![]() |
|
Hangzhou Tire Recall Lawyers
|
Landmark Cases:Anderson v. GM: $4.9 billion dollar jury verdict for a family burned by a defectively designed fuel system. Griggs v. Caterpillar, et al.: $58 million jury verdict for a man injured by a defective tractor. Lampe v. Continental General Tire: $56 million jury verdict for injuries resulting from a defective tire. Wu v. Singapore Airlines: $15 million jury verdict for death in commercial airline crash (in a noneconomic damages-only trial in federal court). Alaska Airlines Flight 261 cases: Major confidential settlements with Alaska Airlines and Boeing for families of those killed when Alaska Airlines Flight 261 crashed off the California coast |
Sample of Current Cases:Roepke/Hunt v. Michelin: Wrongful death and serious personal injury case arising out of defective Michelin tire. DeLeon v. Continental Tire: Wrongful death and serious personal injury case arising out of defective Continental tire. Mansur v. Ford Motor Company: Wrongful death and serious personal injury case arising out of defective Ford Explorer. Pellicano Wiretapping Cases - Lawsuits against numerous defendants for invasion of privacy. Dynamo Energy Corp. v. Surge - Business lawsuit concerning oil and gas rights. Positive Ions v. Ion Media Corp. - Trademark infringement lawsuit. Welding Rod cases - Suits against manufacturers of certain welding rods that cause a Parkinson's-like disease. Vioxx cases - Suits against Merck for severe heart problems resulting from taking Vioxx. Doe v. Robinson Helicopter - Suit against Robinson Helicopter Company for defective R-44 helicopter. Doe v. Sundance Helicopter - Wrongful death and punitive damages case against operator of Grand Canyon helicopter tour company that killed nine people. Doe v. Trash Truck Companies - Suits against trash truck companies and manufacturers for unsafely designed and operated trash trucks. Roche v. Edge Group - Business suit against developers of the W Las Vegas Hotel & Casino. |
The Daily Journal - February 22, 2007 Judge OKs $13 Million Settlement for Soldiers |
|
|
The National Law Journal names Panish, Shea & Boyle one of the Top 12 Plaintiffs' Firms in Nation. They were the only Los Angeles firm selected for the list. |
National Law Journal names Brian Panish as one of the most influential attorneys in the nation. |
|
Panish, Shea & Boyle were profiled in the Los Angeles Times "West" magazine as one of the best law firms in the Los Angeles Area. |
Flores v. Continental Tire - Major Confidential Settlement - Woman sustained paraplegia when the right rear tire on the family's Ford Windstar van experienced a tread belt separation, causing the vehicle to roll over.
Hill v. Titan Tire - Confidential multi-million dollar settlement for a 42 year old man who sustained brain injuries following a tire failure on his vehicle.
Doe v. Auto Manufacturer - Major Confidential Settlement Fuel fed fire caused by defectively designed 15 passenger van rollover. Many occupants killed or severely burned.
Roes v. Doe Auto Manufacturer: confidential multimillion dollar settlement on behalf of a family involved in on-road rollover of sport utility vehicle.
Does v. Van Manufacturer and Rental Company - Confidential multi-million dollar settlement on behalf of the survivors and family members of 14 church group members involved in a fifteen passenger van rollover.
Dominguez v. San Francisco - $27.4 Million Verdict - Mother and 6 others witnessed a city truck driver run over her daughter on a sidewalk. City completely denied responsibility. Largest verdict ever against the City of San Francisco.
Copyright © 2010 Panish, Shea & Boyle - Hangzhou Tire Recall Lawyers - Los Angeles Personal Injury Lawyers - All rights reserved.
Los Angeles Product Liability Disclaimer: The personal injury, wrongful death, catastrophic injury, or other legal information presented at this site should not be considered formal legal advice, nor the formation of a lawyer or attorney client relationship. Prior results do not guarantee or predict a similar outcome with respect to any future matter. Please note that you are not considered a client until you have signed a retainer agreement and your case has been accepted by us.