We don’t settle your case on the courthouse steps

Every battle is won or lost before it is ever fought. We know what it takes to prevail at trial. Our reputation has been built on one of the highest win ratios in the industry. We will not settle your case on the courthouse steps. You expect your attorneys to aggressively defend your interests not only through discovery but also through the closing stage of the case – trial.

Defense Verdict in Baltimore, MD

Brant Poling received a defense verdict, working in conjunction with local counsel, Kelly Hughes Iverson, in a medical malpractice case pending in Federal District Court in Baltimore Maryland.  The physician was accused of causing an injury to all five brachial plexus nerve roots at the time of birth by applying lateral traction during the delivery.  Our client denied the allegation and defense experts testified that the injuries were the result of the natural maternal forces of labor.  After a 10 day trial, the jury returned a verdict in favor of our clients.

Appellate Win!

Attorneys Sabrina Sellers and Brant Poling successfully argued and defended a recent appeal before the 10th District Court of Appeals.  Appellants argued an Affidavit of Merit filed with the Complaint was sufficient evidence to overcome a Motion for Summary Judgment attested to by Defendant orthopedic surgeon.  The Appellate Court upheld the lower Court’s decision on summary judgment in favor of the defense finding that an Affidavit of Merit is not evidence sufficient to create a genuine issue of fact.

Defense Verdict for Attorneys Sabrina Sellers and Brant Poling

A Summit County jury returned a unanimous defense verdict in favor of the defendant Pain Management physician and his corporation following a week-long trial.  Plaintiff claimed the physician negligently performed cervical and thoracic trigger point injections causing the patient to suffer a delayed pneumothorax (punctured lung) over 24-hours after the procedure.  The defense argued Plaintiff suffered a secondary spontaneous pneumothorax based on her pre-existing COPD.  Through the use of colorized ultrasound images and expert testimony, the defense was able to demonstrate that the physician’s injections were nowhere near the patient’s lungs at any time during the procedure.  The jury quickly returned a unanimous defense verdict and shared with the trial team after the fact that the explanations of the medicine, coupled with the courtroom technology used to demonstrate the complexities of the case, left no room for questions about the physician’s care of the patient meeting the standard of care.