Let us review your case.Contact us today to
discuss your situation.Work with a firm who is focused, dynamic and result-oriented.We’re here to help. Learn what you need to know regarding any of your legal issues.

Experience Matters

At RLG, our lawyers have reached favorable settlements and won many verdicts for our clients in a wide variety of legal matters.

For example:

Past Settlements and Verdicts

Jane Doe v. Daly City

We recently successfully represented a Plaintiff in a personal injury case against Daly City after another law firm was no longer interested due to perceived difficulties litigating against a government entiry. The matter arose after her vehicle was struck by an on-duty patrolman who, after aggressive discovery admitted that he was engaged in distracted driving including looking at his onboard computer. Even though, the police report revealed that the officer was negligent the City initially refused to settle the clear liability matter requiring our office to file suit. The case was referred to arbitration, and the City eventually settled just prior to the arbitration date.

The foregoing represents RLG's resolve and determination to protect all of our client's interests and gain rightful compensation notwithstanding another law firm's disinterest due to the difficulty in prosecting a case against a goverment entity.

Defendant Jon Doe

We successfully defended a client with the dismissal of a criminal case, dismissal of a restraining order with the award of attorney's fees exceeding $10,000.00, and gained dismissal of a retaliatory civil case involving flimsy allegations defamation, slander, and intentional interference with business relations. The case involved a contentious relationship between two former business associates, to which our client was associated with one party to the relationship. That individual, through her counsel, were determined to involve our client in the other party's dispute due to our client's financial stability and resources.

RLG attorneys worked tirelessly on behalf of our client, exposing the baseless claims and assertions while undermining the credibility of the claimant, ultimately achieving a resolution and dismissal of all matters. Due to the efforts of RLG, our client can finally put these matters behind him and go back to living his life as existed prior to this litigation.

The foregoing matter represents RLG's resolve and determination to improve our clients position no watter what circumstances he/she face including our ability to expose baseless litigation conducted by misguided litigants and their attorneys.

Defendant Jane Doe v. Insurance Company

We successfully defended our client, a Google employee, against a greedy insurance company that filed an action against her in subrogation arising out of a fire damage claim.

Our client relocated to San Francisco and unwittingly entered into a unilateral lease agreement which required her to be immediately insured without a grace period. While moving in with the help of friends and associates, a personal item was placed near an outdated, dilapidated and unsafe stove top which ultimately caused a small fire within the unit. The owner's of the unit sought excessive compensation for the repair of the small studio, which ultimately caused their insurance to go after our client in subrogation.

After RLG attorneys got involved in the case, we were successful in exposing the comparative fault of the unit owner's and excessive insurance claims. The parties reached a settlement in which our client paid equivalent to the cost of minimal repairs and defense settlement, which was de minimis compared to what the excesss of $200,000.00 sought by the insurance company

Recently Settled Cases

Plaintiff v. Large Medical Treatment Provider

We recently resolved a medical malpractice case against a large medical treatment provider for an elderly woman who was in an anti-coagulated state, a contraindication for a colonoscopy involving a polypectomy, wherein the gastroenterologist perforated her colon. The physician and medical treatment provider denied liability notwithstanding medical literature to the contrary, evidence of lack of informed consent regarding the increased risk of the procedure, and medical expert testimony to the contrary.

Notwithstanding the elderly woman's infirm state, the medical facility pressed towards arbitration until the attorneys at RLG, in consultation with their client determined that the proceedings would put their client at a medical risk and therefore agreed to settled the matter.

This case represents why medical malpractice reform should be promulgated forthwith including do away with mandatory arbitration provisions that most insureds dont know they have agreed. We will continue to fight on behalf of medical malpractice plaintiffs and will not allow this case to affect our resolve for reform and justice for victims of medical malpractice.

This case represents RLG's larger vision which is not just about the bottom line but RLG Client's health and well being as well as our continued and unwaivered involvement in unfair issues that affect all potential litigants in a particular area of law.

Family Doe v. Juvenile Doe Defendants

Represented family of Does v. Juvenile Doe defendants in a case arising out of a group assault and battery of a young man and his sister for the group’s perceived bias against the young man’s sexual orientation in violation of his Constitutional Rights and California Civil Code sections 51.7 & 52.1 that recently promulgated.

The group of five juvenile defendants traveled to the family’s home under the guise of retrieving a videogame and attempted to lure the young man out of the house but when they were unsuccessful, forced the door open and pulled him onto the porch where they assaulted and battered him while they shouted homophobic slurs. The sister alerted to the beating, ran to her brother's aid putting her own safety at risk from these bullies, while members of the group threatened to return that night and break into the family home.

RLG attorneys acted swiftly on behalf of the family, requesting that the defendants’ parents accept liability and defendants’ homeowner’s insurance company provide medical coverage and damages for the young man’s injuries, which included a fractured eye orbit, misaligned jaw, chipped teeth, and injury to his cervical spine.

Over a prolonged and arduous process, the insurance company rejected the claim until our office commenced litigation. After years of costly litigation, four of the defendants settled the case for a six-figure settlement shortly before the original trial date. The one remaining defendant interestingly, the primary defendant, refused to settle the clear liability matter notwithstanding our client’s long-term and devastating injuries including years of psychotherapy, pain management, dental treatment, and long term treatment for his neck including Cervical Facet Radiofrequency Neurotomy.

As a result of the bullying, the family was forced to move, moving out of the state but with our guidence forged ahead to ensure that thier son had a secure future including medical coverage for his life long injuries.

This matter settled in the high six figures with each and every defendant contributing based on their level involvement. Our client has since go on to a straight "A" college student and although he is no longer qualified for a military officer career has now turned his focus to getting an Aerospace Engineeing degree.

This case represents RLG's dedication to protecting individuals and families against the devasting affects of bullying and homophobia have not just on the victim but on his or her family. We stood up to the bully culture and won! RLG is proud to have served a family and the entire community which this horrific incident occured.

Ongoing Litigation

John Doe vs. Well Fargo Bank

Jane Doe vs. City and County of San Francisco

Jane Doe vs. DAS Realty

John Doe vs. RaceTrack

Contact Us

The information on this website is for general information purposes only. Nothing on this site should be taken as legal advice for any individual case or situation. This information, and the submission of any e-mails, do not create an attorney-client relationship.