Garvey Biggers has established a track record of aggressive, successful legal representation across a wide spectrum of liability and injury cases. A passionate and prepared advocate tirelessly focused on you and your case. An unsurpassed knowledge of the legal landscape, the adversaries, and the energy and effort needed for success. One of the best at what he does, day in and day out.
Tried to conclusion or resolved favorable to client:
Represented defendant physician assistant in Greenlee County where claimant went to clinic for pain in right eye. PA diagnosed as “Pink Eye” with prescription for eye drops. Next day client saw plaintiff again and diagnosed as “corneal abrasion” with new medication. Clinic pharmacy was closed and plaintiff could not fill prescription so client patched eye and told claimant to fill prescription the next day. Upon return to clinic the next day, patient’s eye had ulcerated. Claimant hospitalized with severe purulent corneal ulcer that left a scar. Claimant was blind in the other eye and unable to drive, read, work or enjoy hobbies. Case resolved favorable after defending against claims of failure to take adequate history; failure to discover patient was type I diabetic thus more vulnerable to infection; failure to check visual acuity in both eyes and treated without knowing only one good eye; failure to prescribe correct medication; failure to educate patient; failure to refer to ophthalmologist.
Greenlee County CV 2004-0015
Represented hospital where vicarious liability alleged for acts of nurses occurred during delivery of baby that suffered cerebral palsy. The Doctor was also sued and settled early for policy limits. Hospital nurses were alleged to have fallen below standard of care while assisting physician with the delivery. Allegations of excessive use of Pitocin; excessive use of vacuum extraction and failure to seek an order for a cesarean section after a difficult labor and prior cesarean section in mother; following mother’s wishes to give birth “naturally”. Case resolved favorably to client after two years of litigation.
Represented hospital and Nursing College and nurses in Northern Arizona where allegation of L5-S1 radiculopathy was claimed to have occurred as a result of a Demerol injection into the right buttock of the claimant. The student nurse was performing her first injection under the supervision of a highly qualified RN when the student nurse pushed the medicine a little faster than recommended. A large hematoma developed. Claimant was proven to be a drug seeking type patient who brought a frivolous claim. The lawsuit was resolved favorably through dismissal and a complete defense victory on behalf of all defendants.
Represented an insured against a major insurance company. Insured owner of truck that was stolen. Insurance company conducted an aggressive investigation that was not only unreasonable in length, but also, abusive. Client alleged insurer failed to pay for eight months while demanding three years of tax records, bank statements, cell phone records and incurred $60,000 in surveillance on client. Vindictive ex-girlfriend formerly employed by insurance company played a role in the company putting its own interest in front of its insured who was required to pay monthly payments on vehicle and purchase a replacement vehicle. Insurance company offered $75,000 right before trial. Verdict in favor of client for $32,000 compensatory - $1,400,000 punitive damages.
CV 98-19150 Maricopa County
Defended through trial the original maker of In-Line skates. Brain injured plaintiff, 19 y.o. male, purchased pair of skates and while skating toward a major valley mall, he cut across a street, approached a sidewalk and attempted to jump a gravel median. The claimant lost control and fell into an oncoming vehicle head first. Numerous other entities were sued and settled before trial, including property owners for poorly maintained premises and driver of pickup truck. Defended in In-Line Skate manufacturer against claims of poorly designed braking system and packaging that depicted users riding skates without helmets. Claims made that in line skates should be sold with helmets, wrist pads and elbow pads. $11,500,000 requested from jury. Defense verdict in favor of client.
CV 93-05487 Maricopa County
Brought two lawsuits against world’s largest beer manufacturer and manufacturer of kegs on behalf of two different men ages 30 and 28. Both men were in the process of lifting to chest high level full kegs of beer. One was injured by a defective and unreasonably dangerous keg when the rubber bottom of the keg became detached with 15 gallons of beer in it. The full keg came crashing down on the knee, hyperextending it and requiring multiple surgeries leaving him permanently disabled. The second individual, an employee of the local beer distributer was lifting a similarly designed and manufactured keg with rubber bottom and it too became detached in midair while keg was full. This time, the accident resulted in multiple back surgeries to the 28 y.o. male who was married and had four children. Proof was made that the keg manufacturer had secretly known for years that the kegs’ adhesive on the rubber bottoms failed quality control standards. The beer manufacturer while responsible for the bad kegs was unaware of what the keg manufacturer knew. After much investigation in the hometown of the closed down keg manufacturing plant, secret quality control documents were discovered and the case settled. Both cases settled for confidential amounts that were significant and substantial.
