Our Results

At Tetzel Law, we take pride in obtaining the best outcome for our clients. The following are some examples of successful results we achieved for our clients. These cases illustrate the variety of significant matters we handle.

$1,750,000 Settlement – Confidential Malpractice Settlement

$1,250,000 Settlement – Plaintiff Suffers Abdominal Injuries in T-Bone Collision

$1,150,000 Sexual Assault at Nursing Home Settlement

$1,000,000 Medical Malpractice Settlement – Medication Error Results in Stroke

$950,000 Confidential Premise Liability Settlement

$700,000 Medical Malpractice Settlement – Delay in Diagnosis of Melanoma

$600,000 Confidential Product Liability Settlement

$550,000 Motor Vehicle Accident Settlement, Spinal Cord Injury

$500,000 Brake Failure Settlement

$500,000 Boating Accident

$475,000 Fall from Ladder Settlement

$459,000 Disputed Property Damage Claim

$450,000 Medical Malpractice Settlement, Failure to Diagnose Leukemia

$400,000 Settlement – Plaintiff Diagnosed with Trigeminal Neuralgia Following Motor Vehicle Crash

$209,000 Premise Liability Verdict, $325,000 Judgment After Interest

$300,000 Motor Cycle/Bus Accident Settlement

$250,000 Wrongful Death Medical Malpractice Settlement

$250,000 Nursing Home Negligence, Fall from Bed

$237,500 Product Liability Settlement – Hip Implant

$235,000 Motor Vehicle Settlement, Contested Back Injury

$210,000 Pedestrian Accident at Gas Station, Blood Clot Injury

$209,446.53 Arbitration Award – Plaintiff Struck While Crossing Street at Night

$200,000 Medical Malpractice Settlement

$175,000 Motorcycle Intersection Collision

$150,000 Negligent Security Settlement

$150,000 Dog Bite Settlement

$150,000 Property Owner Settles Dog Bite Case, Dog Owner Uninsured

 

$1,750,000 Confidential Malpractice Settlement

$1,250,000 Settlement – Plaintiff Suffers Abdominal Injuries in T-Bone Collision

The plaintiff, a 59-year-old female veteran, was driving home from her job as a Mental Health CNA at a veteran’s hospital. While travelling with the right of way, the plaintiff’s vehicle was T-boned by a commercial dump truck. Plaintiff’s accident reconstructionist analyzed the vehicle crash data of both vehicles involved and was prepared to testify the plaintiff was travelling straight within the speed limit just prior to impact. The reconstructionist was expected to testify the defendant’s failure to yield was the sole cause of the collision.

The plaintiff suffered internal and abdominal injuries in the collision including a splenic laceration, diaphragmatic hernia, and multiple rib fractures. She was initially taken by ambulance to a local hospital at which time her internal bleeding required a medical flight transport to a trauma center. She underwent several procedures during her inpatient hospitalization.

Months later, the plaintiff also developed an intestinal stricture which required a subsequent hospitalization and endoscopies. She was restricted from driving and working for months and remained on a soft diet for approximately six months.

Suit was filed immediately. During discovery and prior to the truck driver’s deposition, the case settled for the policy limits.

$1,150,000 Sexual Assault at Nursing Home Settlement

 The plaintiff was sexually assaulted in a secured dementia unit at the defendant nursing home. The perpetrator frequently visited the facility and socialized with its residents despite having no family members there for many years.

On the day of the incident, a CNA discovered the perpetrator in the plaintiff’s bed with the plaintiff disrobed. The nursing home staff understated the severity of the event to the point the plaintiff’s family, instead of the nursing home staff, notified the police. The plaintiff was taken to a nearby hospital and underwent a SANE exam which revealed physical trauma and confirmed the plaintiff was sexually assaulted. Evidence collected during the SANE exam matched the perpetrator’s DNA.

The plaintiff’s guardian brought negligence claims against the nursing home, nursing home corporate ownership as well as the administrator, director of nursing, assistant director of nursing and several individual RNs. Plaintiff’s nursing home administrator expert opined the defendants breached the standard of care in several respects including allowing a third-party free access to a secured dementia unit, providing access codes to visitors, and failing to require visitors to sign-in. The expert also opined the nursing home attempted to conceal the sexual assault and failed to properly investigate and report prior instances of trauma.

