Marshall, Texas personal injury lawyer represented Plainitff, who sued Defendant on a product liability theory.
A jury in Marshall, Texas reached two separate verdicts totaling $34.4 million in a case in which a toddler was permanently paralyzed after being seated in a Dorel Juvenile Inc. Safety 1st Summit car seat during a May 2013 auto accident. The child’s mother, Nicole Hinson, sued
San Francisco, California criminal defense lawyers represented Defendant charged with ecurities fraud for filing false securities statements relating to its 2017 initial public offering (IPO) and its 2018 and 2019 annual filings.
More... $0 (03-16-2023 - )
United States of America v. Daniel Vickers
Detroit, Michigan criminal defense lawyer represented Defendant charged with defrauding the United States.
Buffalo, New York criminal defense lawyer represented Defendant charged with possession with intent to distribute cocaine, being a drug user in possession of a firearm, and wire fraud.
United States of America v. Michigan Education Association and Michigan Education Special Services Association
Grand Rapids, Michigan civil litigation lawyer represented Defendant accused of violating the False Claims Act (FCA) by applying for and obtaining loans under the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) for which they knew or should have known they were ineligible.
More... $0 (03-13-2023 - MI)
Mark F. Woodard, et al. v. Allied Power Services, LLC
West Palm Beach, Florida employment lawyer represented Plaintiffs who sued Defendant on a failure to pay E.R.I.S.A. benefits theory.
United States of America v. Luis Enrique Rendon Cardenas
Miami, Florida criminal defense lawyer represented Defendant charged with conspiracy for his his role in conspiring with Peruvian-based call centers that defrauded Spanish-speaking United States residents by falsely threatening them with arrest, deportation, and other legal consequences. He is the eleventh defendant to be sentenced to prison in the scheme.
United States of America v. United Alloys and Steel Corporation
New York City, New York criminal defense lawyers represented Defendant charged with disposing of or treating mercury produced or used by Port Refinery, Inc., a mercury refining business in the Village of Rye Brook, New York, which released the mercury into the environment.
As alleged in the complaint filed today in White Plains federal District Court:
Camden, New Jersey personal injury lawyer represented Plaintiff who sued Defendant on a product liability theory claiming to have suffered more than $75,000 in damages and/or injuries as a direct result of a defective and unreasonably dangerous produce designed, manufactured and/or sold by Defendant.
More... $0 (03-02-2023 - NJ)
Darlene Riggleman v. Administrator Bryan K. Lanham
Charleston, West Virginia civil rights lawyer represented Plaintiff claiming that he prisoner civil rights were violated by Defendant.
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania consumer credit lawyer represented Plaintiff who sued Defendant on a Fair Debt Collection Act violation theory under 15 U.S.C. 1692.
Michael E. Middaugh and Donna M. Middaugh v. Jim's Marine & Travel, Inc., d/b/a Jim's RV Center
Scranton, Pennsylvania personal injury lawyer represented Plaintiffs who sued Defendant on a product liability theory claiming to have suffered more than $75,000 in damages and/or injuries as a direct result of a defective and unreasonably dangerous product designed, manufactures and/or sold by Defendant.
More... $1 (03-01-2023 - PA)
Shloime Perlstein v. TransUnion, LLC, et al.
Brooklyn, New York consumer credit lawyer represented Plaintiff, who sued Defenant on a Fair Credit Reporting Act violation theory.
Federal Courthouse - King County Courthouse - Brooklyn, New Yo
New York, New York consumer law lawyer represented Plaintiff who sued Defendant on a Telephone Consumer Protection Act violation theory under 47 U.S.C. 227.
Augusta, Georgia civil rights lawyer represented Plaintiff who sued Defendant on a job discrimination theory.
Plaintiff filed his Complaint in the Superior Court of Burke County on February 8, 2022, alleging violations of the Georgia Whistleblower Protection Act and 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (Doc. no. 1-1, p. 14.) Defendants removed the action to federal court on March 11, 2022. (Doc. no. 1.) Th
More... $0 (03-16-2023 - )
More... $0 (03-13-2023 - MI)
