Verdicts, Settlements and Judgments

Below are some of the results obtained by Ely, Bettini, Ulman & Rosenblatt on behalf of our clients.

• $16.5 million dollar medical malpractice for failure to timely examine and surgically repair spinal cord injury resulting in paraplegia.
  
  
• $2.5 million dollar medical malpractice claim involving a failure to make a proper diagnosis.
  
  
• $2 million dollar death claim and serious injury claim in automobile accident.
  
  
• $2 million dollar wrongful death with a municipality.
  
  
• $2 million dollar wrongful police shooting.
  
  
• $1.5 million dollar medical malpractice matter which was a failure to properly diagnose a pulmonary embolism which resulted in death.
  
  
• $1.5 million dollar slip and fall case.
  
  
• $1.4 million dollar automobile motor vehicle accident with significant insurance coverage dispute.
  
  
• $1.4 million dollar a medical malpractice case involving negligence during spinal surgery.
  
  
• $1.2 million dollar medical malpractice negligent performance of vascular surgery in a rural hospital.
  
  
• $1 million dollar failure to timely discover breast cancer by physicians.
  
  
• $840,000.00 drunk driving/motor vehicle accident case involving mother and daughter.
  
  
• $650,000.00 medical malpractice claim against The United States of America.
  
  
• $650,000 contested automobile accident on Interstate 17 which involved not only negligence on the part of a truck driver but the State was in part liable for improper design of a portion of that highway where the accident occurred.
  
  
• $550,000.00 medical malpractice case involving eye injury to 10 yr old.
  
  
• $535,000 legal malpractice case against an attorney for failure to fulfill client's wishes with respect to distribution of money under a trust.
  
  
• $487,500.00 underinsured motorist claim involving neck/back injuries.
  
  
• $480,000.00 dog bite claim involving a 5 year old child.
  
  
• $380,000.00 against a bar for over-serving a patron who thereafter was involved in a motor vehicle accident.
  

This law firm represents individuals in their injury and death cases in a variety of fields. The above is just a portion of those cases in which we have been successful. We recover damages for claims through arbitration, mediation, settlement, or trial. At the appropriate time, we will give to you our evaluation. Before we enter into an attempted resolution of the case, we always seek the input and consent of the client.

When assessing your case and evaluating it along with you, we will consider the following points:

Using Mediation and Arbitration to Resolve Legal Disputes
Civil court lawsuits and trials are the traditional method for resolving accident and injury disputes. However, concerns about court congestion and delays, rising litigation costs, and the negative psychological and emotional impact of litigation have increased the use of alternative dispute resolution techniques. Two frequently used processes are mediation and arbitration. Mediation is essentially negotiation facilitated by a neutral third party. Arbitration is a binding resolution process similar to trial, but with fewer technical rules and requirements. Each method of dispute resolution has benefits and drawbacks; therefore, we assess your specific needs and goals and help to guide you through the best solution for you.

Mediation
When parties are unwilling or unable to resolve a dispute, they often turn to mediation. Mediation is generally short-term, structured, task-oriented, and a "hands-on" process. In mediation, the disputing parties work with a neutral third party, the mediator, to resolve their disputes. The mediator facilitates the resolution of the parties' disputes by supervising the exchange of information and the bargaining process. He or she may also offer creative solutions and assist in drafting a final settlement. The role of the mediator is to interpret concerns, relay information between the parties, frame issues, and define the problems.

Mediation can be a voluntary process, although in Arizona mediation is required for all cases in litigation. Unlike the litigation process, where a neutral third party (usually a judge) imposes a decision over the matter, the parties and their mediator ordinarily control the mediation process -- deciding when and where the mediation takes place, who will be present, how the mediation will be paid for, and how the mediator will interact with the parties.

If a resolution is reached, mediation agreements may be oral or written, and content varies with the type of mediation. In some court-ordered mediations, the agreement becomes a court judgment. If an agreement is not reached, however, the parties may decide to pursue their claims in other forums.

The mediation process is generally considered more prompt, inexpensive, and simple than formal litigation. It allows the parties to focus on the underlying circumstances that contributed to the dispute, rather than on narrow legal issues. The mediation process does not focus on truth or fault. Questions of which party is right or wrong are generally less important than the issue of how the problem can be resolved.

Arbitration
Arbitration is the most formal alternative to litigation. In this process, the disputing parties present their case to a neutral third party, who renders a decision. Arbitration is widely used to resolve disputes in both the private and public sector. Arbitration is generally considered a more efficient process than litigation because it is quicker, less expensive, and provides greater flexibility of process and procedure. The parties often select the arbitrator and exercise control over certain aspects of the arbitration procedure. Arbitrators typically have more expertise in the specific subject matter of the dispute than do judges. They may also have greater flexibility in decision-making.

Trial
If no agreement can be reached, the parties will go to trial. A trial is the most time consuming, expensive and emotionally exhausting way to reach an agreement. In some cases, a trial is the best option to resolve the issue. However, a trial ends in a judgment, not an agreement determined by both parties.