At the time of the sexual assault, the plaintiff was 87-years old and suffered from multiple underlying health conditions including advanced dementia, depression, anxiety disorder and heart failure. She had no memory of the sexual assault. Plaintiff retained a geriatric psychiatrist to discuss the plaintiff’s changes in behavior after the assault including hallucinations, fear of men, and newly developed sexualized behavior. The expert also opined the plaintiff suffered PTSD as well as worsened depression and anxiety.

$1,000,000 Medical Malpractice Settlement – Medication Error Results in Stroke

In February 2015, the plaintiff, a then 79-year-old independent woman, was admitted to the defendant-nursing home for short-term rehabilitation following a nondisplaced pelvic fracture.  At that time and for many years prior, she suffered from atrial fibrillation and was prescribed Coumadin.  The discharge instructions from the hospital ordered a daily dosage of Coumadin as well as frequent INR testing.  After being admitted to the defendant-nursing home, the plaintiff went 11 days without any anticoagulant medication.  When the nursing home staff discovered the medication error, the defendant-physician attempted to troubleshoot the error by ordering loading doses of Coumadin.  The plaintiff suffered an embolic stroke days later when her daughter-in-law discovered her with facial drooping and garbled speech.  The plaintiff underwent rigorous physical, occupational and speech therapy in the ensuing month in an attempt to regain her independence.  After exhibiting some improvement over the next 7 weeks, the plaintiff travelled to California to visit her daughter where she suffered a second embolic stroke.  The plaintiff never regained any sense of independence thereafter.  She required 24/7 care and necessitated some form of assistance for nearly every activity of daily life. 

The plaintiff brought negligence claims against the nursing home and her assigned physician.  In discovery, it was confirmed the unit manager failed to transcribe the Coumadin order to the plaintiff’s medication administration record in violation of federal and state regulations.  The plaintiff further argued the defendant-physician physically examined the plaintiff twice during the period she did not receive Coumadin and did not undertake any effort to review her chart or ensure her INR levels were within therapeutic range.  The defendant-physician argued she affirmed the Coumadin order upon admission and as a result did not breach the standard of care. 

In addition to standard of care experts, the plaintiff retained an expert cardiologist who opined the first stroke was causally related to the medication error and was also a substantial contributing cause of the second stroke.  The defendants obtained expert opinions indicating neither stroke was causally related to the medication error.  The basis for that position was the plaintiff’s volatile INR levels, the fact she travelled across country and the inability to identify when and where a clot formed.  The defendants also argued an unrelated third stroke in 2019 contributed to the plaintiff’s permanent deficits.

In the middle of discovery shortly after plaintiff disclosed two additional expert opinions, the case settled against both the defendant nursing home and defendant geriatric physician for a total of $1,000,000.

$950,000 Confidential Premise Liability Settlement

$700,000 Medical Malpractice Settlement – Delay in Diagnosis of Melanoma

In April 2017, the plaintiff, a 78-year-old man, went to his primary care doctor with a suspicious lesion on his right arm. The primary care doctor removed the lesion and sent the specimen to the pathology department at a nearby hospital. The defendant pathologist analyzed the specimen and made the diagnosis of basal cell carcinoma. No further testing or treatment was ordered.

Fourteen months later, the plaintiff developed two similar lesions on his right arm. The primary care doctor referred the plaintiff to a dermatologist that removed the lesions and sent the specimens for pathological testing. This time the plaintiff was diagnosed as having metastatic melanoma.

In September 2018, the plaintiff was referred to an oncologist where he underwent a wide local excision procedure. He also commenced monthly adjuvant immunotherapy for thirteen consecutive months. The plaintiff’s treating oncologist indicated the plaintiff had stage III or stage IV melanoma. The plaintiff’s April 2017 specimen was also reviewed by the pathology department of the oncological hospital and the records indicated the correct diagnosis was melanoma instead of basal cell carcinoma.

The plaintiff retained a pathologist and oncologist as experts. After review of the slides, the plaintiff’s pathologist expert agreed the defendant misdiagnosed the April 2017 specimen as basal cell carcinoma instead of melanoma. Both the pathologist and oncologist experts were prepared to testify the misdiagnosis caused a sixteen to seventeen-month delay in diagnosis which allowed the melanoma to advance from stage I or II to stage IV. The plaintiff’s oncological expert opined that a wide resection and a right axillary sentinel lymph node biopsy should have been performed in April 2017, which yields a 95% curative rate for stage I or stage II cases. Instead, the expert oncologist indicated the plaintiff’s melanoma metastasized and went from a curable to a non-curable disease.

