It is a well-known fact that most cases settle, but, settle for what? Is the settlement the actual value your case is worth because you have hired the right personal injury lawyer in Arizona and who has put in the hours needed to prove your case and get you the personal injury settlement you deserve? Or, is it a “take the best you can get” because you hired an attorney who talked a good game, but then did nothing, and as such, has to settle for the insurance company’s number?
Please understand this: Insurance companies know which Plaintiff’s lawyers are willing to fight and litigate cases, and they know which attorneys will settle cheap and simply move onto the next one.
To get the best result for your case, you need an attorney with a reputable Phoenix personal injury lawyer who is willing to work and fight for you—with a proven record of trying cases – with excellent case results.
My name is Chris Zachar. In my 29 year career, I’ve been to trial in approximately 70 jury cases in both federal and state court. I have filed more than a thousand lawsuits and litigated those cases. I have also settled many thousands of cases, some requiring a lawsuit, and some getting done before a lawsuit is needed.
Is your attorney willing to fight for you? Is he/she will to file a lawsuit to prove you are right, and take the case all the way to trial is necessary?
If not, then perhaps you need to talk to us.
We are personal injury and wrongful death lawyers who fight for our clients. Personal injury and wrongful death is what we do—in fact, it is all we do.
In August 2017, “John” was at a bar in Old Town Scottsdale with friends, celebrating a special occasion. Their group was at a reserved booth in the VIP section. During the course of the evening, one of the group members discovered that someone from another table was stealing beers off of their table. A non-confrontational discussion ensued, but the bar’s jumpy and overly aggressive bouncers inserted themselves forcibly into the discussion almost immediately.
Even though John was only a bystander, and not involved in the discussion that was taking place on the other side of VIP booth, one of the bar’s bouncers grabbed him and physically hauled him from their booth, through the bar and outside. Once there, without reason, the bouncer slammed John to the ground, resulting in an injury to his shoulder that later required surgery. The bar refused to accept responsibility, so John retained Zachar Law Firm and a lawsuit was filed.
Fortunately for John, the entire incident was caught on the video cameras of a nearby establishment. Once revealed, the defenses of the at-fault bouncers and bar collapsed. The case was then settled favorably for John by Zachar Law Firm.
In August 2016, “Danielle” was staying at a nice resort in Tucson. While there, guests were encouraged to experience a “nature hike” from the hotel down to an area with a waterfall. The hotel recommended guests do the hike at nighttime when it was cooler.
Danielle and her husband decided to do the hike together. While walking down the trail, as they neared the bottom (which was very dark), Danielle mis-stepped and fell, severely fracturing her ankle, requiring surgery. Her communications with the resort afterwards went unanswered, and Danielle eventually found Zachar Law Firm.
Zachar Law Firm filed suit, and hired an architectural expert to visit and inspect the trail. The expert found numerous violations with Uniform Building Code requirements, as well as substandard lighting for a commercial premises. Shortly after the lawsuit was filed and the expert’s opinions were disclosed to the resort’s attorneys, they proposed an early mediation. The case settled favorably for Danielle at mediation.
“Todd” and some friends decided to go out for some drinks one night. Through the course of the evening, they had a few adult beverages at a bar.
Later in the evening, they decided to go to a different bar. (They were not driving.) When they arrived, Todd was denied admission because the doormen felt he had already had too much to drink.
As Todd started to leave, the doormen decided to taunt him (for unknown reasons). The taunting resulted in a confrontation, wherein the doormen (much younger and much bigger than Todd) slammed him to the asphalt parking lot, caused severe injuries and resulting in hundreds of thousands in medical bills.
Todd hired an attorney, who after a while withdrew and refused to do any further work on the case. Then, Todd found Zachar Law Firm.
The insurance company for the bar refused to make a fair offer for Todd’s injuries and damages, and the case went to trial.
Result: $700,000 verdict in favor of Todd with an 80% liability finding of fault against the bar for the actions of their doormen.
The moral of the story: If your attorney is not willing to fight for you – all the way to trial if needed – you need to find a new attorney.
“Jeannie”, a 4-year-old girl, was invited to a friend’s birthday party. The friend’s parents rented one of the “bouncy-house” things that kids love so much.
Jeannie’s mom dropped her off at the party, after she was assured that all of the children were being supervised and that Jeannie was safe.
Thereafter, the kids at the party were playing in and on the bouncy house, with no adult supervision at all. Things got out of control and Jeannie ended up with a serious injury.
