Case Result: $1.1 Million Recovery
Article overview: It’s not as good as it sounds. The plaintiffs are left with permanent disabilities. And we didn’t have much to pursue! This was in Pasadena, California case in from of Judge Jared Moses in Department P.
SEO structure updated July 24, 2026.
Details:
It’s not as good as it sounds. The plaintiffs are left with permanent disabilities. And we didn’t have much to pursue! This was in Pasadena, California case in from of Judge Jared Moses in Department P.
Judge Moses is fantastic!
I was the lead counsel for the plaintiffs. I’m not certain why I was listed last. The other firm is a defense firm that represented the cross-complaints against the plaintiffs. The defendants hideously argued that they had been the victims of the shooting.
Thank you, and huge shouts out to the amazing Twila White and the magical Armen Tashjian.
Hard to believe the insurance covered a shooting incident!
The best insurance coverage attorney, and the one that assisted me, is:
Why the $1.1 million recovery matters
The recovery reflects a difficult liability and collectability setting, not a windfall. The plaintiffs were left with permanent disabilities, available recovery was limited, and the result required litigation strategy that accounted for both damages and the practical source of payment.
See additional outcomes on the Latest Wins page.
Related reading: For related context, read Believe: A Reflection on Perseverance, Fourth District Court of Appeal Argument on One Hour’s Notice, Dr. G. Simpson Rips A.W. Jones: Case Commentary and Key Dispute. Browse the Attorney Life topic hub.