The defendant was prepared to offer expert testimony from several experts that the cancer had metastasized by April 2017 and that diagnosis and treatment in 2017 would not have changed the plaintiff’s prospect of long-term survival. The plaintiff also suffered from several pre-existing health conditions including renal cell carcinoma, aortic aneurysm with stent placement, coronary artery disease, and two prior heart attacks.

When the case resolved at mediation, the plaintiff had completed immunotherapy treatment and was cancer free for a year and a half without any evidence of reoccurrence.

$600,000 Confidential Product Liability Settlement

$550,000 Motor Vehicle Accident Settlement, Spinal Cord Injury

On March 7, 2014, the Plaintiff, a thirty-three-year-old male, was involved in a four-car crash in heavy traffic on his way to work. The Plaintiff alleged the 16-year-old Defendant caused the event by initially rear-ending the Plaintiff’s car which resulted in multiple impacts with four vehicles.

The Plaintiff was transported to the hospital and diagnosed with a C4-C5 disk herniation that slightly compressed his spinal cord. He ultimately underwent a cervical diskectomy and two-level fusion within a week of the accident.

Plaintiff’s neurosurgical expert was expected to testify the Plaintiff sustained an acute traumatic cervical spinal cord injury with neurological deficits. Moreover, the expert opined the Plaintiff suffered permanent weakness in his arm, permanent damage to his cervical spine, and is at an increased risk to develop adjacent disc disease and additional surgery in his future.

$500,000 Brake Failure Settlement

On January 21, 2014, the Plaintiff, a 63-year-old male, was working with a co-employee to attach a snow plow onto a truck as a winter storm was approaching. The Plaintiff acted as the spotter and situated himself in a garage bay where the snow plows were stored. As the Plaintiff’s co-employee drove the truck towards him to connect the plow to the truck, the brakes allegedly failed, pinning the Plaintiff between two plows. Post-incident investigations indicated the truck’s brake pads and rotors were worn and likely contributed to the crash.

Eight months earlier, the Defendant auto body shop performed a state inspection and major tune-up on the truck. The Plaintiff’s expert, an automotive engineer and certified inspection mechanic, was prepared to testify the Defendant conducted an improper state and brake inspection. The expert opined the worn brake pads and rotors had to be present at the inspection eight months earlier as the vehicle only experienced 2,200 miles of travel during that period. Plaintiff’s expert concluded the Defendant failed to warn the Plaintiff’s employer of the worn brake pads and rotors and failed to recommend replacement.

As a result of the incident, the Plaintiff suffered a serious right leg injury for which he underwent three surgeries. He was unable to return to gainful employment after the incident.

$500,000 Boating Accident

$475,000 Fall from Ladder Settlement

The Plaintiff, a tenant of the Defendant property owner, fell 25 feet from a ladder while in the process of painting and scraping a large multi-family property. Neither the ladder nor any of the equipment was alleged to be defective or unsafe. The Plaintiff sustained multiple injuries including a L2 burst fracture, fractured ribs and fractured fingers. He underwent surgery to his lower spine and right hand and suffered permanent injuries.

The case was brought against the property owner. Plaintiff alleged the Defendant was negligent by: a) failing to hire a reputable painting contractor as the job was extensive and dangerous; b) failing to provide adequate fall protection including staging; and c) negligently hiring the Plaintiff due to his known mental health issues.

The Defendant argued the Plaintiff’s comparative fault barred any recovery as he simply lost his balance while scraping in an unsafe manner. The Defendant also argued she did not owe a duty to provide fall protection or training because she was not a general contractor and did not maintain control of the worksite. The Defendant contended she was unaware of the extent of the Plaintiff’s mental health issues and even so, the Plaintiff was fully capable of appreciating the risks associated with the job.

$459,000 Disputed Property Damage Claim

Multiple pipes burst in homeowner’s vacant secondary residence causing substantial structural damage.  Insurer denied the claim based on a failure to adequately maintain the property and disputed the value of the damage.  After an in-depth investigation, counsel proved insurer’s obligation to provide full coverage for the occurrence and homeowner was fully compensated for damages to real and personal property.