Wrongful death and survivor claims made against natural gas supplier and manufacturer of gas wall heater arising from gas explosion at a residence. The victim was husband to high school sweetheart and father of two young children. He suffered burns over 80% of his body and three months of hospitalization at Maricopa Medical Center Burn Unit resulting in more than $6,000,000 in medical bills prior to passing away. We alleged that gas supplier employee spoke with deceased within an hour of the incident telling the victim to “bleed” the line of a recently installed new steel pipe gas line. Through investigation and testing it was established that new steel pipe can cause natural gas to lose its artificial odor. Alleged that the deceased bled the line per instructions of gas company employee, the house became filled with un-odorized gas. When a spark was created to try and light a new wall heater for which the steel pipe had been installed, an explosion occurred. The deceased was at the epicenter of a 2000 degree blast. The heater had been failing to light, or stay lit, for over two weeks and attempts to bleed the line by a handyman had been made prior to the day of the phone call to the gas supplier. These attempts resulted in no smell of gas by the handyman. The hardware store that sold the heater was alleged to have sold the wrong type of heater, as the residence required natural gas but instead, a propane heater was brought home from the store. The victim and his helper were focused on the gas supply rather than the heater during the weeks of it not lighting. The instructions on the heater and on the instruction booklet informed the user to call the local gas supplier in the event that the heater would not light. The handyman had told the victim to call the gas supplier the night before the explosion. It would be the last call the victim ever made. The employee of the gas supplier denied telling the deceased to bleed the line. He died at age 37 shortly after testifying in the case. Lawsuit was heavily defended against our claims that were favorably settled on behalf of the widow and two children after more than 50 depositions and four years of litigation.
Represented carpenter against world’s second largest power tool manufacturer. A miter saw without proper guarding failed to protect the hand of a 52 y.o. male who went through 23 surgeries and ultimately lost his arm. Negligent design, and failure to warn allegations resulted in a 10% finding of fault against manufacturer. A $700,000 award was made to the plaintiff after 3 weeks of trial.
CV 90-30684 Maricopa County
Defended nursing staff and nursing home where a patient was taken following an auto accident. 73 y.o. male survived by his daughter. He had sustained bilateral subdural hematomas requiring ventricular shunts and came to home on a mechanical ventilator. He deteriorated and could not eat. He then underwent a feeding tube placement procedure at a local hospital. He came back to the nursing home and within a day or two spiked a fever and died. Autopsy revealed acute peritonitis from a misplaced feeding tube. Nurses accused of breaching standard of care for failure to detect misplaced feeding tube before, during and after each feeding. Allegations for failure to address respiratory distress and claims about false chart entries when decedent was at hospital and not at the nursing home. Claims defended under the Adult Protective Services Act (APSA) for abuse and neglect allegations. Ten day jury trial resulted in favorable settlement for client who demanded case be settled after closing arguments. Limited amounts of insurance coverage forced settlement and prevented Jury from completing deliberations where the Jury had eliminated punitive damages and were leaning in favor of defense verdict. Pretrial demands ranged up to $8,600,000. Case settled for $850,000.
CV 2002-002119 Maricopa County
Participated in defending a wrongful death Adult Protective Services Act (APSA) claim against a group home for which the State of Arizona was alleged to be vicariously liable. A 51 y.o. male who was severely mentally retarded had no teeth or safety awareness and a history of choking, inhaled a bean burro. He choked to death. He was a choking risk based on prior incidents. His food was to be cut up prior to his gaining access to such products. Allegations against client, State of Arizona and the group home included abuse and neglect for multiple things including failure to perform CPR; failure to report choking to the 9-1-1 operator; fraudulent entries into care log. The investigation by the State concluded that there was evidence of neglect. The author of the investigative report was defended at trial. The career DDS employee explained his initial investigation findings which changed based upon what he discovered after the report was authored. Before trial, Plaintiffs made $4,900,000 demand. Defendants offered $1,000,000 prior to trial. Jury returned verdict for $307,250.
CV 2008-014211 Maricopa County
Defended large roofing contractor in first Jury trial of a class action construction defect lawsuit brought in State of Arizona. Over 500 roofs were alleged to have been negligently constructed as part of a lawsuit that also alleged poorly built homes in a master planned community in north Phoenix. Allegations against architectural, structural, drywall, stucco, geotechnical, plumbing, mechanical and air conditioning. Claims against client roofing company included leaking roofs caused by short underlayment and violation of building codes for improperly nailed shingles. Before trial we offered $90,000 to the 500 plaintiff class. Verdict returned after 6 weeks of trial and 14 attorneys on behalf of various parties. Roofing company liable for $89,000. Plaintiffs were seeking between $10,000,000 and $20,000,000 from the general contractor, developer and host of sub-contractors.