Jeannie’s parents consulted with Zachar Law Firm, which began investigating. The facts revealed that there had been zero supervision at the party and that this incident should never have been allowed to occur.
A claim was made to the homeowners insurance of the friend’s parents. After all information was presented, the case settled favorably for Jeannie and her parents.
“Joe” was driving to work, when rear-ended by another vehicle. At the time, Joe was recovering from a prior ankle surgery, but after the crash, he started having a great deal of more pain. Joe returned to his surgeon, who, after an MRI confirmed that Joe sustained a completely new injury. Another surgery had to be performed.
Anticipating that the insurance companies would blame the pre-existing medical condition, ZLF communicated with Joe’s surgeon and obtained a report to prove that the new injury had occurred. The claim was then presented to the insurer for the at-fault driver, who promptly paid its limits and settled. Joe then submitted the claim to his Underinsured (UIM) carrier. Can you guess? Yep. Denied as a pre-existing injury.
So, ZLF filed a lawsuit. The case proceeded to discovery and Joe was deposed. He did very well.
The defense then scheduled a medical appointment with its own doctor, who saw and examined Joe. In this case, the defense doctor could not argue with the conclusions of the Plaintiff’s surgeon.
Shortly after, the case settled for the UIM policy limits.
“Marcia” was invited to a wedding with some friends. Online, a friend of Marcia’s booked a 2 bedroom cottage in the area. When the group arrived and entered the cottage, they discovered that Bedroom #2 was a loft, accessible only by a ladder. There was nothing in the online description that mentioned this. As Marcia’s friend was pregnant, Marcia was not going to make her friend climb the ladder to get to the loft, so Marcia agreed to take Bedroom #2.
Marcia climbed the ladder to view Bedroom #2, and on her first descent, Marcia lost her balance and fell, injuring her foot badly. After surgery and many months of healing, Marcia decided to consult with Zachar Law Firm. ZLF undertook the investigation and consulted with an expert in these matters, learning that “ladders” are not an acceptable means of providing access to a different level of a rented home. Stairs and ramps yes, ladders no.
A lawsuit was filed. During the case, the deposition of the property owner took place and he admitted under oath that the condition was not safe. He also admitted that he had done nothing to warn potential renters of the condition. He had thought about some remedies to the ladder but admitted that he had not even considered simple, reasonable remedies suggested by ZLF’s attorney in the deposition. He admitted that the ladder violated building codes.
Shortly after, in a mediation, Marcia’s case settled.
“Simone” was riding her bike to work one morning. As she came to an intersection, she stopped for a red light. When the light turned green, she began to cross in the crosswalk. She saw a vehicle coming up from her left, but it was going slow and had the red light, so she assumed it would stop. It did not, hitting her not once but twice and with enough force to knock her forward and out of the crosswalk. There were no witnesses, and the driver denied fault, claiming that she was not in the crosswalk. Simone suffered some serious injuries and had a lot of medical bills. A lawsuit was filed, and the driver was deposed. He admitted that he never saw Simone, and actually hit her a second time because he thought he had hit the curb and just needed to get past it. (Obviously, as he admitted he never saw Simone, he could not maintain his lie that she was not in the crosswalk). A short time after his deposition concluded, the insurance carrier asked to resume settlement negotiations, and the case settled.
“Mary” was walking late one night from her church to her home, which was in the same neighborhood. Mary was crossing the street in an unmarked crosswalk, carrying a flashlight and saw a car coming, but assumed the car would stop for her. It did not and a collision occurred. The driver claimed that Mary had “walked into the side of her car” and the police officer concluded in his report that Mary was at fault. ZLF was retained and obtained the police report and photos; with the aid of an accident reconstruction expert, ZLF determined that Mary had not walked into the side of the car—the damage was at all not consistent with such. A lawsuit was filed for Mary and after only a short while in litigation, the case settled for the driver’s policy limits.
“Angela” was shopping at a local supermarket when she slipped and fell on a spill on the floor. She injured her knee and required medical care, but the supermarket refused to cooperate with the claim. We filed a lawsuit and obtained video that showed a customer spilling a drink, a store employee simply placing a cone nearby (which was obscured by a display) and then doing nothing more. About 15 minutes passed, and here comes Angela, never sees the spill and falls. After depositions of Angela and the store employee were taken, which proved that the store’s efforts to clean or protect the spill were substandard, the case settled very favorably for Angela.
