News &
Resources

Thorpe Shwer attorneys Brad Shwer, Kristin Paiva, and Trevor Cox successfully defended one of the nation’s largest franchisors in a matter in Florida state court. The complaint alleged various allegations of negligence and vicarious liability.

Thorpe Shwer attorneys Bill Thorpe and Adam Reich recently obtained a favorable verdict on behalf of a major Class I interstate railroad following a three-week jury trial in the Superior Court of Maricopa County, Arizona. The case was brought under the Federal Employers’ Liability Act by a former conductor who alleged that he injured his right ankle and knee while dismounting a locomotive at the defendant’s yard. At trial, the plaintiff alleged that he was unable to return to work as a conductor and that he would require additional treatment for his right knee in the future. Plaintiff requested over $6 million in lost wages and pain and suffering damages. Bill and Adam presented evidence that the plaintiff’s liability theory lacked merit, his claimed injuries were inconsistent with his description of the event, and he failed to mitigate his damages by abandoning two separate positions given to him by the …

Attorneys Andrea Marconi, André Merrett, and Kristin Paiva obtained a stipulated dismissal for a public official in a high-profile case stemming from allegations of sexual misconduct committed by a university assistant coach. The complaint alleged that Thorpe Shwer’s client was liable for actions or omissions allegedly taken during the investigation of Plaintiff’s claims. After filing a motion for summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity, Plaintiff agreed to a stipulated dismissal of the client.

Thorpe Shwer attorneys Brad Shwer, Kristin Paiva, and Tyler Grim obtained a stipulated dismissal for one of the nation’s largest franchisors in a matter in Arizona superior court. The complaint alleged counts of negligence, vicarious liability, and negligent hiring, training, and supervision. After Thorpe Shwer filed a motion to dismiss on behalf of the franchisor, the plaintiff agreed to a stipulated dismissal with prejudice.

Thorpe Shwer attorneys Brad Shwer, Kristin Paiva, and Jamie Gill Santos successfully defended one of the nation’s largest franchisors in a matter in Florida state court. The complaint alleged various allegations of negligence. Following briefing and oral argument, the court granted the franchisor’s motion to dismiss on 3 separate, but related, cases, thereby dismissing all claims against the client.

Thorpe Shwer attorneys Brad Shwer and Kristin Paiva successfully obtained summary judgment on behalf of a husband and wife seeking to recover damages resulting from a breach of a promissory note. After the judgment was issued, the parties entered into a favorable settlement agreement.

Thorpe Shwer, P.C. attorneys Bill Thorpe, Brad Shwer, and Jamie Gill Santos were successful in arguing to the Ninth Circuit that the District of Nevada’s ruling on summary judgment in favor of its major Class I railroad client should be affirmed. The case was brought by a trespasser who was struck along mainline track in New Mexico and sustained serious injuries. The trespasser’s wife also sued. The plaintiffs raised numerous theories of liability against both the railroad operating the train involved in the accident, as well as another railroad that owned the tracks in question. The district court granted both railroads summary judgment on all claims, finding that the only duty owed to the trespasser under New Mexico law was not to willfully or wantonly injure him and that there was no evidence suggesting the railroads acted in such a manner. The plaintiffs appealed the summary judgment decision pertaining to …

Thorpe Shwer attorneys Bill Thorpe, Brad Shwer, and Adam Reich successfully obtained summary judgment on behalf of a major Class I railroad in a matter in Maricopa County Superior Court. The case was brought by the injured driver and the representatives of a deceased passenger following a fatal grade crossing accident in Northern Arizona. The plaintiffs raised numerous theories of liability against the defendant, including claims related to the actions of the train crew, the physical characteristics of the crossing where the accident occurred, and several alleged violations of federal regulations. After extensive briefing in 2013 related to, among other things, federal preemption of the plaintiffs’ claims, the court granted summary judgment to the defendant, resulting in the dismissal of all claims against the defendant. The plaintiffs appealed to the Arizona Court of Appeals, who upheld the majority of the trial court’s decision. The Court of Appeals determined, however, that …

Thorpe Shwer attorney, Adam Reich, and Laurel Stevenson of Haden Cowherd & Bullock in Springfield, Missouri, recently obtained a unanimous defense verdict on behalf of a major Class I interstate railroad following a five-day jury trial in Webster County, Missouri. Adam became involved in the case less than a month before trial at the request of the client’s General Counsel. The litigation arose following an accident in which the plaintiff struck the side of the defendant’s train at a public grade crossing. The then 25-year-old plaintiff underwent eight surgeries following the accident for various orthopedic injuries. At trial, the plaintiff advanced several theories of liability concerning the actions of the train crew and alleged that the defendant failed to comply with several federal regulations. The plaintiff’s experts claimed that she suffered traumatic brain injuries, as well as serious orthopedic injuries. They estimated that plaintiff’s economic losses exceeded $4 million. Following …

Thorpe Shwer attorneys William Thorpe and Adam Reich, along with Laurel Stevenson of Haden, Cowherd & Bullock in Springfield, Missouri, recently obtained a complete defense verdict on behalf of a major Class I interstate railroad, following a two-week jury trial in the Circuit Court of Pulaski County, Missouri. The case was brought by an injured plaintiff and his spouse arising out of an accident in which the plaintiff was struck by the defendant’s train at a private grade crossing. At trial, the plaintiffs advanced numerous theories of liability concerning the physical characteristics of the crossing and the defendant’s policies regarding the sounding of the train’s horn on approach to private crossings. Plaintiffs claimed the injured party suffered a traumatic brain injury, spinal injuries, and multiple orthopedic injuries as a result of the accident. The trial court granted the defendant’s motion for directed verdict at the close of the plaintiffs’ case-in-chief …