$450,000 Medical Malpractice Settlement, Failure to Diagnose Leukemia

Plaintiff had a history of health issues and presented to her primary care physician for blood work which revealed high white blood cell count, absolute neutrophils and absolute monocytes.  Despite acknowledgment of the abnormal results, no follow up blood count was performed.  As a result, the Plaintiff’s Leukemia went undetected and untreated until it was too late to be effectively treated.  Ultimately, the Plaintiff passed due to complications associated with Leukemia.

$400,000 Settlement – Plaintiff Diagnosed with Trigeminal Neuralgia Following Motor Vehicle Crash

On April 26, 2018, plaintiff operated her vehicle in the far right-lane on I-90 when her vehicle was struck by a commercial tow truck attempting to merge from the middle lane.  As a result, plaintiff’s vehicle spun out and struck the guardrail.

The plaintiff presented to the hospital after the collision with complaints of neck and back pain.  Radiology confirmed no fractures, and plaintiff was discharged with pain medication.  In the ensuing days, plaintiff developed left-sided facial pain and followed up with her dentist.  In the weeks prior to the collision, plaintiff’s number 12 (left upper) tooth was fractured and extracted.  No abnormalities were found during dental examinations.  Plaintiff continued to experience left-sided facial pain, and ultimately received a neurology referral.  Following examination and radiology, plaintiff was diagnosed with trigeminal neuralgia.  Ultimately, surgical intervention was recommended and plaintiff underwent a left craniotomy for microvascular decompression. 

Plaintiff’s neurosurgical expert was expected to testify the plaintiff’s diagnosis of trigeminal neuralgia was casually related to the trauma sustained in the motor vehicle accident, and the need for surgery was reasonable and necessary.

The defendant contested liability and the causal relationship of plaintiff’s trigeminal neuralgia diagnosis.  Defendant’s expert neurologist was expected to testify a pre-existing anomaly in the brain stem on the right-side of the plaintiff’s face caused the pain on the left-side, and the decompression of the trigeminal nerve was not caused by trauma from the collision in absence of fracture, hematoma, or severe whiplash. 

The case settled at mediation during discovery.

$209,000 Premise Liability Verdict, $325,000 Judgment After Interest

(Stuart v. National Amusements, Inc.; Middlesex Superior Court, Civil Action No.: 2012-02802)

On March 27, 2010, the Plaintiff, a 67-year-old male, watched a movie at the Showcase Cinema in Woburn, Massachusetts with his wife. At its conclusion, as the Plaintiff exited the theatre, he tripped and fell on a dustpan and broom extending over an aisle from a theatre chair. The Plaintiff fell forward and his head impacted a partition wall.

At trial, Plaintiff’s counsel proved the Defendant violated several of their own policies which included leaving obstructions in walkways/aisles, improper storage of cleaning equipment and failure to perform theatre safety checks. The Defendant’s employees admitted said policies were not followed on the night of the incident due to understaffing of ushers.

The Plaintiff sustained a head injury, namely post-concussive syndrome, as well as soft tissue neck and back injuries. All diagnostic tests were negative. He alleged the head injury significantly affected his everyday life due to constant, debilitating headaches. The Plaintiff sought treatment with many different neurologists and underwent various forms of treatment including steroid injections, Botox injections and daily pain medications.

The Plaintiff’s damages were complicated by a motor vehicle accident he was involved in two years prior for which he sought treatment and had references to head pain/headaches. The client also sat for a deposition related to the motor vehicle accident three days after the theatre incident and testified inconsistently about his injuries.

The case was tried over one week. The first and only offer was made before the final day of trial which was substantially less than the verdict.

$300,000 Motor Cycle/Bus Accident Settlement

In May of 2015, the Plaintiff, a twenty-three-year-old male, was operating his motorcycle when a school bus turned in front of him, causing the Plaintiff to swerve from the road and fall off his motorcycle.

The Plaintiff was transported to the hospital and diagnosed with fractures in his shoulder, wrist and thumb.  In the months following the accident, the Plaintiff treated conservatively and returned to work as an apprentice electrician.  After returning to work, it was apparent his thumb fracture had not healed properly.  As a result, the Plaintiff underwent two surgical procedures to repair the nonunion in his thumb.  He returned to work in a full capacity three months after the final procedure.

Plaintiff’s orthopedic expert was expected to testify the Plaintiff will continue to suffer from deficits relating to the mobility of his thumb.  Plaintiff’s counsel argued those impairments will be magnified given the Plaintiff’s age and profession.

