J. David Bolen


Verdict in favor of global client leads to continued representation

Our client, a global insurance company, provided re-insurance coverage to a group of insurance carriers. We were retained to provide both written and live expert testimony and opinions about the meaning and interpretation of various insurance policies and contracts during a coverage arbitration in London, England. In addition to the legal research that was required, we attended an extensive training to be a witness in the foreign hearing due to the differences in procedures in the United Kingdom. The case was resolved successfully for our client and we still get cases today because of it.

FELA case involving Federal Preemption and complex witness work

Our client, a railroad company (the defendant), was sued in conjunction with the Federal Employers Liability Act (FELA). The plaintiff in this case alleged injuries to his knees and back as a result of walking on large rocks along the railroad and in rail yards. The case involved issues of Federal Preemption about rock size and complex witness work. This case was tried to a verdict in the defense’s favor.

Woman alleges client’s cleaning product turned her skin orange

Our client, a Multi-National Consumer & Professional Good Manufacturer, manufactured a liquid-type cleaning product that contained a fragrance that made it smell of oranges. In this product liability case, a cleaning lady, who had used the product, claimed it had turned her skin an orange color and damaged her liver. Through our investigation, we determined rather than being the result of the use of the product, a localized outbreak of a viral infection may have been responsible for the damage. As a result, the Court returned a judgment in favor of our client.

Summary judgment in FELA case upheld and new laws enacted as a result

Our client, an international transportation company, was sued by an employee under the Federal Employers Liability Act (FELA). The employee claimed a back injury due to the vibrations coming through the seat of a locomotive. We were able show through the employee’s own medical records and testimony he had discussed this injury with this physician outside the statute of limitations, which is three years. The trial court granted us summary judgment on the statute of limitations issue. The Plaintiff appealed the judgment which was upheld on appeal by the State’s Supreme Court. Not only was the judgment upheld on appeal, but the Court enacted a new point of law as a result for FELA cases in that State.

No negligence verdict for client in slip-and-fall case

The plaintiff claimed a soft tissue back injury due to a slip-and-fall on snow and ice outside of our client’s, a national convenience store chain, store. We received a defense verdict at trial on the basis there was no negligence (no breach of any duty) on our client’s part.

Partial summary judgment for client in breach of agreement dispute

On behalf of our client, a subsidiary of a national consumer goods company, we obtained a partial summary judgment regarding a contract dispute between our client and a supplier. The court agreed with our client’s right to refuse wood waste, which is used in the production of charcoal, delivered by the plaintiff. This resulted in a significant reduction in the potential amount of damages the supplier could claim at trial, which ultimately paved the way for a settlement between parties.

Summary judgment for client in deliberate intent case

Our client, a large chemical company, was accused of Deliberate Intent. Deliberate Intent is an extension of Workers’ Compensation in which an employee may collect extra compensation if the employer is shown to have deliberately and intentionally exposed the employee to harm.

In this case, the plaintiff claimed a variety of health conditions due to exposure to toxic chemicals. Our client received summary judgment due to insufficient evidence. The court also found that a prior settlement agreement released our client from any claims against them.

Summary judgment for client in sexual harassment and gender discrimination suit

Our client, a locally operated nonprofit day care center, was sued by a former employee. The plaintiff claimed sexual harassment and gender discrimination. We were able to obtained summary judgment on behalf of our client on grounds of insufficient proof. Due to the nature of this case, it received local and national attention.