Jury Verdicts
Feb 2018 : Jury Verdict
Local funeral home chain lost a body entrusted to it for funeral services. After a three-week trial, the jury rejected the funeral home’s claim that her body had been stolen and returned a verdict in favor of our clients (parents of the deceased).
Link to Article February, 14 2018
Mar 2012 : Jury Verdict
Clients position eliminated in a reorganization three years after reprimanding a V.P. for sexual harassment. After a two-week trial, the jury found employer SAWS had retaliated.
Link to Article March 10, 2012
Jan 2010 : Jury Verdict
Successful defense of real estate broker sued for failure to disclose a sinkhole on an adjoining property. In a three-week trial, client was cleared of all liability and awarded his attorney’s fees.
Link to Opinion
May 2009 : Jury Verdict
53 year-old man held liable for initiating an inappropriate relationship with a 16 year-old girl.
Link to Article
August 2008 : Jury Verdict
A local utility found liable to a 26 year employee for gender discrimination.
Link to Article
September 2007 : Settlement
SAWS approves settlement of race discrimination case.
Link to Article
September 2005 : Jury Verdict
A local utility found liable to its employee for sexual harassment and retaliation for reporting the harassment.
Link to Article
April 2004 : Jury Verdict
Majority shareholders looted the corporation and denied dividends to the minority shareholder (client).
Link to Article
September 2000 : Jury Verdict
Employer found liable for firing an eight-year employee after she told her supervisor she was pregnant.
Link to Article
August 1999 : Jury Verdict
Hospital found liable, violating the disability discrimination statute, for firing an administrator after she suffered a minor stroke on the job.
Link to Article
March 1999 : Jury Verdict
Landlord found liable to a tenant gang-raped at an apartment complex due to inadequate security. This case settled prior to the punitive damage phase of the case.
Link to Article
Note: These jury verdicts do not represent the amounts received by Katzman & Katzman clients. Due to the fact that the trial and appellate courts have the authority to order remittitur (reduction) of the amounts found by the jury, as well as reverse any of the findings, the amounts ultimately received by the clients may not be represented by the amounts awarded by the jury. Other factors that affect the net amount received by a client are voluntary decisions to settle while a verdict is on appeal, the defendant’s economic viability with regard to collectability of a verdict, the contingency fee, and case expenses if applicable.