The Defendant contested liability as no contact was made between the Plaintiff and the school bus. The Defendant argued the Plaintiff had limited experience operating a motorcycle and was travelling at a high rate of speed.  Further, the Defendant maintained the Plaintiff had a clear view of the school bus for a significant period of time and acted unreasonable in attempting to avoid it.

$250,000 Wrongful Death Medical Malpractice Settlement

Tetzel Law filed a lawsuit on behalf of the deceased Plaintiff’s family, alleging wrongful death due to the medical malpractice of the Defendants.  Plaintiff alleged that as a result of the improper care and treatment by the Defendants, the decedent’s colon cancer went undiagnosed leading to the decedent’s premature death.  Plaintiff alleged the Defendants failed to properly investigate and report initial CT scan findings which revealed a concerning a colonic mass.  As a result of that failure, Plaintiff alleged the colonic mass was allowed to develop further and the decedent’s colon cancer went undiagnosed for months, leading to the decedent’s passing.  The Defendants disputed the claims. After filing the lawsuit, the attorneys at Tetzel Law were able to secure a $250,000 settlement for the decedent’s family.

$250,000 Nursing Home Negligence, Fall from Bed

Plaintiff was an 80-year-old patient of the Defendant nursing home when he fell out of his bed and sustained significant head injuries.  As a result of the head injuries, Plaintiff suffered subdural hematoma and underwent a craniotomy procedure.  Shortly after the surgery, Plaintiff suffered a myocardial infarction which was complicated by the subdural hematoma.  The Plaintiff passed approximately one-month post-surgery.  The attorneys at Tetzel Law alleged the Plaintiff was a known fall risk, and the nursing home failed to take proper precautions including bed/side rails on the Plaintiff’s bed.  Further, the attorneys at Tetzel Law through expert consultation alleged the myocardial infarction suffered post-surgery and the Plaintiff’s untimely death were related to the initial fall and the head injuries.  Through negotiations, Tetzel Law achieved a $250,000 settlement for the family of the deceased Plaintiff. 

$237,500 Product Liability Settlement – Hip Implant

Plaintiff underwent a hip replacement surgery due to degenerative osteoarthritis.  Over the ensuing years, Plaintiff experienced intermittent rashes, later identified as metallosis, and experienced a crunching feeling when walking.  Eventually, the hip implant broke at the head of the implant, known as a head-neck dissociation for faulty hip implants. As a result. Plaintiff underwent a revision surgery.  The attorneys at Tetzel Law discovered the hip implant system was recalled and faulty.  Through negotiations, the attorneys at Tetzel Law achieved a $237,500 settlement for the Plaintiff.

$235,000 Motor Vehicle Settlement, Contested Back Injury

Plaintiff exited a parking lot when he was struck by an oncoming vehicle.  Plaintiff suffered serious injuries to his back, including disc injuries with the potential for future surgery.  Insurance company initially denied liability and disputed the extent of the Plaintiff’s injuries.  Prior to filing suit, the attorneys at Tetzel Law were able to settle the case for the policy limit of the Defendant.  Further, the attorneys at Tetzel Law pursued an underinsurance claim and obtained an additional settlement for the Plaintiff.

$210,000 Pedestrian Accident at Gas Station, Blood Clot Injury

Plaintiff owned a gas station and attended to one of the valves at the side of the building when a vehicle struck the Plaintiff and ran over his legs.  Plaintiff suffered crush injuries to his leg, resulting in blood clots which ultimately caused a stroke.  The insurance company disputed the extent of the Plaintiff’s injuries.  Through consultations with experts, the attorneys at Tetzel Law obtained a policy limit settlement against the Defendant, and pursued an underinsurance claim to secure additional reward for the Plaintiff.

$209,446.53 Arbitration Award – Plaintiff Struck While Crossing Street at Night

On 12/30/2015, the plaintiff, a pedestrian, attempted to cross a five-lane roadway at approximately 10:00 PM.  Simultaneously, the defendant drove his vehicle in the far-right lane.  The plaintiff walked across four lanes when he was struck by the defendant’s vehicle.  The plaintiff was not in a crosswalk at the time of the incident.  The collision was witnessed by two individuals, one of whom travelled in front of and to the immediate left of the defendant.  The witness noticed the plaintiff with enough time to stop his vehicle and avoid a collision.  The same witness also noticed the defendant on his cell phone immediately after the collision.  The defendant denied the cell phone use alleged by the witness. 

