Recoveries
$5,000,000 recovery by jury for a woman who tripped over an unpainted curb in front of Sports Authority.
$1,250,000 recovery for a neck injury and closed head injury resulting from a truck collision.
DATE OF RECOVERY: 09/26/2002
FACTS: In a collision, where the Defendant truck driver rear-ended another vehicle, causing that vehicle to hit out client head on, Braun & Ree was able to obtain a $1,250,000.00 RECOVERY for the neck injury, and closed head injury, which were the result of the collision. Our client claimed $130,000 in past medical bills and $145,000 in past wage loss.
INSURANCE CARRIER: Ohio Casualty
$250,000 recovery for a client who incurred $26,576 in medical bills.
DATE OF RECOVERY: 11/19/1998
FACTS: Michael R Braun was able to secure a $250,000.00 RECOVERYfor a client who, after being struck head on by another driver, incurred $26,576 in medical bills associated with a scalp laceration and a severely broken leg.
INSURANCE CARRIER: AMICA
$225,000 recovery due to being hit by a moving vehicle.
DATE OF VERDICT: 06/21/2006
FACTS: Our client was working as a security guard, for a parking lot in downtown Atlanta and, while he was on foot patrol, and watching a suspicious person, he was struck by a vehicle driven by the Defendant. The Defendant was driving his car around a curve and up the parking ramp,
when he struck plaintiff. Both parties testified they did not see one another prior to the collision. Our client sustained a broken leg, and a knee injury, so Braun & Ree sued the defendant for failing to maintain a proper lookout. The Defendant denied responsibility for the collision and contended the our client was negligent in failing to watch for cars while standing in a parking lot.
RECOVERY EFFORTS: Last Offer: $100,000
INSURANCE CARRIER: Allstate
$200,000 recovery due to negligence of apartment complex.
DATE OF RECOVERY: 06/21/2000
FACTS: Michael R Braun’s clients were residents of an apartment complex in Lithonia, where a fire occurred, after a resident fell asleep while their barbecue grill was still lit. On behalf of his clients, Michael sued the complex, alleging that: (1) the fire suppression system for the complex contained deficiencies;
2) the complex failed to enforce and comply with local ordinances which prohibited barbecue grills on the balconies of apartments; (3) the complex failed to properly update the apartments as required by code; and (4) the plaintiffs suffered personal property damage as a direct result of defendants’ negligence. The complex contended that they did not start the fire and that no ordinance violations existed in regard to the grill on the deck or the sprinkler system.
INSURANCE CARRIER: Fireman’s
