Personal Injury Lawyers

The chances are that if you have been injured due to the negligence of another individual, not only are you struggling physically, but also emotionally and financially. At The Madrid Law Firm, we have worked with countless clients, seeking to put their best interests first. With over 60 years of combined legal experience, our team knows how to fight for the results that you truly deserve. Please do not hesitate to get the help you need.

Our Case Results

Mechanic Subjected to Hostile Work Environment, Suit Claimed

Plaintiff suffered a knee injury but was not able to take time off from work which delayed his necessary arthroscopic surgery. The jury found favor in the plaintiff and awarded him $176,000 in total damages against the defendants.

Read the full article here.

81-Year-Old Client Jolted Out of Wheelchair

Our client, an 81-year-old woman in a manual wheelchair, was at the County Fair with her daughter. As she was exiting the County fair while being pushed by her daughter, the front wheels of the wheelchair struck a rut/crack in the asphalt parking lot causing the wheelchair to suddenly and unexpectedly stop which catapulted our client out of her wheelchair. Our client struck the ground, face first. She sustained a fractured nose and fractured vertebrae. The County Fair facility, owned by a public entity, denied the claim. The public entity claimed that the rut/crack was a trivial defect in the asphalt, blamed the daughter and viewed our client’s injuries as minor and pre-existing. The Madrid Law Firm was able to establish that the parking lot constituted a dangerous condition because of the size and depth of the rut/crack coupled with lack of lighting in the parking lot. The Madrid Law Firm ascertained that the County Fair facility had prior notice of this dangerous condition and failed to take any corrective action. After two days of mediation prior to trial, the Madrid Law Firm was able to obtain a 7-figure settlement for their client. When tragedy strikes, it makes a big difference who is in your corner. Our client benefited from our combined 60 + years of legal and trial experience behind her case. The results speak for themselves!

CLIENT RECOVERS 6 FIGURES AGAINST DRUNK DRIVER

Client was driving a tractor-trailer loaded with a forklift on the freeway when a drunk driver traveling in excess of 100 MPH rear-ended his tractor-trailer causing it to jackknife. The passenger of the drunk driver died and no there were no injuries to the drunk driver. Client was injured and taken to hospital by ambulance. Immediately following this collision another vehicle traveling in the same direction collided into the drunk driver’s vehicle. Thereafter, another vehicle collided into this third vehicle.

The drunk driver’s insurance carrier denied client’s claim alleging that he did not sustain any injuries because of the size and weight of the tractor trailer vs the Audi vehicle. Client retained a personal injury self-proclaimed “SUPER LAWYER” law firm. Once the insurance company denied the claim, the “SUPER LAWYER” law firm dumped the client. Client was referred to the Madrid Law Firm.

The Madrid Law Firm filed suit immediately. The defendant’s insurance lawyers associated the drunk driver’s high profile criminal defense lawyers to block and frustrate all discovery efforts because the drunk driver was a celebrity and was asserting 5th Amendment protection. Didn’t Work!! The high profile criminal defense lawyers discovered at a law and motion hearing that the Madrid Law Firm lawyers were equally, if not superiorly, experienced in criminal law and procedure. The Madrid Law Firm lawyers demonstrated to the Court that all defense motions had no merit and the deposition of their drunk driver client should go forward. The case settled shortly thereafter for 6 figures. Additionally, because the client had been injured by a convicted drunk driver, the client was entitled to his attorneys’ fees and costs as a matter of law.

GOLF-CART V. TRACTOR-TRAILER

Two Clients worked for a company where they had to transport tools from one building to another on a golf cart. The clients would use the surface streets to get from one building to another. The clients were stopped at a stop sign when the defendant, who was driving a tractor-trailer, traveling in the opposite direction veered over and hit the golf cart head-on causing both clients to be ejected from the golf cart. Both clients were seriously injured.

The self-insured trucking company denied the claim asserting that the clients were not entitled to pain and suffering damages because the golf cart was uninsured and the golf cart was not authorized to be on public streets. The Madrid Law Firm filed suit. In support of this untenable position, Defendants filed a motion with court to preclude clients from receiving compensation for pain and suffering because the golf cart was uninsured. Madrid Law Firm characterized this as a “Twinkie” defense because this is not the law and filed a one page opposition citing the correct law. The judge overruled this frivolous motion and ruled that clients were entitled to pain and suffering damages. Case settled.