The plaintiff was found unresponsive and taken to a nearby hospital where he underwent a right craniotomy surgery. Plaintiff remained inpatient for approximately two-weeks and was transferred for additional two weeks of rehabilitation.  Plaintiff received neurological treatment in the ensuing months to improve his cognitive issues.  

Liability was heavily contested.  Defendant argued no evidence of speeding; the incident area was nearly unlit; the plaintiff was wearing dark clothing looking at his cell phone; and that the plaintiff was not in a crosswalk.  The Local Police Department accident reconstructionist concluded the defendant was travelling within the speed limit and the defendant did not have enough perception reaction time to avoid the collision. 

The parties agreed to arbitration following the close of discovery with a confidential high/low agreement. The arbitrator found both parties equally negligent.  The arbitrator awarded the plaintiff $418,893.05, reduced to $209,446.53 for shared liability.

$200,000 Medical Malpractice Settlement

Plaintiff presented to the Defendant hospital with worsening abdominal pain, loss of appetite, and weight loss. Plaintiff received a diagnosis of pancreatitis and discharged with pain medication but continued to present thereafter with chronic abdominal pain.  Six months after the initial visit, Plaintiff presented to another hospital who performed a CT scan which revealed pancreatic cancer.  The cancer was categorized as advanced, and despite eight months of chemotherapy, the Plaintiff passed away.  The attorneys at Tetzel Law alleged the hospital breached the standard of care owed to the Plaintiff through their failure to follow up and perform an abdominal CT scan.  The Defendant denied a breach occurred and argued the ultimate outcome would have been no different.

$175,000 Motorcycle Intersection Collision

While travelling on his motorcycle through a main intersection, the Plaintiff was struck by a vehicle entering the intersection from the Plaintiff’s right side.  Liability was contested and centered on which vehicle entered the intersection first.  The Plaintiff suffered a significant leg fracture which required surgical intervention.  Through negotiations the attorneys at Tetzel Law were able to secure a $175,000 settlement for the Plaintiff.

$150,000 Negligent Security Settlement

The Plaintiff and her family were residents of a large federally subsidized apartment complex in East Boston.  On the night of the incident, the Plaintiff engaged in a verbal altercation with multiple non-residents at the property that turned physical but dissipated once law enforcement arrived on scene.  Later in the evening, the non-residents returned to the apartment complex and attacked the Plaintiff and her family members while they were walking outside in a common area.  The Plaintiff was assaulted and suffered multiple facial fractures that required reconstructive surgeries.  Through discovery and multiple depositions, it was revealed the defendant apartment complex and its management company had prior notice of the non-residents trespassing at the property as well as other violent criminal activity.  The plaintiff argued that simple and feasible security measures could have been undertaken to prevent the occurrence.  The defendants maintained legal causation defenses and argued the Plaintiff was an active participant in the melee. The case settled at mediation for $150,000 prior to trial. 

$150,000 Property Owner Settles Dog Bite Case, Dog Owner Uninsured

In July 2012, the minor Plaintiff, five-years old at the time, was attacked by a pit bull mix at a multifamily property. He sustained facial scarring to his forehead.

The dog owners/tenants were uninsured. Plaintiff’s counsel pursued a claim against the property owner under a Nutt v. Florio theory; the dog owners/tenants remained as Defendants in the case to maintain joint-tort.

The property owners defended the case on the grounds they did not know the dog resided at the property, never saw the dog and likewise did not know of the dog’s dangerous propensities.

Through discovery, Plaintiff’s counsel identified the tenants’ previous landlord who was expected to testify he evicted the dog owners/tenants because the dog had attacked a child. In addition, Plaintiff’s counsel located a tenant to the property, who had since moved, and he was expected to testify the property owners knew the pit bull resided at the property and knew the dog was dangerous.

After the close of discovery, the parties unsuccessfully mediated the case. Shortly before trial, at the second mediation, the case settled for $150,000.

DISCLAIMER: The settlements and verdicts listed here represent a sampling of the case results pursued and won by Tetzel Law, LLC. Please note that every case is different and these verdicts and settlements, while accurate, do not represent what we may obtain for you in your case. However, our clients tell us that knowing we have achieved significant results, both by settlement and jury verdict, is one factor that many of them used to decide to hire us.