Austin, Texas personal injury truck wreck lawyer represented the Plaintiff who sued on an auto negligence theory.

This case was filed in the 453rd Judicial District Court of Hays County, Texa, 21-02083, and was removed to federal court by the Defendants.

Texas, is a “modified” comparative negligence state. Under the Texas modified comparative negligence standard, plaintiffs c

Dallas, Texas personal injury slip and fall lawyer represented the Plaintiff who sued on a premises liability theory.

This case was filed in the County Court at Law No 5 of Dallas County, TX, CC-22-04793-E, and was removed to federal court.

A premises liability action is a form of “negligence” based on a premises defect theory. The elements to establish a premises liability c

Abilene, Texas personal injury truck wreck lawyers represented the Plaintiff who sued on auto negligence theories.

This case was filed in the County Court at Law No. 3, Dallas County, Texas, CC-22-05707-C, and was removed to federal court by the Defendants.

Texas is a “modified” comparative negligence state. Under the Texas modified comparative negligence standard, plaintiffs

Fort Worth, Texas personal injury truck wreck lawyer represented the Plaintiff who sued the Defendant on an auto negligence theory.

This case was filed in the 43rd District Court- Parker County, CV23-1283, and was removed to federal court by the Defendants.

Texas is a “modified” comparative negligence state. Under the Texas modified comparative negligence standard, plaintiff

Dallas, Texas personal injury truck wreck lawyers represented the Plaintiff who sued the Defendant on an auto negligence theory.

This case was filed in the Dallas County Court at Law No. 2, CC-23-00227-B, and was removed to federal court by the Defendant.

Texas is a “modified” comparative negligence state. Under the Texas modified comparative negligence standard, plaintiffs c

Charleston, South Carolina personal injury truck wreck lawyers represented the Plaintiff who sued on an auto negligence theory.

Some states subscribe to the “pure comparative negligence” rule, where a plaintiff can recover damages even if he or she was 99 percent at-fault. But South Carolina follows the “modified comparative negligence” rule, with a 51 percent bar. Here, the plain

San Francisco, California criminal defense lawyer represented the Defendant charged with participating in a conspiracy that targeted U.S. military personnel and property in Iraq.

Rock Hill, South Carolina personal injury truck wreck lawyer represented the Plaintiff who sued on an auto negligence theory.

This case was filed in the Chester County Court of Common Pleas, 2023-CP-12-00086, and was removed to federal court by the Defendants.

Some states subscribe to the “pure comparative negligence” rule, where a plaintiff can recover damages even if he or

Baltimore, Maryland personal injury truck wreck lawyer represented the Plaintiff who sued the Defendant on a auto negligence theories.

Maryland remains one of the few remaining states to use this doctrine in assessing injury claims. Under Maryland law, a person who is found to be contributorily negligent may not recover ANY damages for their injuries, regardless of how minor their contrib

Washington, DC personal injury truck wreck lawyers represented the Plaintiffs who sued on auto negligence theories.

This case was filed in the Superior Court for the District of Columbia, 2022 CA 000031 V, and was removed to federal court by the Defendants.

Unlike most states, Washington D.C. is a contributory negligence state. Under contributory negligence rules, victims cannot

Santa Ana, California family law divorce lawyers represented the parties.


Respondent Krystyna Marczak and nonparty Carl Rickard Dahlberg were going through a divorce when their home in Costa Mesa (the property) burned down. They entered into an arrangement with defendant Anoushiravan Eslamdoust aka Tony Esla (Esla). Under the deal, Esla provided $50,000 to buy out Dahlberg's interest

Richmond, Virginia personal injury truck wreck lawyer represented the Plaintiff who sued the Defendant on auto negligence theories.

This case was filed in the General District Court for the City of Richmond, GV23004707-00, and was removed to federal court by the Defendants.

Some states follow a more enlightened version of the fault law called "comparative negligence." Alas, Virgi

Roanoke, Virginia personal injury truck wreck lawyer represented the Plaintiff who sued on auto negligence theories.

