Jurimatic: Verdicts and Settlements

The personal injury case Roger Daigle v. Ashley Monick, et al. (AAN-CV19-6033189-S) concluded on October 3, 2025, with a defense verdict. Plaintiff Roger Daigle filed suit in 2019 following a March 2017 rear-end collision on Howe Avenue in Shelton, Connecticut, claiming the defendant, Ashley Monick, negligently struck his stopped vehicle and caused severe, lasting injuries requiring extensive medical care. The trial centered on the disparity between the plaintiff's claimed serious injuries and the low-impact nature of the crash. While Mr. Daigle's experts affirmed the injuries were a direct result of the trauma, the defense experts challenged this causation, suggesting the ailments were pre-existing or exaggerated. After several years of litigation and weeks of trial, the jury returned a verdict in favor of the defendant, Ashley Monick, and against the plaintiff, Roger Daigle. This finding confirmed that Mr. Daigle had not successfully proven his claim of negligence, concluding the six-year legal battle with no damages awarded.

In Mae K. Moore v. Johnson & Johnson, an 88-year-old California woman’s family won a landmark $966 million verdict after a Los Angeles jury found Johnson & Johnson liable for her death from mesothelioma, a cancer caused by asbestos exposure. Mae Moore used Johnson’s Baby Powder and Shower to Shower daily for decades, unaware of contamination risks. Evidence revealed the company knew for years that its talc products could contain asbestos but continued marketing them as safe. The jury found Johnson & Johnson negligent, guilty of fraud, and acting with malice by concealing the health hazards. It awarded $16 million in compensatory damages and $950 million in punitive damages, marking the largest single-plaintiff verdict against the company in talc litigation history. Johnson & Johnson denied wrongdoing and announced plans to appeal, maintaining its powders were asbestos-free. The verdict, however, stands as a defining moment in nationwide talc lawsuits and a warning to corporations accused of consumer deception.

The lengthy medical malpractice trial, Weinberg, Harlan, Co-Executor of the Estate Et Al v. The Stamford Hospital Et Al (FBT-CV20-6099514-S), reached a decisive conclusion on September 18, 2025. The lawsuit, initially filed against multiple parties, ultimately centered on the claim that Dr. Michael Bernstein, M.D., was medically negligent in the treatment of Robert Joseph Weinberg, who died in May 2018. The Estate of Robert Weinberg had sought substantial damages, arguing that the physician’s actions fell below the acceptable standard of care and directly caused the patient's wrongful death. Following the presentation of conflicting expert testimony regarding the complexity of Mr. Weinberg’s medical condition and the appropriateness of the care rendered, the Bridgeport jury returned a verdict firmly in favor of the defendant, Dr. Bernstein. The jury found that the plaintiffs failed to meet their burden of proof, thus dismissing the claims of medical negligence and absolving the doctor of liability.

The personal injury case Terrance Brown v. Andrew Corazzini, et al. (NNH-CV24-6139139-S) concluded on September 24, 2025, with a defense verdict. Plaintiff Terrance Brown, a passenger injured during an August 2022 collision between a Connecticut Transit bus and a private vehicle on Broadway Street in New Haven, filed suit against the private vehicle’s owner and operator, Andrew and Chiara Corazzini. Mr. Brown alleged that the Corazzini driver's negligent operation caused the crash, which resulted in his serious and painful injuries. Throughout the trial, counsel for Mr. Brown, led by Frank P. Cirillo, presented expert testimony on crash reconstruction and medical causation, arguing for money damages of not less than $15,000.00. The defense, represented by Michael Quinlan, forcefully denied negligence and contested the severity and origin of the alleged injuries. After deliberation, the jury returned a verdict firmly in favor of the Defendant, Corazzini, as against the Plaintiff, Terrance Brown. The finding confirmed that Mr. Brown had not met his legal burden to prove that the defendants' negligence caused his injuries.

The lawsuit Oamic Ingredients, LLC v. Steven Z. Gu (FST-CV23-6063464-S) concluded on October 7, 2025, with a powerful victory for the plaintiff. Oamic Ingredients, LLC, had sued its former Treasurer, Steven Z. Gu, for financial misconduct, including Breach of Contract, Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Conversion, and Statutory Civil Theft. The core of the dispute revolved around Oamic’s claim that Mr. Gu had misused his trusted position to misappropriate company funds and assets. Mr. Gu, representing himself as an attorney, denied the allegations and filed counterclaims. After a full jury trial in the Stamford Superior Court, the jury found in favor of Oamic Ingredients LLC on all claims. The jury awarded $327,593.05 in compensatory damages and $40,000.00 in liquidated damages for Breach of Contract, totaling $367,593.05 in direct damages. Furthermore, the jury made a critical finding of YES for both Treble Damages (Statutory Civil Theft) and Punitive Damages (Breach of Fiduciary Duty), which significantly increased the final monetary judgment against Mr. Gu due to his intentional misconduct.

