Latest jury verdicts, settlements, and legal outcome analysis
A Lake County jury ruled in favor of Rae Casto and awarded her $136,000 in damages after Alex McCollum, driving on behalf of Aim Integrated Logistics, Inc., struck her vehicle at the Silhavy Road and LaPorte Avenue roundabout on October 14, 2022. The Defendants admitted liability at trial, and the jury decided only on the amount of damages. Judge Calvin D. Hawkins entered judgment on October 17, 2025.
Zezy R. Farfan, an intellectually disabled woman who successfully completed a six-month work training program at a Station Casinos property, applied for a porter job at Red Rock Casino in 2018. The casino extended her a conditional offer, then withdrew it the day after calling her in specifically to ask about her disability accommodations. A federal jury in Nevada found Red Rock Casino liable for failing to hire her because of her actual disability, her perceived disability, and for failing to reasonably accommodate her — awarding $400,000 in compensatory damages under each theory and $2,500,000 in punitive damages.
A Connecticut jury found a commercial driver and his employer, Restoration Specialists, LLC, 85% at fault for a July 2023 intersection collision in Wolcott. The Plaintiff, Arthur Fil, sustained multiple cervical, thoracic, and lumbar injuries after the company vehicle suddenly turned left across his lane of travel. Although the jury assigned 15% comparative negligence to the Plaintiff, it calculated gross economic and noneconomic damages at $30,000, resulting in a finalized net award of $25,500.
Louis Liner prevailed in a federal employment discrimination lawsuit against a Louisiana pest control company after his employer terminated him for refusing a mandatory COVID-19 vaccination that conflicted with his sincerely held religious beliefs. The jury unanimously found that Liner proved his bona fide religious belief, informed his employer of this belief prior to termination, and that his religious belief was a motivating factor in the company's decision to fire him. The jury determined the employer failed to prove it was unable to reasonably accommodate Liner's religious needs and that his continued employment posed no direct threat to workplace safety. A jury awarded Liner $100,000 in compensatory damages and $200,000 in punitive damages, along with $75,000 in past lost earnings.
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.
A jury in the Eastern District of Texas returned a unanimous verdict finding that Samsung Electronics infringed two wireless communications patents owned by Headwater Research LLC. The jury awarded $278,791,460 as a lump sum reasonable royalty for infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 8,406,733 and 9,198,117, which covered automated device provisioning and secure wireless messaging technology used in Samsung's Galaxy phones, tablets, Knox-enabled devices, and Tizen-based products.
A Miami-Dade County jury returned a defense verdict on all claims in a lawsuit alleging that a barbershop associate fraudulently took over the Plaintiff's business while he served time in federal prison. The Defendants argued that the Plaintiff sold the business for $8,500 before his incarceration under a notarized agreement. The Court also ruled in favor of the Defendants on the remaining equitable claims.
A federal jury in the Western District of Washington awarded $7,000,000 to Susan Chen and her minor son J.L. after finding the Washington State Department of Children, Youth, and Families negligently investigated the family and negligently inflicted emotional distress through the wrongful removal of two children from their home.
A federal jury in Delaware ordered Teneobio Inc. and Amgen Inc. to pay $20,203,704 in damages to Harbour Antibodies after determining that the Defendants' antibody discovery platform literally infringed claim 2 of U.S. Patent Number 10,906,970. While the jury unanimously found that Teneobio's UniRat platform met the "cloning said recombined heavy chain locus" element, it rejected the Plaintiffs' claim that the infringement was willful. The jury also systematically rejected all of Teneobio's invalidity defenses, including allegations of obviousness, lack of enablement, and inadequate written description, validating the structural integrity of Harbour's transgenic rodent technology.
