Lyons & Snyder

$327,577

Rear-End Car Accident

Our client was struck from behind. Our client was in her late 60’s at the time of the crash and suffered a multitude of injuries that created a somewhat complicated presentation. Our opinion was very simple: our client, despite some normal aging-related findings on her diagnostic imaging, was not under the care of a medical professional prior to the crash, and therefore, the injuries were either created by the crash or activated a previously latent injury. Some attorneys shy away from taking complicated cases, especially when the causation of the injuries is somewhat cloudy. Believing our client 100% allowed us to present a very clear picture of what injuries were traumatically caused and what injuries aggravated a pre-existing condition. Taking something complicated and making it easy to understand was the key to a successful outcome for our client.

$700,000

Multi-Vehicle Rear-End Crash

A negligent driver rear-ends our client, causing a multiple-vehicle crash on I-95. Unfortunately, this was not our client’s first crash. Our firm was fortunate enough to represent him in two prior crashes over the last decade. At the time of this crash, our client was still under the care of doctors for his pre-existing injuries. This fact made identifying new injuries and/or aggravations to his pre-existing injuries more complicated. We believe that if you received treatment for pre-existing conditions, it is best to return to the same doctors following a new crash, as your prior doctors will be in the best position to evaluate what injuries are “new” and which injuries are “old” or “pre-existing.” Our approach in this case was simple - do not try to mislead, understate, or hide your prior injuries from the insurance companies. As a result, we were confident about what injuries were new vs. what injuries were old/pre-existing. The new injuries alone warranted a large settlement. This strategy took all the wind out of the defense attorney’s sails at mediation. By swiftboating these expected defenses, it led to a great result for our client.

$350,000

Car vs Bike Crash

Our client was struck as he was operating his bike on the sidewalk, crossing through an entrance/exit to a shopping plaza. Our client suffered lower leg injuries. It was very clear to Marc Lyons that the damages our client suffered were in excess of the $250,000.00 insurance policy afforded to the at-fault driver. Despite our position that the case was clearly in excess of the policy, the insurance company rejected our position. After filing suit and demonstrating the true value of our client’s injuries, Marc Lyons was able to get $100,000.00 more than the policy amount directly as a result of their failure to tender the policy when they should have.

$250,000

Rear-End Car Accident

Our client was struck behind and sustained low back injuries. Our client was self-employed and, despite needing surgery, could not do so as he could not afford to miss work. The insurance company attempted to minimize his injury in light of his lack of “invasive” treatment and initially lowballed out the client. Marc Lyons filed suit and was able to demonstrate the significance of his injuries despite the lack of surgery, obtaining a favorable result for the client.

$150,000

Premises Liability

Our client was on vacation when she was sitting on a porch swing at her hotel when it fell unexpectedly. Thankfully, our client took pictures and video of the area, which allowed Marc Lyons and his building expert to conclude that the swing had not been properly mounted and lacked adequate support. As you would imagine, the insurance company denied the claim suggesting that they lacked any notice of its defective condition. Marc Lyons argued successfully that it was installed improperly, to begin with, and that it was a ticking time bomb. Although our client had a full recovery, a very nice settlement was achieved in her favor.

$865,000

Rear-End Trucking Accident

Our client is on I-95 in the far-right lane when he is rear-ended by a Freightliner. His vehicle spins and careens into an embankment on the side of the road. The Freightliner drives away from the scene before stopping a few miles down the road. The Freightliner claims our client improperly merged into his vehicle in the middle lane, and “he wasn’t sure he made contact with our client’s vehicle.” We immediately ordered any 911 calls and retained an accident reconstructionist who inspected the scene of the crash. The accident reconstructionist identified gouge marks in the road that confirmed the crash occurred in the far-right lane - disproving the truck driver’s version of events. The accident reconstructionist was also able to document that our client’s brake lights were engaged at the time of the crash, disproving a secondary argument concerning our client’s speed. As a result of the crash, our client suffered a back injury and a mild traumatic brain injury. Following the submission of our demand, we spent months negotiating the appropriate damages. We submitted an additional report from an audiologist to bolster our case. Phil Snyder filed suit. The case finally settled in litigation for 2x the initial offer.