A California auto group, Logic Automotive Group, LLC, settled a major labor dispute for $212,675, avoiding a trial over claims it had systematically failed to pay employees proper wages and provide mandated breaks. The lawsuit was filed by former employee Neena Jaramillo-Johnson, who utilized the state's Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) to pursue penalties on behalf of all affected workers. The settlement closed the entire case just over a year after the initial complaint, confirming a complete resolution between the parties.

The case, David Beri, et al. v. City of Los Angeles, et al. (Case No. 22STCV03744), involved a negligence claim filed in January 2022. Plaintiffs David and Eva Beri alleged that City employee Rochelle C. Feldman's careless driving while on the job caused a motor vehicle accident, resulting in significant physical injuries, emotional distress, and financial losses, including medical expenses and lost wages. The Beris sued the City under the theory of vicarious liability. The parties reached a final, out-of-court settlement agreement in December 2023 for $562,500, which resolved all claims. The City and the employee made the payment without admitting fault or liability.

The employment lawsuit, Anderson Mackey v. County of Los Angeles, et al., filed in February 2023, alleged unlawful disparate treatment and retaliation against the Los Angeles County Fire Department (LACFD) under California’s FEHA. Mackey claimed he suffered emotional distress and lost wages due to the hostile work environment. The case was resolved out of court in November 2024, confirming a final settlement payment of $635,127 authorized by the County to resolve all claims without an admission of liability by the defendants.

Juan Zamora and Geraldine Zamora sued the County of Los Angeles and Deputy Ramirez over an incident involving the Deputy's alleged excessive force. The complaint included serious claims like battery, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and violation of the Tom Bane Civil Rights Act. The County rejected all claims, asserting the Deputy acted reasonably and was protected by immunity. After unsuccessful mediation attempts, the parties avoided a jury trial by reaching an unconditional settlement on March 15, 2024. The County finalized the legal action for $190,000.

Plaintiff Sylvia Rubio initiated a personal injury and property damage lawsuit against the County of Los Angeles and its Sheriff’s Department following a motor vehicle collision. The suit alleged negligence, careless conduct, and negligent entrustment related to the crash. Although the County vigorously denied responsibility in its formal answer, the case avoided a trial. The parties reached a final, unconditional settlement on June 5, 2024, resolving all claims for $425,000.

The San Bernardino County Superior Court jury delivered a major verdict in favor of former employee Amelia Russell in her suit against Spray Enclosure Technologies, Inc., and co-defendant Melanie Helzer. Filed in 2019, Ms. Russell's lawsuit centered on claims of serious employment violations, including Hostile Work Environment Harassment based on gender, Gender Discrimination, Retaliation, and Wrongful Termination. The defendants had denied all claims, asserting they acted lawfully. Following the trial, which unfolded over several weeks, the jury returned a Special Verdict in November 2024. The jury found that the company had engaged in unlawful conduct and awarded Ms. Russell $575,935 in compensatory damages for her economic losses and emotional distress. Crucially, the jury also found that the defendants' conduct involved malice, oppression, or fraud, and subsequently awarded an additional $100,000 in punitive damages, bringing the final total judgment to $675,935.

The case of Anthony Nonn v. The City of Los Angeles, et al. (Case No. 23STCV01231) involved a personal injury claim against multiple governmental entities, including the City of Los Angeles and the State of California's Department of Transportation (Caltrans). Plaintiff Anthony Nonn filed the lawsuit in January 2023, asserting that dangerous and known conditions on a public roadway, which the defendants failed to correct or warn against, directly caused a traffic incident that left him with severe, life-altering injuries and substantial loss of income. The defendants strongly denied all claims of negligence and liability, arguing they lacked sufficient legal notice of the condition and that the plaintiff may have contributed to the accident. Both parties prepared for a jury trial, securing experts in accident reconstruction and medicine. However, the parties ultimately bypassed the courtroom, reaching a settlement in March 2025. The defendants agreed to pay Mr. Nonn a final negotiated amount of $3,000,000 to resolve all claims for past and future medical care, lost earnings, and general damages.