At the Dawson Law Firm, we run our practice with the belief that serving our clients is the #1 priority. Our Firm has successfully represented thousands of satisfied clients over the past three decades. Our personal injury attorneys are recognized throughout the Miami/Fort Lauderdale area for honesty, hard work, and dedication. The case results of our clients speak for themselves. These are REAL clients.

 Broward County School Bus Driver Won $120,000 for Back Injury

To begin, Lelia was the nicest person you could ever find, and spent a career as a school bus driver in Broward County.   She was involved in minor accident and treated with a chiropractor for her injuries.  An MRI was conducted and it showed a herniated disc at C6-7, but there were significant evidence of degeneration due to her age at the time of the accident.  The Defendant had liability insurance in the amount of $50,000.

Next, a suit was filed and the case proceeded to trial.  The jury heard from the plaintiff, a fine church going woman.  After, she testified that he did not have neck pain prior that required medical attention to the accident.  Then, no records of any prior complaints of pain to that region were ever produced.  Her chiropractor testified that all of her complaints arose from the injury in the automobile accident even if the herniation pre-dated the accident.

Next, the Defendant used one of the usual suspects of defense doctors who railed on about the degenerative changes and that the herniation pre-dated the accident.  However, he had no explanation for how the accident did not cause the symptoms if there was no medical history of neck pain.

As a result, the jury awarded $120,000, which was exactly what they were asked to award and in light of the fact that a Proposal for Settlement was served for $18,000, the Plaintiff got the benefit of attorney fees being added on to the amount collected.

Firefighter Struck and Injured by Uninsured Motorists and Won $400,000 

First, Scott was an experienced EMT Firefighter driving home from work when his vehicle was struck from behind by a group of people heading to the airport.  Furthermore, Scott did not have uninsured motorist coverage.   However, the owner of the car had a policy limited to $10,000.00.  Scott felt neck pain at the scene and based upon his knowledge as a first responder, he asked to have a cervical MRI conducted upon being taken to the nearest hospital.

Next, the results of the MRI showed a herniation with no osteophytic changes.  Armed only with this report, we demanded the policy limits and gave the defendant 10 days to tender them. Insurance company responded with an offer of $5500.  As a result, the lawsuit was filed the next day.

Then, a week after having the insured served with the lawsuit, the adjuster called and offered to settle for the $10,000 liability coverage. Therefore, this offer was rejected.  Later, at trial, the jury awarded over $400,000. When threatened with a bad faith lawsuit as a consequence of the result, the insurance company wrote the check to cover that verdict.

Bar Owner Sues Insurance Company for Canceling Policy

To begin, Joe F. was the owner of a restaurant bar in Broward County.  He had dutifully paid for liability insurance for many years. Consequently, he had an incident at his bar that resulted in a claim being made under his liability insurance coverage.  As a result, the insurance company took a statement from his bar manager and determined that the client had made material misrepresentations on the application and they rescinded the policy.

Next, we filed a lawsuit seeking a Declaratory Judgment on the issue of the canceling of the insurance policy and sought a judicial determination regarding the claim that the client had made material misrepresentations.  After, the insurance company moved the case to Federal Court in an effort to complicate the litigation and to necessitate a significantly greater amount of time.

Meanwhile, the case proceeded to trial after significant discovery was conducted.  The main issues were whether the clients misrepresented the number of bouncers at the bar, whether there was misrepresentation regarding compliance with the responsible vendor’s act, and the plaintiff questioned whether the application itself contained questions which were vague and ambiguous.  In fact, the case was tried non-jury, and it took three days to try.  Despite the pretrial bravado of the attorneys for the insurance company, the court entered a 28 page order finding for the plaintiff.

In conclusion, numerous insurance companies attempt to utilize the claim of material misrepresentation as a shield from otherwise legitimate claims, knowledge of this area is of paramount importance when seeking to protect coverage for client.  Furthermore, this litigation, as a large and complex Federal case, required significant time and skill to obtain a favorable result.