Jury Verdicts & Settlements

Latest jury verdicts, settlements, and legal outcome analysis

Asbestos Negligence Verdict: Shipyard Liable for Mesothelioma

A Louisiana federal jury found Huntington Ingalls Incorporated (Avondale) solely liable for the asbestos-related death of Ronald Marcella, a former shipyard clerk who worked at the facility from 1962 to 1964. Although Mr. Marcella performed clerical duties, his proximity to tradesmen cutting raw asbestos insulation caused him to inhale toxic fibers, resulting in a fatal diagnosis of malignant mesothelioma decades later. The jury cleared all six third-party equipment manufacturers and awarded the Marcella family $6,625,000 in general damages. Following post-trial motions, the Court amended the judgment to include pre-judgment interest dating back to the initial 2024 judicial demand.

Motor Vehicle Accident

DC Jury Clears Driver in Stop Sign Crash Lawsuit Trial

A District of Columbia Superior Court jury found in favor of Defendant Naeem Wynn on May 19, 2026, ending a civil lawsuit brought by Joseph Wade over a two-vehicle collision at the intersection of Kansas Avenue NW and Ingraham Street in Washington, D.C. Wade claimed that Wynn ran a stop sign on March 11, 2023, and slammed into his 1997 Chevrolet Astro, destroying the vehicle and causing serious, life-threatening injuries that required treatment at Howard University Hospital. Wade sought more than $75,000 in compensatory damages on a negligence count and more than $3.5 million on a gross negligence count, claiming permanent injuries, lost income, and ongoing pain, anxiety, and fear of driving. Wynn, represented by attorney Michael Merod, denied the allegations in his answer filed on December 12, 2024, and raised ten separate defenses, including denials of negligence, lack of a causal link between the crash and Wade's claimed injuries, and possible third-party fault. After trial before Associate Judge Leslie A. Meek, the jury answered "No" to the first question on the verdict form, which asked whether the Defendant acted negligently. Because of that finding, the jury did not consider the second question about the Plaintiff's own negligence. The Court entered judgment in favor of Wynn and against Wade in the amount of $0.00 on the same day.

Labor and Employment Law

Solar Project Labor Dispute Ends With No Damages Awarded

A North Carolina labor staffing company supplied over a million dollars' worth of workers to a major Arkansas solar construction project, never got paid, won big at trial — and then watched a judge erase the largest awards. HardHat Workforce Solutions, LLC secured jury findings in its favor on every claim it brought, including a $4.4 million punitive damage verdict against Jingoli Power, LLC. But the Court vacated the conversion verdicts entirely, leaving HardHat with symbolic wins and no money after years of litigation over $1,101,174.54 in unpaid labor invoices.

Tort -General

Portland Cider Riot May Day Attack Jury Verdict Guide

On May 1, 2019, an open International Workers' Day celebration at the Cider Riot pub in Portland, Oregon, turned into a scene of violent conflict. Approximately 20 heavily geared and armed individuals affiliated with the right-wing group Patriot Prayer USA descended upon the property. The confrontation quickly escalated into physical warfare as the group deployed chemical sprays and struck patrons with weapons, leaving one customer with a broken vertebra. The business and its owner, Abram Goldman-Armstrong, filed a civil suit against several participants, alleging trespass, intentional interference with economic relations, and the intentional infliction of emotional distress. On January 30, 2026, a Multnomah County Circuit Court jury held the Defendants accountable, awarding $600,000 in compensatory damages for emotional trauma alongside $160,000 in punitive damages to penalize and deter the malicious conduct.

Consumer protection

California Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Defect Lawsuit

Kimberly A. Mattei brought a civil lawsuit against auto manufacturer FCA US, LLC, under the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act, commonly known as California's lemon law. She alleged that her newly purchased 2021 Jeep Grand Cherokee harbored severe operational defects that the manufacturer's authorized service centers failed to repair despite multiple opportunities. Believing she was entitled to consumer protection remedies, Mattei demanded full restitution of the $58,317.08 purchase price, a civil penalty of up to two times her actual damages for willful misconduct, and compensation for incidental expenses. FCA US, LLC strongly contested the claims, maintaining that the vehicle did not present defects that substantially compromised its safety or value, and arguing that any repair delays did not result in harm to the owner. Following a trial in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, the jury reached a complete defense verdict, finding that the vehicle's usage was not substantially impaired and that the owner had suffered no demonstrable harm from repair delays.

Intellectual Property Law

Texas Jury Orders Charis to Pay $8.4M over Stolen Blueprints

A high-stakes corporate feud between competing energy engineering firms culminated in an $8.4 million federal Court judgment against Charis Engineering, LLC. Charis initially filed a lawsuit as the Plaintiff against BCCK Engineering, Incorporated and BCCK Holding Company, claiming that BCCK launched a commercial smear campaign regarding intellectual property theft that scared a mutual client, Targa Resources, into canceling two lucrative Nitrogen Rejection Unit construction contracts. However, the procedural posture of the lawsuit shifted dramatically when BCCK fought back with powerful counterclaims, effectively turning the original Defendants into the prosecuting parties at trial. BCCK asserted that Charis's founder—a former BCCK employee—had taken proprietary technical blueprints to win those commercial bids. A federal jury ultimately sided entirely with BCCK on its counterclaims, finding that Charis had willfully and maliciously misappropriated BCCK's trade secrets under the Federal Defend Trade Secrets Act. The Court ordered Charis to pay $3.75 million in compensatory damages and $4.65 million in exemplary damages.

Motor Vehicle Accident

Connecticut Intersection Bus Crash Jury Verdict Report

On January 11, 2024, an intersection collision occurred on Park Street in Hartford, Connecticut, when a 2018 IC Bus operated by Victor Bonilla Porras and owned by DATTCO, Inc. collided with the rear driver's side of James Davidson’s 2002 Chevrolet Suburban. Davidson filed a lawsuit alleging that the bus driver made an abrupt, unsafe left turn without warning, causing severe permanent lumbar spine injuries, facet syndrome, and thoracic contusions. The defense contested liability, denying all claims of negligence and harm. Following a trial before Judge Kaitlin A. Halloran, the jury returned a complete defense verdict, finding no liability and awarding zero damages.

Personal Injury

Connecticut Jury Clears Hospital in Malpractice Suit

An elective laparoscopic left hepatectomy to remove a benign liver growth turned into an emergency open surgery at Yale New Haven Hospital when a patient suffered severe abdominal bleeding and a persistent bile leak. The surgical team discovered a torn splenic capsule, which forced them to perform an immediate, unplanned splenectomy. The Plaintiff alleged that the surgeons used excessive traction and failed to secure proper informed consent. However, the defense maintained that the complications were inherent risks of a complex operation rather than deviations from the medical standard of care. A Connecticut jury agreed with the defense, returning a complete defense verdict.

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.