Case Summaries

A young female nurse was traveling down Interstate 79 when she suddenly came up on a car facing her with its headlights on in her direct lane of travel. She did what any reasonable person would do – she applied her brakes, before losing control of her vehicle. She had severe injuries including a broken pelvis and concussion. The driver in the other vehicle (barely injured) brought claims against the nurse’s automobile insurance policy seeking damages. The nurse had no intention to sue but was angered by the other driver’s greedy actions. The nurse retained Desai. Desai did a thorough investigation including scene re-creation and driver’s compiling sworn witness statements to prove the other driver was completely at fault in causing the collision.  Desai presented compelling and overwhelming evidence to the insurance company and ultimately, the nurse recovered the entire limits of the other automobile liability policy. The case settled for policy limits and a lawsuit was not necessary because the case was properly built and presented, ultimately settling for the best possible outcome (all available insurance) without the need for litigation. Desai vindicated the nurse’s rights against the man that tried to sue her for no reason.

Rear-ender collision on Interstate 79 caused by driver under the influence of narcotics. Our clients were a wonderful couple. The wife sustained a painful neck injury. The couple consulted another law firm, but were turned down because their injuries were “soft-tissue” in nature (example, whiplash). The couple then retained Desai to get justice– angry because the wife was hurt by an intoxicated driver. The wife progressed through her medical treatment and was found to have sustained a permanent brachial plexus injury (the brachial plexus is the network of nerves that sends signals from the spinal cord to the shoulder, arm and hand). Desai demanded the full available liability limits of the driver’s policy. Then, Desai demanded the full available limits of our client’s underinsured motorist policy. Her own insurance company refused to make an offer. Desai then obtained additional medical evidence and a statement from the wife’s doctor regarding the seriousness of the injury and once again demanded the full insurance proceeds. Less then a week later, the insurance company agreed to offer the wife the full available insurance limits of her underinsured motorist coverage for $100,000.00. The case settled without a lawsuit because it was built and presented properly.  In this case, being relentless saved the client timely and expensive litigation and resulted in the best possible outcome (all available insurance proceeds).

T-Bone style collision, where the other vehicle pulled out in front of the vehicle our client was a passenger in. Our client sustained various non-life-threatening musculoskeletal injuries and an eye injury. The client had pre-existing eye conditions that muddied the waters in determining whether the eye injury and associated surgery was related to her head trauma from the collision. Desai compiled medical research and interviewed the doctor that performed the surgery in securing substantial medical evidence that the eye injury was due to the head trauma, and not caused by the client’s pre-existing medical conditions. Ultimately, the case settled for $270,000.00 (essentially all of the available insurance) shortly before the lawsuit because the case had been built, saving the client significant time and expense in unnecessary litigation. Without the due diligence and a proper presentation of the client’s medical evidence, the client would have been dragged into lengthy and costly litigation and the outcome may have been different.

Our client was a 59-year-old pipe-fitter that was struck head-on by an intoxicated motorist. Our client sustained various serious injuries including a crushed heel and lacerated tendons in his dominant hand. He was out of work for an extended period. Desai immediately requested all insurance policies applicable to the client’s claim. The at-fault driver carried minimal insurance. Desai found three different policies in the client’s household that would apply. Due diligence confirmed that the insurance company made a mistake in issuing one of the policies, and instead of paying its limits of $15,000.00 – that insurance company had to pay $100,000.00, under that specific policy. One of the other insurers argued that their policy did not apply, but Desai gathered evidence and legal research undermining their argument, ultimately resulting in that insurance company paying its $100,000.00 limits. In total, the case settled for all available insurance of $300,000.00 and the pipe fitter was able to retire early. Without resilience and due diligence, in finding, triggering, and maximizing the insurance policies, this case would not have resolved within 6 months for all available insurance.

