Retail and Hospitality Team Obtains Defense Verdict

Shareholder Glenn E. Ireland and Associate Angel A. Darmer recently obtained a defense verdict for a regional fast food chain in a jury trial held in the Circuit Court of Jefferson County, Alabama. Plaintiff’s Complaint alleged claims of Assault and Battery, Negligent Supervision, and the Tort of Outrage against the fast food chain. After trying the case before a jury, Glenn and Angel successfully obtained dismissal of Plaintiff’s Negligent Supervision and Outrage claims under a Rule 50 Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law. Plaintiff’s Assault and Battery claims were submitted to the jury, which returned a defense verdict in favor of the client.  Post-trial, Glenn and Angel successfully moved for a Rule 54 Order taxing costs against Plaintiff on behalf of their client, as the prevailing party.  At this time, they are moving forward with collection efforts of litigation expenses pursuant to the award of costs in favor of their client.

 

News

Taylor Named to a Leadership Position with claimsXchange

Carr Allison attorney Jeremy P. Taylor of our Mobile (AL) office was recently appointed to an educational leadership position within the transportation section for claimsXchange. He looks forward to partnering with them to provide cutting edge training within the industry. Congratulations!

Learn More

Zwilling to Present Webinar On A Little Bit About a Lot: Tips on Successfully Handling Common Employment Issues

What steps should an employer take in response to a complaint of harassment?  What conditions constitute a disability and what protections exist for employees regarding the same?  How should claims of discrimination be investigated?  What steps should be taken before a poor performer’s employment is terminated?  During this webinar, we […]

Learn More

Frederick and Weaver Obtain Summary Judgment

Carr Allison attorneys Charles Frederick and Kyle Weaver of our Orlando and Tallahassee (FL) offices recently won a motion for summary judgment on behalf of a national client. Our attorneys argued that the Court was able to rely on photographs that blatantly contradicted the plaintiff’s statements. The Court sided with […]

Learn More