My name is Larry Nguyen and I live in Dallas and while traveling to Houston a crate fell off of a truck, hit my car, and the owner ran away.
I was on the internet, looking around, searching up lawyers in Dallas and Mike Grossman came up and I decided to contact him. I visited the office and he was very friendly, helpful, and he described to me and explained everything what the process is going to be. It was quick, easy, and everything worked out great. If it happened to me again, I'd be right back here.
-
L. Nguyen
Automobile Accident Case
Dallas Truck Accident Mediation
Dallas Truck Accident Attorney Michael Grossman Explains Personal Injury Mediation
When dealing with a truck accident case, our attorneys try to reach a settlement as smoothly as possible to avoid causing any unnecessary grief to our clients.
Oftentimes we can reach a settlement by simply calling the insurance company and discussing the claim and what might happen if it goes to trial. But if we cannot reach an agreeable settlement by telephone or written correspondence, we go into mediation (which is still significantly less of a headache than going to trial).
Mediation is where the plaintiff's attorneys and the defense counsel meet with a mediator to discuss the prospects of the case and try to avoid going to trial. This process occurs after both the plaintiff's and the defendant's attorneys have had time to gather evidence and prepare litigation for the case. Even though we prepare for trial, neither side wants it to actually go that far. Not only are trials a hassle for everyone, but they are also unpredictable. Trials involve trying to convince a jury to see things one way or another and, since every jury is different, this can be an extremely volatile task. Both sides want to avoid playing with that wild card as much as they can.
To that end, they meet with a mediator. A mediator is typically a retired attorney or judge who provides a neutral, experienced point of view. To begin, the mediator listens to the opening statements, arguments, and assertions presented by each side. The mediator then meets with each side separately to discuss their arguments. Essentially, the mediator is trying to get a feel for how the case will go if it goes to trial. He or she will then discuss these prospects with both the plaintiff's attorneys and the defense counsel. The mediator's goal is to guide both parties to a settlement that they find agreeable.
While our attorneys prefer to settle cases in this manner, we are certainly willing to take the case to trial if an agreeable settlement cannot be reached through other means. We have twenty years of experience with both trial cases and cases resolved through mediation, and we have successfully resolved hundreds of large cases through both mediation and trial with every major trucking company in the country. In other words, your opposition knows who we are, and they are often very cooperative with our negotiations because they know how successful our attorneys have been in court. We are determined to help you however we can. If you need an experienced attorney to help you mediate your case, we are here for you. If, on the other hand, you need someone to aggressively fight for your rights in court, we can do that too. We will do whatever we can to help you get the justice you deserve and the settlement you need. Contact a truck accident mediation attorney at Grossman Law Offices today.
Is a trial the best idea for these kinds of cases?
Why is mediation better in these situations?
Recovery for client who suffered soft tissue injuries when she was struck by an 18-wheeler.
$41,000.00
$13,666.00
$135.00
The family of a deceased woman hired our firm following a fatal 18-wheeler accident. The fatal accident occurred as the driver of an 18-wheeler lost control of his vehicle and veered out of his lane, resulting in a massive collision. The decedent, a passenger in a vehicle, died on the scene.
Her adult children consulted our firm to initially investigate the accident and make sense of the facts and circumstances since the family felt that the police report did not make it clear enough precisely what occurred. We launched a full investigation an immediately deposed the investigating officers.
Upon the completion of our investigation, it was apparent that the trucking company was indeed negligent and a lawsuit was soon filed. The defendant's launched an aggressive defense whereby they initially claimed that the truck driver was overcome by his passenger who allegedly grabbed the steering wheel and deliberately drove the truck off the road, despite the truck driver's best efforts.
We refuted this claim by illustrating that the tire marks that were present clearly show the truck gradually moving across the road and eventually onto the grass, which is entirely inconsistent with an abrupt lane change caused by someone taking control of the wheel. It was quite an unusual defense strategy that we were frankly surprised to even find ourselves having to refute.
The defendants then argued that a tire blowout may have contributed to the accident, which is significant because it would enable the defendant to offset some portion of their liability to a tire manufacturer or installer. Through deposition testimony of the investigating officer we established that there was absolutely no indication at the scene of the accident that a tire had blown out.
Finally, the defendants argued that the company which loaded the trailer may have improperly loaded the cargo. This argument was most plausible considering that the precise cause of the decedent's death was that she was essentially pummeled by cargo that broke through trailer and struck her person.
