Jury Verdicts & Settlements

Latest jury verdicts, settlements, and legal outcome analysis

Jury Sides With Insurer in Miami Wind Damage Claim

A Miami-Dade couple sued their homeowners insurance company after it failed to pay for wind and rain damage they said struck their property in May 2020. The insurer denied the claim, citing a six-month delay in reporting the loss, missing documentation, and an inspection that found wear and tear rather than storm damage. After a jury trial, the jury found the homeowners did not prove their property suffered a direct physical loss during the policy period, and the Court entered final judgment in favor of the insurance company.

Breach of Contract

Jury Awards $75K in Florida Water Damage Insurance Suit

A Miami-Dade jury sided with homeowners Judy Dorcelus and Myrtha Ambroise-Dorcelus in their breach of contract suit against Universal Property & Casualty Insurance Company, rejecting all eleven of the insurer's affirmative defenses, including late notice, neglect, and failure to provide documentation. The jury awarded $75,000 in damages for a 2019 plumbing-related water loss, and the Court later entered final judgment for $55,828.63 plus $23,513.54 in prejudgment interest.

Breach of Contract

Jury Awards $120K in Florida Windstorm Insurance Dispute

A Miami-Dade County jury found that a Florida homeowner's property sustained windstorm damage and awarded $120,000 against Citizens Property Insurance Corporation, which had denied the claim after its inspection found only wear and tear on the roof. The final judgment totaled $148,853.73 including prejudgment interest.

Breach of Contract

Jury Awards Millions in Cattle Loan and Fraud Dispute

A jury in the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon awarded $3,645,002 in compensatory damages and $1,290,000 in punitive damages to the Plaintiffs in a dispute over a cattle lending operation. The Defendants also secured $1,612,000 on their counterclaims for breach of contract and unjust enrichment.

Breach of Contract

MN Jury Awards $900K for Fraud in Hemp THC Joint Venture

In Jon Wood, et al. v. Lift Bridge Brewing Technologies, LLC, et al., a group of investors known as the Tutus Parties filed suit after their joint venture to launch a hemp-derived THC and CBD beverage brand, Lyvly, Inc., collapsed. The Plaintiffs alleged that Lift Bridge Brewing and its executives fraudulently concealed a local city moratorium that banned cannabis manufacturing, failed to deliver viable product samples, and misallocated startup capital to promote their own beer products. While Lift Bridge argued the relationship was strictly bound by a manufacturing contract and failed due to a lack of investor funding, the Washington County District Court jury found that a legal joint venture existed. The jury held Lift Bridge liable for fraud and breach of fiduciary duty, awarding the Plaintiffs $900,000 in damages.

Breach of Contract

Florida Jury Awards Designer Unpaid Condo Renovation Fees

A Florida design and staging firm took a real estate investor and his trust to federal Court after a luxury condominium project soured over unpaid bills. The firm, owned by a licensed broker, had been hired to remodel, decorate, and stage a Miami penthouse that the trust bought for $1.9 million and planned to flip. The firm said the owners kept ordering upgrades far beyond the original $138,000 budget, accepted the finished work, and then refused to pay in full once the unit sold for nearly $3 million. The Defendants countered that the firm itself broke the contract and that they had already paid everything they owed. After trial, the jury sided with the firm on most of its claims, including breach of contract and unjust enrichment, and awarded $81,492.87. It rejected the firm's civil theft and conversion claims, declined to hold the Defendants liable on the larger renovation invoice, but found them liable for $14,433.79 in unpaid apartment rent.

Breach of Contract

Real Estate Broker Wins Massive Commissions & Fraud Lawsuit

The Plaintiff argued that Goldstein served as the procuring cause for the real estate transaction. Goldstein’s legal counsel emphasized that the agent identified the property, educated the buyers on its investment value, drafted the initial paperwork, and extracted the vital target price from the listing broker. The Plaintiff asserted that Ezekiel fabricated an excuse to pull out of the deal solely to cut Goldstein out of the transaction. By routing the purchase through a nonexistent entity and using a family member as a sham broker, the Defendants pocketed the commission as a credit to lower their overall purchase costs.

Breach of Contract

Home Investment Ends in $398,000 Breach of Contract Verdict

What began as an agreement to merge households for multi-generational care ended in a federal Courtroom when a daughter refused to place her aging parents on a property title. Susan and Michael Murman sold their longtime home in Eureka, California, to provide a $300,000 down payment for a replacement property in Hawaii, relying on their daughter Patricia's status as a military service member to secure a VA loan and medical benefits. After the closing, Patricia repeatedly delayed adding her parents to the deed and ultimately decided to sell the home when the military reassigned her to South Korea. Displaced and financially drained, the parents relocated to Idaho and filed suit. A federal jury in the Northern District of California ruled in favor of the mother, finding that a valid contract existed and that the daughter had been unjustly enriched, resulting in a total final judgment of $398,000.

Breach of Contract

Jury Sides With Insurer in $213M Post-Judgment Interest Fight

Federal Express Corporation sued three excess insurers — National Union, Great American, and Liberty Mutual — over their refusal to cover more than $213 million in pre-judgment and post-judgment interest that piled up during a seven-year appeal of a massive personal injury verdict in New Mexico. FedEx argued the insurers actively participated in and benefited from the appeals while interest compounded at 15% per year, then walked away from the bill. The jury found National Union did not breach its duty of good faith and fair dealing.