E.E. and H.H. were on the way from Philadelphia, PA and traveling to Southern West Virginia when they were struck head-on, on the wrong side of the interstate, by a drunk driver. The collision was violent and caused E.E. significant, permanent injuries, including a mangled right arm and brain injury. H.H. was fortunate to survive with minor injuries. The driver that caused the wreck did not carry sufficient insurance and Desai looked to the clients’ own underinsured motorist carrier for compensation. In conducting an insurance investigation, Desai learned that the clients maintained residency with H.H.’s parents, and that her sister also resided in the household with a separate auto policy. The insurance policies for H.H.’s parents’ vehicles denied the claim. Desai presented compelling evidence to overturn the insurance company’s denial. The insurance policy for H.H.’s sister denied the claim and again, Desai presented compelling evidence to overturn their denial. Ultimately, all of the insurance companies and policies (3 different companies, 4 different policies) ended up paying all of their limits of insurance. Each claim settled for the maximum available insurance of $255,000.00. H.H.’s claim alone had to be presented properly, with a specific focus and evidence regarding her emotional distress damages, which are hard to quantify and prove. The case was presented perfectly, and all insurance was collected. It is worth noting that a very intensive investigation was undertaken (the at-fault driver’s cell phone was forensically examined to confirm he was not at a bar – which could have provided additional insurance coverage; multiple witnesses were interviewed; the site was visited and re-constructed; insurance databases were utilized to confirm no additional policies; and a private investigator was hired to uncover relevant facts). A very tragic situation, but the best possible legal outcome.

Our clients were three young ladies employed by a fast-food chain and subjected to inappropriate sexual harassment and contact by their manager. We took these claims very seriously and investigated their claims thoroughly before bringing a lawsuit. By the time we filed suit, we had spoken and obtained statements from over 10 former employees. The case was built before it was filed. We knew these young women were telling the truth based on what we learned about the restaurant, its operations, and its hiring practices. The restaurant refused to engage in settlement discussions prior to the filing of the lawsuit. So, we filed suit strategically, and began applying pressure – producing tons of documents and witness statements that corroborated our clients’ claims. The restaurant chain quickly tapped out and contacted us to resolve the claims prior to trial and even depositions. We were successful in resolving each clients’ claims. The restaurant was held accountable for allowing such sexual harassment to persist and for its failures in properly vetting out its supervisory hires.

Our clients were police officers with a police department in West Virginia. They were subjected to inappropriate conduct and sexual harassment by a high-ranking officer within the department. Our clients followed the Department’s policies in reporting the sexual harassment and initiating an investigation. Unfortunately, however, the police department did not sincerely handle their complaints – conducting a slow investigation, questioning the officers rather than the harasser, and failing to inform the officers of the investigation results and status. The officers realized that the Department was not taking their complaints seriously and retained Desai. Desai investigated the matter and evaluated the Department’s liability for failing to take the officers’ complaints seriously. Eventually, a lawsuit was filed and the Department quickly settled all three claims. Had the Town handled the complaints seriously, no lawsuit would have been filed. The police officers recovered for their emotional and mental damages and maintained their positions at the department. More importantly, the Town learned about the legal consequences for failing to properly handle complaints of harassment and discrimination.

Our client was in Bridgeport, West Virginia, properly traveling when a motorist pulled out directly in her path, causing a violent collision. Our client sustained a fractured wrist. The other party argued that our client was speeding, but did not produce any real evidence to support their allegation. Our team performed an investigation and learned that the other motorist had been eating at a restaurant immediately prior to the collision, and that he was rushing out, because he was “not feeling well.” We obtained an affidavit from the waiter of the restaurant. Eventually, a lawsuit was filed over an insurance dispute involving the collision, but the case quickly settled for all available insurance coverage. Our client was vindicated in her rights and obtained a favorable result. Without proper legal counsel, the client likely would have been met with significant insurance roadblocks. Without a proper investigation, the client likely would have received less money – though she deserved every cent of what she ultimately received for injuries and pain and suffering.

