Personal Injury Lawyers
The chances are that if you have been injured due to the negligence of
another individual, not only are you struggling physically, but also emotionally
and financially. At The Madrid Law Firm, we have worked with countless
clients, seeking to put their best interests first. With
over 50 years of combined legal experience, our team knows how to fight for the results that you truly deserve. Please
do not hesitate to get the help you need. Call for a free consultation
today if you are seeking compensation for a personal injury claim.
Our Case Results
81-Year-Old Client Jolted Out of Wheelchair
Our client, an 81-year-old woman in a manual wheelchair, was at the County
Fair with her daughter. As she was exiting the County fair while being
pushed by her daughter, the front wheels of the wheelchair struck a rut/crack
in the asphalt parking lot causing the wheelchair to suddenly and unexpectedly
stop which catapulted our client out of her wheelchair. Our client struck
the ground, face first. She sustained a fractured nose and fractured vertebrae.
The County Fair facility, owned by a public entity, denied the claim.
The public entity claimed that the rut/crack was a trivial defect in the
asphalt, blamed the daughter and viewed our client’s injuries as
minor and pre-existing. The Madrid Law Firm was able to establish that
the parking lot constituted a dangerous condition because of the size
and depth of the rut/crack coupled with lack of lighting in the parking
lot. The Madrid Law Firm ascertained that the County Fair facility had
prior notice of this dangerous condition and failed to take any corrective
action. After two days of mediation prior to trial, the Madrid Law Firm
was able to obtain a 7-figure settlement for their client. When tragedy
strikes, it makes a big difference who is in your corner. Our client benefited
from our combined 50 + years of legal and trial experience behind her
case. The results speak for themselves!
Mechanic Subjected to Histile Work Environment, Suit Claimed
Plaintiff suffered a knee injury, but was not able to take time off from
work which delayed his necessary arthoscopic surgery. The jury found favor
in the plaintiff, and awarded him $176,000 in total damages against the
Read the full article here.
CLIENT RECOVERS 6 FIGURES AGAINST DRUNK DRIVER
Client was driving a tractor-trailer loaded with a forklift on the freeway
when a drunk driver traveling in excess of 100 MPH rear-ended his tractor-trailer
causing it to jack knife. The passenger of the drunk driver died and no
there were no injuries to the drunk driver. Client was injured and taken
to hospital by ambulance. Immediately following this collision another
vehicle traveling in the same direction collided into the drunk driver’s
vehicle. Thereafter, another vehicle collided into this third vehicle.
The drunk driver’s insurance carrier denied client’s claim
alleging that he did not sustain any injuries because of the size and
weight of the tractor trailer vs the Audi vehicle. Client retained a personal
“SUPER LAWYER” law firm. Once the insurance company denied the claim, the
“SUPER LAWYER” law firm dumped the client. Client was referred to the Madrid Law Firm.
The Madrid Law Firm filed suit immediately. The defendant’s insurance
lawyers associated the drunk driver’s high profile criminal defense
lawyers to block and frustrate all discovery efforts because the drunk
driver was a
celebrity and was asserting 5th Amendment protection.
Didn’t Work!! The high profile criminal defense lawyers discovered at a law and motion
hearing that the Madrid Law Firm lawyers were equally, if not superiorly,
experienced in criminal law and procedure. The Madrid Law Firm lawyers
demonstrated to the Court that all defense motions had no merit and the
deposition of their drunk driver client should go forward. The case settled
shortly thereafter for 6 figures. Additionally, because the client had
been injured by a convicted drunk driver, the client was entitled to his
attorneys’ fees and costs as a matter of law.
GOLF-CART V. TRACTOR-TRAILER
Two Clients worked for a company where they had to transport tools from
one building to another on a golf cart. The clients would use the surface
streets to get from one building to another. The clients were stopped
at a stop sign when the defendant, who was driving a tractor-trailer,
traveling in the opposite direction veered over and hit the golf cart
head-on causing both clients to be ejected from the golf cart. Both clients
were seriously injured.
The self-insured trucking company denied the claim asserting that the clients
were not entitled to pain and suffering damages because the golf cart
was uninsured and the golf cart was not authorized to be on public streets.
The Madrid Law Firm filed suit. In support of this untenable position,
Defendants filed a motion with court to preclude clients from receiving
compensation for pain and suffering because the golf cart was uninsured.
Madrid Law Firm characterized this as a “Twinkie” defense
because this is not the law and filed a one page opposition citing the
correct law. The judge overruled this frivolous motion and ruled that
clients were entitled to pain and suffering damages. Case settled.