This case was filed in the Montgomery County Circuit Court, CL-22002004-00, and was removed to federal court by the Dfendant.

Some states follow a more enlightened version of the fault law called "comparative negligence." Alas, Virginia still chooses what is known

Wheeling, West Virginia personal injury truck wreck lawyer represented the Plaintiff who sued on an auto negligence theory.

Under West Virginia's comparative negligence laws, an injury victim who is 50% or less at fault for an accident can recover compensation for their injuries. Their total amount of damages will then be reduced by the percentage that they were to blame for the accident.

Wheeling, West Virginia insurance law lawyer represented the Plaintiff who sued on a bad faith breach of insurance contract theory.

West Virginia, the law defines “insurance bad faith” as any insurance company conduct that violates the state’s statute and results in damages to the policyholder. It can be any action that is not a general and sanctioned business practice. Any breach o

Austin, Texas personal injury slip and fall lawyers represented the Plaintiff who sued on a premises liability negligence theory.

This case was file din the 419th Judicial District Court, Travis County, TX, D-1-GN-23-008705, and was removed to federal court by the Defendant.

A premises liability action is a form of “negligence” based on a
premises defect theory. The eleme

Austin, Texas personal injury car wreck lawyer represented the Plaintiff who sued on an auto negligence theory.

In Texas, we are a “modified” comparative negligence state. Under the Texas modified comparative negligence standard, you can sue for damages even if you are partially at fault for an accident. However, if you are found to be more than 50% to blame for an accident, you canno

Bluefield, West Virginia personal injury lawyer represented the Plaintiff who sued the Defendant on a negligence theory.

The elements of a personal injury claim in West Virginia are: Duty of care, breach of duty of care, damages and a direct casual relationship between the two.

West Virginia is a modified comparative negligence state. Plaintiffs can be no more than 50% responsibl

Charleston, West Virginia personal injury lawyer represented the Plaintiff who sued on auto negligence theories.

Under West Virginia's comparative negligence laws, an injury victim who is 50% or less at fault for an accident can recover compensation for their injuries. Their total amount of damages will then be reduced by the percentage that they were to blame for the accident.

Charleston, West Virginia insurance law lawyer represented the Plaintiff who sued on a bad faith breach of insurance contract theory.

This case was filed in the Circuit Court of Kanawha County, West Virginia, 23-C-368, and was removed to federal court by the Defendant.

The elements that make up bad faith insurance lawsuits. Typically, a plaintiff
must possess these elements

San Francisco, California personal injury lawyer represented the Plaintiff who sued on a Federal Tort Claims Act auto negligence theory.

Federal tort claims are those against the federal government for damages to property, personal injuries, or death caused by the negligent or wrongful acts of a government employee while they were acting within the scope of their employment.

San Francisco, California insurance law lawyer represented the Plaintiff who sued on a bad faith breach of insurance contract theory.

This case was filed in the San Francisco County Superior Court, CGC-21-597318, and was removed to federal court by the Defendant.

An insurance company has a legal duty to uphold its obligations under the terms of the policy. If they fail to do so,

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania personal injury truck wreck lawyer represented the Plaintiff who sued on an auto negligence theory.

This case was filed in the Court of Common Pleas Philadelphia County, 230400387, and was removed to federal court by the Defendants.

In Pennsylvania, you can recover compensation for a personal injury claim as long as the level of fault is not more than

Harrisburg, Pennsylvania personal injury lawyer represented the Plaintiff who sued the Defendant on a negligence theory.

n Pennsylvania, a plaintiff can recover compensation for a personal injury claim as long as the level of fault is not more than 50% of the total fault. An action to recover damages must be started within two years, and those damages can include medical bills, lost wages

Scranton, Pennsylvania personal injury truck wreck lawyers represented the Plaintiff who sued on auto negligence theories.

This case was filed in the Court of Common Pleas of Lackawanna County, 24-CV-736, and was removed to federal court by the Defendants.

Pennsylvania follows a 51 percent comparative negligence rule, which means you can recover damages if you were less than 51 p