CV 2000 – 006709 Maricopa County
Represented 36 y.o. male in car accident against defendant who was killed in the accident along with his wife. The estate of the negligent driver was sued for failure to yield at a stop sign at 19th Avenue and Pinnacle Peak Road in Phoenix. Defendant claimed plaintiff was sole cause of accident, inattentive and speeding at time of collision. Through investigation and interviews we discovered defendants had interviewed two eyewitnesses to accident but failed to call them to trial. Accident reconstruction proved defendants’ defenses were false and based upon information that did not take into account the two eyewitnesses. Client had to have laminectomy at L5 – S1 and steel rods placed in lower back. He lost his career in heavy highway construction and had an 11th grade education. He needed to be retrained and our vocational rehabilitation experts testified he was capable of being a civil engineer. We demanded $450,000 before trial. Defendants offered $300,000. The Jury returned a verdict in our favor for $750,000 after a 7 day trial. 100% fault upon defendant.
CV 98 – 06109 Maricopa County
Defended cement truck driver after an American Red Cross van operator for “Meals on Wheels” crashed into rear of cement truck stopped in rural roadway. The crash killed the passenger of the Red Cross van. The deceased female was 75 y.o. with a life expectancy of 1 year because of lung cancer. The cement truck was stopped in the middle of the road because the driver thought someone had flagged him down from the opposite direction. We made a $40,000 offer. Red Cross was found to be 95% at fault. Non-party nursing home assessed 5% fault. Client, cement truck driver, found to have zero percent fault. Verdict for Plaintiff for $500,000. 6 day trial.
CV 98 – 22795 Maricopa County
Represented two teenage sisters aged 15 and 17 who were passengers in vehicle turning left into West Side Shopping Mall in Phoenix. The turn occurred at an uncontrolled intersection and a speeding vehicle collided with the passenger side of the left turning car. One claimant burned over 40% of her body after being ejected from vehicle and lying on asphalt for extended period. Other sister took full impact suffering permanent brain damage. 10 day Jury trial. Awarded sister with burns $750,000 plus emotional injuries of $50,000. Awarded $1,900,000 to sister with head injury. Mother given $62,000 for loss of consortium. Found drivers of vehicles to each be 49% at fault and City of Phoenix 2% at fault for negligent design of intersection.
CV 94 – 06236 Maricopa County
Represented innocent defendant who rear-ended a van operated by a local male pharmacy owner age 50. Pharmacist was stopped at a red light in rush hour traffic in Tucson. Client who was stopped behind van took foot off brake and rolled into rear of vehicle. Pharmacist jumped out of van insisting not to call police but defendant called anyway. Later, pharmacist claimed he needed knee surgery. Defense verdict after 3 day trial. $50,000 had been demanded; we had offered $2,500.
CV 333603 Pima County
Represented an ambulance company in negligence claim where $24,000,000 was sought for resulting brain injury caused from a dissected carotid artery. Victim had been in two collisions within less than 20 minutes. The first accident occurred at a controlled intersection in Mesa, as a left turning vehicle turned in front of claimant. After the ambulance arrived and City of Mesa strapped the 23 y.o. female to a backboard with head blocks and tape, a second collision occurred on way to hospital. The trial was about which accident caused the dissected carotid artery that manifested approximately one hour post-accident requiring emergency surgery. The brain injury and resulting trauma to the parents was catastrophic. Medical-legal questions arose as to whether the injuries could be divided or whether it was an “indivisible injury”. Three week trial. Defense verdict in favor of client and ambulance company.
Represented client roofer in the course and scope of employment. Client was the victim of roof cave-in on a Costco new construction site. Client suffered significant orthopedic injuries to his arm. Co-worker fell at same time as roof gave way. Co-worker broke his back and was confined to a wheel chair. Case settled favorably for client who obtained a lifetime monthly payout for wrist. The co-worker also recovered in a separate claim.
Represented 56 y.o. male heavy highway construction worker who fell through a “trap” wood board resting over a drainage culvert 36 feet in the air on a highway overpass. Client shot through cement drainage tube and fell to ground, landing feet first. His spine jammed and he suffered ruptured disks at C4 C5 C6 in his neck. His arms atrophied and he became permanently disabled with no hope for being retrained. He had a wife and 10 children. Without a lawsuit, the case was settled for $1,000,000 against the cement subcontractor on the jobsite. Lifetime benefits through a structured settlement was procured, guaranteeing payment for the life of the husband and wife.
Represented 24 y.o. Hispanic male, an electrical helper who fell 20 feet through a skylight on a roof where he was assisting in hanging a sign on the side of a building. It was a tire warehouse and when he fell, he landed on a 10 foot stack of tires then bounced to the ground falling another 10 feet. He shattered his elbow and had a fractured a vertebrae in his lower back. The case tried in Federal District Court. Awarded client $200,000 with a finding of fault against his employer of 55% and against him for leaning against the unguarded skylight in the amount of 25%. Defendant building owner found 20% at fault for failure to guard the skylights.
CV 11 – 00269 – PHX – JAT
Auto accidents and auto liability cases are a specialty of the firm.More Expertise