When faced with potentially harmful evidence, it is best to accept responsibility and face the situation head on, instead of playing games and trying to hide evidence. Using tactics like this is not likely to endear the jury to an attorney, and may fuel their anger, leading to larger verdicts. 1. Equihua v.
Noneconomic damages often make up a large portion of Nuclear Verdicts™. Defense attorneys will be happy to know there is a new interpretation of “damage cap” at play in Tennessee after the ruling in Yebuah v. Ctr. for Urological Treatment, PLC.[i] The Tennessee Supreme Court’s ruling is a small step in the right direction
Florida Rule 769.78 generally dictates rules on offers and demands as they pertain to judgments.[i] However, this area of law is not well-settled. In a recent case, Florida’s courts dove into the impact of post-offer prejudgment interest on the “judgment obtained.”[ii] The ruling in CCM Condominium Association, Inc. v. Petri Positive Pest Control, Inc.
Plaintiffs’ lawyers are driving skyrocketing damages awards in courts all across the country . Such Nuclear Verdicts® – jury awards in excess of $10 million or that are disproportionate and irrational given the facts of a case – trigger higher costs for the insurance industry and result in premium increases that are out of