A CASE LACKING HORSE SENSE

Our client, a ranch owner, was sued by a barrel racer who claimed that her horse stepped on a nail while on the ranch premises. The horse was injured and ultimately euthanized. While the death of any horse is tragic, the client ranch owner and barrel racing organization that hosted the event were not at fault. The barrel racer acknowledged that she signed a Release of Liability and further could not prove any negligence against the ranch owner or the organization that hosted the barrel race. After advising the plaintiff's cadre of counsel who claimed to be "Equine Lawyers" that the MADRID LAW FIRM doesn't play "Let's Make a Deal" or recommend settlements on "frivolous" cases and before a Motion for Summary Judgment was filed to terminate this action, the barrel racer and her "Equine Law Attorney" dismissed the case! We are now filing post-trial motions to recover costs as well as obtain judgment for court ordered sanctions against the barrel racer and her cadre of "Equine Law" attorneys.

THE HUNTER BECOMES THE HUNTED

Our Client, a commercial property development corporation, was wrongfully sued for Indemnity, Contribution and Apportionment of Fault stemming from a purchase and sale real estate transaction between a third party and a former shareholder of our client. Our client was not involved in the purchase or sale of the subject real estate transaction. During the transaction, the former shareholder was issued a promissory note in his name for $50,000.00 by this third party. The shareholder then sold the Note to the plaintiff for $40,000.00. The plaintiff sued to collect the $40,000.00 against this third party/defendant. The third party/defendant filed a cross-complaint against our client claiming Indemnification, Contribution and Apportionment of Fault and a host of contract and tort actions alleging vicarious liability against our client. The truth of the matter was that our client is a "deep pocket" and defendant erroneously and avariciously assumed that by suing our client, our client was going to capitulate and pay to get out of the lawsuit. Big mistake! The Madrid Law Firm filed a Motion for Summary Judgment, which was granted and the case dismissed. Our client now has the option of going after defendant/cross-complainant for malicious prosecution for recovery of all attorneys' fees and costs. We are currently in the process of filing post-trial motions to recover costs.

ASSAULT

Client was at a Western Bar with two female friends. One of the female friends got into an argument with a bar waitress. Another patron stepped in and struck our client's friend. The bouncers separated the two ladies. The ladies were escorted outside and were going to be allowed to fight. Client stepped in and took his female friend and escorted her to his car. As he was helping her get in the car, a patron struck client with his fist twice in the face causing him severe injuries. When the client went to see his first lawyer, he was told that he had no case. Client retained Madrid Law Firm. Bar disputed liability claiming that an unknown patron had struck Client and they were not responsible. Madrid Law Firm was prepared to prove at trial their duties and obligations to Client, which made them liable.

Result: Case settled before trial.

Team Madrid represented a client who had been sexually molested when he was a child by a priest. During the time that he was molested, this certain priest would take the neighborhood boys all about the same age to Big Bear for overnight stays and sexually molest them. As an adult, client came to see Team Madrid about representing him in connection with these incidences that occurred to him when he was a boy. Team Madrid accepted the case and took on the church.

Result: This clergy case was successfully resolved in the client's favor.

ASSAULT

Client entered a liquor store. As he was paying for his items, the clerk wrongfully accused client of taking items without paying for them. When client showed him he had not taken anything, the Clerk struck the client on his head with a baseball bat culminating in lacerations requiring stitches and clamps.

Result: Team Madrid successfully represented the client and recovered a substantial settlement for personal injuries sustained as a result of this unprovoked assault and battery.

ASSAULT

Client, a patron at a bar, was attempting to gain re-admission to the bar. The security guard advised client that he was no longer allowed inside the bar, walked him to the parking lot and proceeded to punch him in the face. Client was punched until he passed out. Client retained the Madrid Law Firm. Prior to the case proceeding to trial, the defendants settled the case.

Result: Client was substantially compensated for his injuries and damages.

Plaintiff, a nurse and barrel racer gave away her barrel racing horse with bucking propensities to Defendant #1, a rodeo stock contractor, to find a home for the horse. Defendant #1 then gave the horse to Defendant #2, a rodeo pick up man and bronc rider. Defendant #2 then sold the horse to Defendant #3, a professional barrel racer. Defendant #3 successfully competed in various rodeos on the subject horse. Once the Plaintiff discovered that Defendant #3 was riding on the horse in the rodeo successfully, she demanded the return of the horse. Plaintiff sued all three defendants for breach of contract and conversion. Team Madrid represented all three defendants. At trial, Plaintiff brought in Lance Graves, a barrel race horse expert who opined that horse had a value of $120,000.00. Defendants brought in Sharon Camarillo, a world-renowned equine expert, clinician and educator. Ms. Camarillo opined that the horse had no value because of its propensity to buck, which made the horse unsuitable as a barrel racing horse and dangerous.

Result: After a four-day bench trial, the Court ruled in favor of the defendants.