Our firm consulted several experts in the fields of heavy cargo transportation and physics. Our experts felt that the cargo was secured in a manner that is perfectly consistent with industry standards and that due to the forces involved, the cargo would not have behaved any differently irrespective of how it was secured. In short, the collision caused the cargo to break free and the negligence lay squarely on the trucking company and not any other entity. The case was successfully resolved through litigation.
$2,000,000.00
$775,000.00
$25,000.00
Recovered for client who suffered soft-tissue damage which required physical therapy after being rear ended by a commercial vehicle.
$40,000.00
$13,333.00
$50.00
Recovery for client who suffered nerve damage and required steroid injections as a result of a car accident.
$150,000.00
$50,000.00
$4,800.00
Recovered for client who suffered soft-tissue back injuries and leg contusions in an 18-wheeler accident.
$90,000.00
$30,000.00
$562.00
Our firm was hired by a delivery driver who suffered a closed head injury resulting in the permanent loss of smell in a head-on accident. The incident occurred as the driver of an 18-wheeler lost control of his vehicle and veered into oncoming traffic. Our client's delivery vehicle was struck head-on, causing massive damage to both vehicles.
Our client was taken to an area hospital where he was treated for minor bodily injuries and a closed head injury which originally manifested itself as a concussion and temporary memory loss.
Suit was filed against the defendants following their failure to respond to our correspondence in a timely manner and litigation began. Included in the suit were both the defendant truck driver and his employer. The results of our investigation and the physical evidence from the accident scene made it apparent that the defendants had indeed caused the accident. Defense counsel soon conceded liability
$1,450,000.00
$560,000.00
$31,410.00
Recovered for client who was rear-ended by an 18-wheeler resulting in soft tissue injuries and chiropractic treatment.
$60,000.00
$20,000.00
$1,050.00
Recovery for motorcyclist who suffered a back injury in an 18-wheeler accident.
$200,000.00
$80,000.00
$5,709.00
Our client, a middle-aged woman, was injured when an 18-wheeler rear-ended her vehicle. As a consequence of the wreck, she sustained a back injury which required surgery to remedy. Naturally, the defendants denied liability and argued that the accident was unavoidable. Our attorneys filed suit. The defendant driver initially claimed that our client suddenly changed lanes in front of his tractor-trailer and then inexplicably slammed onto her brakes. When confronted with eye-witness testimony and other physical evidence that reflected an entirely different scenario, the truck driver ultimately recanted. The case was successfully resolved through litigation.
$350,000.00
$140,000.00
$8,188.00
(policy limits) Our firm was hired by the wife and children of a retired Army Colonel who was killed in an underide 18-wheeler accident. In addition to being a decorated veteran, the decedent worked both professionally and on a voluntary basis to establish numerous learning institutions and vocational programs for at risk youths. The accident occurred as the decedent was traveling on a rural highway when an 18-wheeler failed to yield the right of way and made a rolling stop through a stop sign.
This placed the trailer of the 18-wheeler in a position whereby it blocked the entire roadway and shoulder, leaving the decedent no option but to collide with the trailer. Witnesses on the scene attempted to revive him but to no avail. Furthermore, while two female eye witnesses struggled to pry open the decedent's door to provide emergency care, the truck driver stayed in his truck and offered no assistance. Despite what appeared to be an incredibly apparent case of negligence on behalf of the defendant, defense counsel refused to accept liability resulting in rather lengthy litigation.
The defendants initially denied the claim based on the allegation that the decedent was speeding and the truck driver therefore could not adequately gauge the amount of time he had to pause at the stop sign. The physical evidence contradicted this notion entirely, notwithstanding the fact that even if the decedent had been contributorily negligent, that would not have outweighed the severe degree of negligence on the part of the defendant. Nevertheless, our attorneys were able to conclusively refute this argument based on eye-witness testimony and the testimony from police investigators who calculated the decedent's speed to be precisely at the posted speed limit. In a desperate and largely unprecedented move, the defendants then designated the state as a responsible third party.
Generally speaking, a defendant will often threaten to designate a third party in order to leverage their position but it is rare that such an arbitrary and arguably frivolous designation is actually carried out. However, that is precisely what occurred and the state was thusly incorporated into the lawsuit by the defendants. The basis of the defendant's argument was that the state erected a large street sign that obstructed the truck driver's view of approaching traffic.
Several months of intense litigation were required to before the defendant finally acquiesced in regard to this argument. The argument was finally abandoned by the defendants when in the first mediation our attorneys presented video footage shot (in a controlled setting) from the perspective of an 18-wheeler driver which showed that the sign simply did not obstruct enough of the roadway in order to be a hazard. The case was ultimately resolved through litigation.
Confidential
Confidential
Confidential