In July 2017, “Gianna” was involved in a motor vehicle accident. In follow-up, Gianna received hospital and chiropractic therapy for her injuries. Her bills were about $9,000, and she had damage
to her car as well. The insurance company for the at-fault driver offered her an amount that did not even pay her bills. Trying to handle her own case, she filed a lawsuit in Justice Court, not realizing that Justice Court jurisdiction is limited to $10,000 in Arizona. Unsure what to do, she contacted Zachar Law Firm; we immediately filed papers to transfer her case to Superior Court jurisdiction. Thereafter, the case proceeded through discovery, and ultimately settled for almost five times the amount offered her before ZLF became involved.
In August 2017, “Dani” arrived at a retreat property in Sedona
with her family for a church retreat. The time was 1 a.m., and the family walked through the large property to check it out. As Dani walked down a hall, she was unaware that a sunken room was in front of her because the tile and pattern looked the same.
Dani stepped off the step and lost her balance, severely injuring her knee. She sought medical assistance, then legal aid. Two law firms told her that they could not help. Zachar Law Firm
told her we could. A lawsuit was filed, and the formal investigation ensued. In deposing a representative of the retreat property, it was admitted that the condition was a hazard and that they had done
nothing to warn anyone. The case was scheduled for mediation, where an excellent settlement was reached for ZLF client Dani.
In May 2016, “Danielle” was attending her grandson’s college graduation in Phoenix. The college was small and rented out a local reception hall for the ceremony. After it was over, around 10 p.m., Danielle was walking in a crowd towards the parking lot. It was dark, and unbeknownst to her, there were steps. She did not know the steps were there and never saw them, which resulted in a serious fall and a hip fracture, which required surgery. The facility refused to admit responsibility, despite receipt of a report from an expert retained by Zachar Law Firm that the area was dark, unsafe and in violation of the building codes. After filing a lawsuit and proving the dangers, the case settled favorably for Danielle.
In January 2016, “Tommy” sustained a serious injury in a motor vehicle accident. Tommy first contacted a TV-advertising law firm, who took some information but then declined Tommy’s case because they did not think there would be enough insurance coverage for it. Tommy then found Zachar Law Firm. We accepted the case and began a thorough investigation. Ultimately, ZLF was able to locate a second and much larger insurance policy that applied to the case. The case eventually settled for the maximum available under both insurance policies.
In March 2014, “Michelle” was eating with a friend at a local restaurant. As they finished and got up to leave, Michelle slipped and fell on water that was on the floor near an exit door.
Even before she could get up, a manager was present with a “Wet Floor” sign, apologizing for the incident. (The quick appearance by the manager meant that he knew of the spill before Michelle fell but failed to guard it to prevent something like this.)
After Michelle concluded her medical care, her claim was submitted to the insurance company, which denied the claim. ZLF filed a lawsuit and thereafter, knowing that ZLF was serious about litigating the case, Michelle’s claim settled.
Zachar Law Firm recently settled a case wherein the client came to us after being represented by another law firm.
The prior firm had done little to move the case along, and the client was becoming quite dissatisfied.
The reason for this made no sense to us. It was a good case. It needed attention (and so did our nice young client)
We see this all too often. Many law firms advertise for ‘personal injury’ cases, even though honestly, they have no idea how to handle a personal injury case.
They think, well, a rear end accident? Easy! Once they get involved and realize the amount of knowledge and work that is truly necessary, the case stalls, little gets done and the client gets dissatisfied.
Often these firms string the client along, telling that these things ‘take time’. While that is sometimes true, they generally don’t take anywhere near as much time as the law firm represents to them.
Upon receipt of the file in this case mentioned earlier, we recognized a few things that could have been done right away to get the case into a settlement posture. ZLF took immediate steps to do just that.
After only a few short months, the case settled for the adverse driverís policy limits.
In May 2008, a boy was attacked by a neighbor’s dog. The boy suffered a very serious injury to his nose and face, to the extent that plastic surgery was necessary to repair it.
This client came to Zachar Law Firm more than a year after the incident occurred. This created potential legal hurdles in making claims for the boy’s injuries and for the medical expenses incurred by the family. The ‘strict liability’ laws in Arizona require that a lawsuit be filed within one year of the date of the injury, and the one year deadline had already passed.
Zachar Law Firm accepted the case. Through it investigation and strong efforts in presenting the case, was able to convince the insurance company for the dog’s owner that it was in its best interest to settle the case. Ultimately, ZLF was able to resolve it with a very good outcome for the client. Indeed, at this time of this writing, the boy has had the additional surgery that has nearly resolved the physical damage caused by the attack.
