Google

Verdicts

Below are reports of verdicts obtained by Kazan Law in cases that have gone all the way through trial. It may seem strange that there aren’t very many, with some that are quite old.

Why do we say we are trial lawyers when we try so few cases to verdict?

We accept a relatively small number of cases and prepare every one of them for trial. Over the years, defendants and their lawyers have learned that trying cases against Kazan Law is rarely productive and almost always very expensive. As a result, they are anxious to settle cases with us.

Even when we start trial, we almost always resolve it by settlement before a verdict. Other lawyers report settlement amounts on their web sites; we do not.

Our settlement amounts are confidential for two reasons. First, our clients never want their personal financial information spread all over the Internet, and if we listed those settlements, everyone would know how much money that client received. Second, defendants who settle with us don’t want other defense lawyers to know how much they have paid our clients. They certainly don’t want other plaintiffs’ lawyers to know, because if word got out, those lawyers would try to get the kind of settlements we get.

So, if we bragged about our settlements as others do, it would let people figure out which clients got how much, and it would hurt all our future clients because it would reduce the potential for getting them the kinds of settlements we have gotten others in the past. Since our primary responsibility is to do the very best we can for every client, the decision to forgo “bragging rights” is an easy one. So, while this list might make it look as if we don’t do much, it actually demonstrates how well we really do for our clients.

If you have a case, we would be pleased to evaluate it for you and give you our honest and well thought-out assessment of its potential on a private and confidential basis. You can be confident that unless we go to jury verdict, no one will ever know how much we recovered for you.

$27,342,500 Verdict for Former Wife of Insulator

An Oakland, California jury found that Owens-Illinois, a former manufacturer of KAYLO asbestos containing thermal pipe insulation, manufactured a defective product, was negligent, and failed to adequately warn consumers, and fraudulently concealed the health hazards of its KAYLO products. The jury also found that Owens-Illinois, Inc. acted with malice, oppression or fraud. (Rose-Marie and Martin Grigg v. Owens-Illinois, Alameda County Superior Court Case No. RG12629580). [read more]

$11,000,000 Wrongful Death Verdict Reached for Automotive Parts Man

An Alameda County, California jury returned an $11 million verdict in an wrongful death suit against Pneumo Abex LLC on January 15, 2014. The jury was tasked with deciding the full amount of Mr. Bankhead’s widow’s and daughters’ losses due to his wrongful death 17 years before his life expectancy. (Emily Bankhead, Tammy Bankhead, and Debbie Bankhead Meiers v. ArvinMeritor, Inc., et al., Alameda County Superior Court Case No. RG12632899) [read more]

Confidential Resolution Reached for Airline Pilot

Kazan Law filed suit against the manufacturers of the asbestos products that an airline pilot diagnosed with mesothelioma was exposed to, as well as the property owner, tenant, and contractors at the hangar the man visited as a child. Kazan Law was able to defeat the defendants’ two attempts to remove the case to Federal Court in Philadelphia. The case was successfully resolved during jury selection. (Timothy and Caroline Vest v. Allied Packing & Supply, Inc., et al.,
Alameda County Superior Court Case No. RG09489518) [read more]

$5,437,882 Verdict for Leadership Trainer

An Oakland, California jury found Crane Co, a manufacturer of industrial products, liable for a man’s mesothelioma after hearing evidence showing that Crane Co corporate officers knew or should have known as early as the 1930s that asbestos causes diseases that kill. (James Hellam v. Crane Co., California Superior Court, Alameda County No. RG11609947) [read more]

$6,825,000 Verdict for Career Auto Mechanic

A Hayward, California jury found Ford Motor Company guilty of defectively designed products, failure to warn of product defect, and negligence. (Patrick Scott and Sharon Scott v. Allied Packing & Supply, Ford Motor Company, et al, Alameda County Superior Court No. RG12613671) [read more]

$17,400,000 Two-Phase Verdict for Heavy Duty Vehicle Parts Man

An Alameda County, California jury found that manufacturers Pneumo Abex, Arvin Meritor, and Carlisle Corporation defectively designed their brakes, failed to adequately warn consumers and customers of the dangers the brakes posed, were negligent, and intentionally concealed information that could have prevented harm, and acted with malice, fraud and oppression, warranting a second phase determination. (Gordon and Emily Bankhead v. Allied Packing & Supply, Inc., et al, Alameda County Superior Court No. RG10502243) [read more]

Confidential Resolution Reached for PG&E Laborer

Kazan Law filed suit against the manufacturer of insulation used at PG&E’s Moss Landing Steam Plant. The night clean up crew worked around asbestos containing dust and debris that covered their clothing and affected their breathing. The case was successfully resolved without being presented to the jury. (Donald Osterberg v. Allied Packing & Supply, Inc., et al., Alameda County Superior Court Case No. RG10515625) [read more]

$5,482,047 Verdict for Machinist

An Oakland, California jury found RSCC Wire & Cable, manufacturer of Rockbestos asbestos insulated wire and cable products, guilty by failing to adequately warn consumers and customers of the dangers its wire products posed, its negligence, and its malicious and oppressive misconduct. (Ronald Merrill Ricker and Suzanna Ricker v. RSCC Wire & Cable, Inc., Alameda County Superior Court No. RG10496251) [read more]

$10,038,000 Verdict for Welder

An Alameda County jury found asbestos supplier Plant Insulation liable for mesothelioma. (Ulysses Collins and Cloristeen Collins v. Plant Insulation Company, Alameda County Superior Court No. RG0414330) [read more]

$4,055,000 Verdict for Automobile Serviceman

A Los Angeles jury found brake manufacturer Pneumo Abex had been aware of the deadly health effects of breathing asbestos dust, but did not begin warning its customers of those effects until decades later. (Robert Frank Smith and Mary Lou Smith v. Pneumo Abex LLC, Los Angeles County Superior Court Docket No. BC396072) [read more]

$20,000,000 Verdict for Woman Exposed to Asbestos in Her Own Family Home

An Alameda County Superior Court jury found Hill Brothers Chemical Company responsible for mesothelioma and conduct undertaken with malice, oppression or fraud. (Karen Peterson and Jeffrey Peterson v. Hill Brothers Chemical Company, Alameda County Superior Court No. 2001-031817) [read more]

$11,500,000 Verdict for Construction Project Estimator

An Alameda County jury found Eternit, Inc., manufacturer of enameled cement asbestos board, liable based on design defect, failure to warn and negligent supply. (Don Lee Henderson & Marlene Henderson v. Eternit, Inc., Alameda County Superior Court No. 843027-6) [read more]

$20,500,000 Verdict for Pipe Manufacturing Plant Worker

An Alameda County jury found asbestos-cement pipe manufacturer J-M A/C Pipe Co. negligent and its actions malicious. (William Hardcastle and Vonda Hardcastle v. J-M A/C Pipe Corporation, Alameda County Superior Court No. 830058-2) [read more]

$6,500,000 Verdict to Woman for Childhood Household Asbestos Exposure

An Alameda County jury found USX Corporation, successor corporation to Western Pipe & Steel shipyard, liable for mesothelioma that arose after childhood household exposure to asbestos. (Jeanette Franklin v. USX Corporation, Alameda County Superior Court No. 816407-0) [read more]

Jack London Market, 55 Harrison Street, Suite 400, Oakland, CA 94607 | Toll Free: 1.877-995-6372 | Tel: 877-995-6372 | Fax: 510.835.4913
Serving Oakland, San Francisco, Los Angeles and all of California.