The following cases illustrate some of the Perry Law P.C.’s Insurance Industry Group’s experience in handling UM and Bodily Injury Defense matters:


Case Summary

Tassi, et. al. v. Weebothee and GEICO

A federal judge dismissed a car crash lawsuit against GEICO after determining a New Mexico man involved in the crash was improperly added to prevent the case from being moved to federal court. The judge also determined the plaintiffs were unable to sustain their claims for damages.

Attorneys Meloney Perry and Stacy Thompson obtained the dismissal of the lawsuit that stemmed from a 2014 car accident between the plaintiffs and William Tsethlikia. The lawsuit stated the plaintiffs were verbally and physically assaulted after the accident by Tsethlikia and his passenger Derick Weebothee, who were in the car that hit them. Plaintiffs allege they were entitled to punitive damages under the uninsured/underinsured motorist coverage because they were not able to recover punitive damages under the bodily injury coverage of Tsethlikia’s insurance policy.

Perry Law P.C. attorneys argued the plaintiffs added Weebothee only to keep the case out of federal court. The attorneys were able to move the case from state to federal court based on the improper joinder and requested dismissal of Weebothee from the lawsuit. The attorneys also filed a motion for summary judgment based on the plaintiffs’ inability to sustain their claims. The Federal Court granted the motion to dismiss, giving it jurisdiction to toss the claims all together.

Case Result

Dismissed


Case Summary

Sally Crawford Case

Perry Law P.C. attorneys Meloney Perry and Stacy Thompson convince the Texarkana Court of Appeals to dismiss a 13-year-old car crash case.

Filed in 2007, the case involving Teresa Rae Turner and Sally Crawford stemmed from a July 21, 2003 collision. Turner filed a lawsuit two years later against Crawford in Hopkins County for damages related to the crash, which proceeded to drag on for years. The Perry Law firm received the case in October 2017, where attorneys were tasked to determine whether any options were available to end the case.

Using a two-tiered approach, Perry and Thompson filed a motion for summary judgment as well as a motion to dismiss the case for failure to prosecute under Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 165a. The trial court denied both motions. The two-tiered approach allowed the attorneys to file a Writ of Mandamus with the Texarkana Court of Appeals, who eventually ordered the trial court to dismiss the case in its entirety.

Case Result

Dismissed


Case Summary

Carreon Case

The Perry Law firm convinces a jury to award less in a bodily injury case involving a postal carrier and a young insured, who failed to yield the right of way. In addition to general damages, Plaintiff alleged a neck surgery was necessary due to her injuries and refused to accept anything less than the policy limits. Complicating the matter was Plaintiff’s cancer diagnoses. Attorneys with the Perry Law Firm convinced the trial court to exclude any mention of her cancer diagnoses at trial. The Plaintiff’s neurosurgeon was deposed and Perry Law attorneys cross examined her life care planner at trial. Jury awarded the Plaintiff less than originally requested.

Case Result

Reduced damages in favor of client


Case Summary

Dhanani Case

Attorneys for the Perry Law Firm obtained a defense verdict win in an uninsured motorist case in Denton County District Court with the jury deliberated for less than 15 minutes.

Case Result

Favorable defense verdict


Case Summary

Felmlee Case

The Perry Law Firm convinced the judge in an uninsured motorist case, that the claim file was not relevant; therefore, privilege did not have to be established at hearing requiring witnesses.

Case Result

Dismissed


Case Summary

Godfrey Case

In an insured defense case, the Perry Law Firm obtained summary judgment in Collin County District Court on a negligent entrustment claim prior to depositions.

Case Result

Summary judgment


Case Summary

Mavrokordatos Case

Perry Law attorneys convinced a jury in Dallas County Court at Law #1 to award the Plaintiff the amount they suggested in trial against insured, who failed to yield the right of way. Plaintiff claimed extensive debilitating injury to his thumb, including permanent impairment and extensive lost wages. During the trial, attorneys we were able to discredit the Plaintiff, which led to the lesser amount awarded to her instead of the large verdict requested by Plaintiff.

Case Result

Favorable defense verdict


Case Summary

Skinner Case

Attorneys for the Perry Law Firm successfully defended insured involved in a rear end accident in Denton County District Court. Plaintiff, who was two cars in front of insured, claimed extensive injuries and lost wages as a result of the accident.  At trial, Perry Law attorneys discredited the Plaintiff. The jury awarded her the amount suggested by Perry Law lawyers, instead of the large verdict, originally requested by Plaintiff.

Case Result

Favorable defense verdict


Case Summary

Thrower

The Perry Law Firm obtained a summary judgment in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Lubbock Division, on Plaintiff’s claim for breach of contract and bad faith in an uninsured motorist/underinsured motorist insurance case. The attorneys obtained the summary judgment based on Plaintiff’s inability to prove liability due to settlement agreements entered into with tortfeasors.

Case Result

Summary Judgement


Case Summary

Varughese

In Tarrant County District Court, Perry Law attorneys convinced Court of Appeals that jury award in bodily injury case was offset by fees and costs in defending the case. During original trial, Plaintiff claimed extensive dental work, injuries and plastic surgery was required as a result of injuries sustained in motor vehicle accident. Attorneys tried the case to jury, who awarded the Plaintiff damages as originally requested. Offer of settlement had been filed in case; therefore, Perry Law attorneys argued the award was offset by the fees and costs in defending the case.   Court of Appeals affirmed the ruling and, for the first time, addressed how calculations under the offer of settlement rule were to be completed. This is a significant ruling on the standing offer of settlement procedure.

Case Result

Significant ruling on the standing offer of settlement procedure