted to reach them by standing on a lower shelf and trying to nudge them off the shelf.  The jury returned a defense verdict in Steve’s client’s favor.

Padilla v. Wal-Mart

In this case plaintiff was hit by a pole in the garden center of Wal-Mart’s Carson City store.  Ms. Padilla claimed years of chiropractic treatment through a chiropractor that she worked for, but could not produce records reflecting that treatment.  The jury awarded a small amount which was less than the settlement offer made by Wal-Mart which resulted in an award of attorney’s fees and costs in Wal-Mart’s favor against Padilla.

Northrup v. Sierra Nevada Stage Lines

In this case, plaintiff was claiming personal injuries following a bus accident.  At trial Steve established that most of the plaintiff’s treatment was related to his work in a tire shop as opposed to the bus accident.  The jury awarded $273, which was significantly less than the settlement offer from Steve’s client.  Plaintiff agreed to dismiss the case in exchange for Steve’s client not seeking fees and costs against him

Hammons v. Richards Manufacturing

In this case Steve and Duffy Buchannan were defending Richards Manufacturing, who manufactures medical bone fixation devices, against a claim that the device was defective and resulted in additional injury to Hammons when it broke necessitating additional surgery. Steve and Duffy established the device broke due to excessive weight being place on it by the physician allowing weight bearing too early. The jury returned a defense verdict for Steve and Duffy’s client.

Smith v. Helms Construction, Sierra Pacific Power

In this jury trial Steve was defending Helms. Bill Peterson was defending Sierra Pacific. The plaintiff Smith claimed personal injuries after a water pipe installed underground burst while Smith, a contractor, was excavating around it. The jury returned a defense verdict for Steve and Bill’s clients.

Grouse v. Helms Construction

In this jury trial Steve and Mick Iglesias were defending road constructor Helms Construction who was sued by Grouse who claimed that Helms caused gravel on the road causing his motorcycle to skid off the road at Cave Rock causing serious injuries. During the trial a witness was discovered who testified that Grouse was speeding and excessive speed caused the accident. Steve and Mick obtained a defense verdict for their client and an award of attorneys fees and costs.