Our client was rear-ended while on his motorcycle by another motorcyclist. The at-fault motorcyclist blamed our client for the collision and tried to bring a claim against our client for her injuries. Fortunately, the client was referred to Desai immediately after the collision and a prompt, thorough investigation was immediately undertaken. Desai retrieved camera footage from a jewelry store near the accident scene which undoubtedly proved the fault of the other motorcyclist. Furthermore, Desai obtained several witness statements confirming the other motorcyclist had been drinking and appeared to be intoxicated at the time of the collision, as well as statements as to her inexperience in operating motorcycles. We stood by our client and fought the insurance company tooth and nail to accept responsibility for their insured (the other motorcyclist). After producing overwhelming evidence, the insurance company had no choice but to accept legal responsibility and agree to pay for our client’s damages. His motorcycle was swiftly replaced and he was paid a monetary amount for every day that he went without a motorcycle (because it was not his fault). Our client did sustain minor injuries, and fortunately none of them were serious. We made sure he was properly compensated for all of his losses and for his anguish in being wrongfully accused and almost sued. What started out as an insurance nightmare for the client (wherein he almost lost his bike and would not be compensated for his medical bills and injuries), ended up being a major victory for our client as he received a substantial sum to properly compensate him for his physical, emotional, and financial damages.

This case arose in Marlinton, West Virginia, where our client was riding with a group of motorcyclists, before a motorist made a left turn directly in the path of our client’s motorcycle. Our client tried to evade the other motorist’s vehicle, and almost made it, but was thrown from his motorcycle to the right of the roadway. Our client fortunately sustained only minor injuries including road rash and a knee injury. The at-fault driver completely denied responsibility, arguing the “motorcycles came out of nowhere.” We filed a lawsuit on behalf of our client and learned during depositions that the other motorist was legally blind, had serious driving restrictions, and was deaf in her left ear – explaining why she did not see or hear the motorcycles coming down the road before beginning her left turn. The insurance company still refused to accept responsibility, so we prepared our case for trial. One week before trial, the insurance company called to settle the case – agreeing to pay our client $50,000.00 – much more than his injuries justified, because of the time and energy wasted in litigating a case that was otherwise clear and should have been resolved without a lawsuit, almost a year prior. Other lawyers involved in the case expressed their opinion that our client’s demand of $50,000.00 was unreasonable based on his injuries, but we stood firm in our position, arguing the insurance company would have to pay a premium for the inconvenience they forced upon our client by failing to take responsibility. We stood on principle and the insurance company ultimately agreed to pay, acknowledging our client’s position. The result exceeded the expectations of other lawyers involved in the case, but to us was the right and fair result for our client.

Our client was a federal government employee that was subjected to sexual harassment by someone higher in her chain of command. The sexual harassment was egregious and once we heard the young lady’s story, we knew we had to help her. We usually do not take cases against the federal government because they require specialized knowledge and have their own unique procedures under federal law – but we made an exception in this case because we felt a need to obtain justice on behalf of the young lady. The government agency immediately denied responsibility and refused to compensate our client for her losses. She had experienced significant emotional distress and ultimately resigned from her position due to the harassment. Shockingly, the Agency blamed our client for failing to complain about the harassment – though she was a brand new employee and was fearful of coming forward. An intense legal battle ensued and we obtained significant evidence in support of our position that the government agency failed to properly investigate our client’s claims once they became aware and protected the harasser (a higher-ranking individual), while failing to consult, protect, or assure our client. We painted a very clear picture as to how this failure resulted in our client’s resignation. The Agency ultimately decided to resolve our client’s claim at mediation. Notably, the mediator, a federal Judge from Texas, indicated that this was the highest settlement they had seen this federal Agency pay to resolve claims of this nature. We were thrilled for our client that finally got justice. The financial settlement made her whole, but more importantly, she is happy that her story was believed and advocated for – and that the Agency finally acknowledged the seriousness of her claims.