A CASE LACKING HORSE SENSE
Our client, a ranch owner, was sued by a barrel racer who claimed that
her horse stepped on a nail while on the ranch premises. The horse was
injured and ultimately euthanized. While the death of any horse is tragic,
the client ranch owner and barrel racing organization that hosted the
event were not at fault. The barrel racer acknowledged that she signed
a Release of Liability and further could not prove any negligence against
the ranch owner or the organization that hosted the barrel race. After
advising the plaintiff's cadre of counsel who claimed to be "Equine
Lawyers" that the MADRID LAW FIRM doesn't play "Let's
Make a Deal" or recommend settlements on "frivolous" cases
and before a Motion for Summary Judgment was filed to terminate this action,
the barrel racer and her "Equine Law Attorney" dismissed the
case! We are now filing post-trial motions to recover costs as well as
obtain judgment for court ordered sanctions against the barrel racer and
her cadre of "Equine Law" attorneys.
THE HUNTER BECOMES THE HUNTED
Our Client, a commercial property development corporation, was wrongfully
sued for Indemnity, Contribution and Apportionment of Fault stemming from
a purchase and sale real estate transaction between a third party and
a former shareholder of our client. Our client was not involved in the
purchase or sale of the subject real estate transaction. During the transaction,
the former shareholder was issued a promissory note in his name for $50,000.00
by this third party. The shareholder then sold the Note to the plaintiff
for $40,000.00. The plaintiff sued to collect the $40,000.00 against this
third party/defendant. The third party/defendant filed a cross-complaint
against our client claiming Indemnification, Contribution and Apportionment
of Fault and a host of contract and tort actions alleging vicarious liability
against our client. The truth of the matter was that our client is a "deep
pocket" and defendant
erroneously and avariciously assumed that by suing our client, our client was going to capitulate and
pay to get out of the lawsuit.
Big mistake! The Madrid Law Firm filed a Motion for Summary Judgment, which was granted
and the case dismissed. Our client now has the option of going after defendant/cross-complainant
for malicious prosecution for recovery of all attorneys' fees and
costs. We are currently in the process of filing post-trial motions to
Client was at a Western Bar with two female friends. One of the female
friends got into an argument with a bar waitress. Another patron stepped
in and struck our client's friend. The bouncers separated the two
ladies. The ladies were escorted outside and were going to be allowed
to fight. Client stepped in and took his female friend and escorted her
to his car. As he was helping her get in the car, a patron struck client
with is fist twice in the face causing him severe injuries. Client went
to see first lawyer who told him he had no case. Client retained Madrid
Law Firm. Bar disputed liability claiming that an unknown patron had struck
Client and they were not responsible. Madrid Law Firm was prepared to
prove at trial their duties and obligations to Client, which made them liable.
Result: Case settled before trial.
Team Madrid represented a client who had been sexually molested when he
was a child by a priest. During the time that he was molested, this certain
priest would take the neighborhood boys all about the same age to Big
Bear for overnight stays and sexually molest them. As an adult, client
came to see Team Madrid about representing him in connection with these
incidences that occurred to him when he was a boy. Team Madrid accepted
the case and took on the church.
Result: This clergy case was successfully resolved in the client's favor.
Client entered a liquor store. As he was paying for his items, the clerk
wrongfully accused client of taking items without paying for them. When
client showed him he had not taken anything, the Clerk struck the client
on his head with a baseball bat culminating in lacerations requiring stitches
Result: Team Madrid successfully represented the client and recovered a substantial
settlement for personal injuries sustained as a result of this unprovoked
assault and battery.
Client, a patron at a bar, was attempting to gain re-admission to the bar.
The security guard advised client that he was no longer allowed inside
the bar, walked him to the parking lot and proceeded to punch him in the
face. Client was punched until he passed out. Client retained the Madrid
Law Firm. Prior to the case proceeding to trial, the defendants settled the case.
Result: Client was substantially compensated for his injuries and damages.
Plaintiff, a nurse and barrel racer gave away her barrel racing horse with
bucking propensities to Defendant #1, a rodeo stock contractor, to find
a home for the horse. Defendant #1 then gave the horse to Defendant #2,
a rodeo pick up man and bronc rider. Defendant #2 then sold the horse
to Defendant #3, a professional barrel racer. Defendant #3 successfully
competed in various rodeos on the subject horse. Once the Plaintiff discovered
that Defendant #3 was riding on the horse in the rodeo successfully, she
demanded the return of the horse. Plaintiff sued all three defendants
for breach of contract and conversion. Team Madrid represented all three
defendants. At trial, Plaintiff brought in Lance Graves, a barrel race
horse expert who opined that horse had a value of $120,000.00. Defendants
brought in Sharon Camarillo, a world-renowned equine expert, clinician
and educator. Ms. Camarillo opined that the horse had
no value because of its propensity to buck, which made the horse unsuitable
as a barrel racing horse and dangerous.
Result: After a four-day bench trial, the Court ruled in favor of the defendants.