Zachar Law Firm is very proud to have made a difference in this young man’s life.
In May 2009, a man was at a restaurant, intending to get some breakfast with his girlfriend following an early morning horseback ride in Cave Creek. They decided to eat on the outdoor patio. It was a bright, sunny Sunday morning.
As the man opened the door to go outside, he fell, suffering a serious injury to his leg. He did not know exactly how it occurred, as he generally was not an accident-prone person. He asked Zachar Law Firm was to investigate, to determine whether there were any problems at the property that might explain the incident.
In the investigation, ZLF determined that the outside access was in gross violation of the Uniform Building Code. Further, a review of court records showed that the same restaurant had previously been sued by another patron who had fallen and injured herself AT THE SAME SPOT only one (1). The previous patron likewise argued that the premises failed to confirm to the Uniform Building Code. The ZLF investigation further showed that in that one (1) year time period, the restaurant had taken no steps to remedy the problem or make the area safe as required by the Uniform Building Code.
Following completion of the client’s medical care, Zachar Law Firm was able to resolve the case for fair compensation for the client.
Zachar Law Firm continues to assist a very nice lady who was injured during a bar fight in Scottsdale Arizona. She was at a club when a brawl broke out between the club entertainer and one of the patrons. Our client simply got caught up in the melee and was injured.
The investigation showed that the club entertainer was the instigator, and a lawsuit was filed against both the entertainer and the club. While in litigation, the insurance company for the club went bankrupt.
Zachar Law Firm was able to reach a settlement with the insurance company, and Zachar Law Firm continues to monitor the bankruptcy proceedings for payment to our client. Unfortunately, these insurance company bankruptcies (called “receiverships”) can take forever.
We anticipate a payout for our client soon. For our client, we hope this to be true.
In late 2010, a young man visiting Phoenix was attacked by a dog and severely injured. Zachar Law Firm was retained to investigate and bring a claim against the owner of the dog for the young man’s injuries. The case was complicated due to the fact that the dog had bitten at least one other at the time of the attack.
Zachar Law Firm was able to determine all limits of insurance that applied, and after extended negotiations, was able to settle the claims for the limits of the policies.
A conservatorship and an annuity were established for this remarkable young man, assuring that his future medical needs will be covered and his settlement will be available for him for many years to come.
In September 2011, a young man was injured while riding his motorcycle, when a vehicle turned left in front of him… The at-fault driver left the scene and could not be located.
The client came to Zachar Law Firm after meeting with one of the big advertising firms in Phoenix, who promised him a ‘reduced fee’ but gave him little hope for finding the at-fault driver or obtaining a recovery.
In our investigation, Zachar Law Firm was able to determine that the client was entitled to make claims to multiple policies of UNINSURED MOTORIST insurance. With an aggressive and professional plan, Zachar law firm was able to settle for the policy limits of all the applicable policies, and obtain a very good result for the client.
In November 2007, an elderly man was riding his bike near downtown Phoenix when he was struck by a transport bus. The transport bus driver did not stop.
The man on the bike died at the scene.
Through investigation, with police reports, Zachar Law Firm was able to determine the name of the bus company and driver, and was retained to bring a claim and lawsuit for wrongful death for the surviving children of the deceased man.
The children were all over the United States, and contact was difficult. Through diligence, communication was eventually established. The claims then proceeded, and ultimately concluded with a size-able and fair settlement for the clients.
A man was riding his motorcycle through a parking lot and was hit by a car traveling too fast. He suffered some serious injuries and required a substantial amount of medical care. As the collision occurred on private property, there was no police report, and there was a dispute as to who was at fault. Of course, the other drivers insurance company denied the claim.
Zachar Law Firm was hired to investigate. The investigation showed fairly clearly that our client was a victim. Ultimately, Zachar Law Firm was able to prove the fault of the other driver, and her insurance company paid its policy limits. Thereafter an under-insured claim was presented for the client and policy limits received there as well.
Zachar Law Firm represented a young woman who was rear-ended by another motorist. The adverse driver denied liability and refused to make any offers. Even though there appeared to be no valid defense to the facts of the accident, the insurance company refused to offer the injured victim anything.
As a result, she decided to seek legal assistance. She found us in an online search.
After review, and seeing no tenable defense, Zachar Law Firm filed a lawsuit. The case proceeded to litigation. In the lawsuit, the investigation and facts clearly demonstrated that the defense was unsupportable.
Prior to any hearings, after the client’s deposition, the case settled for policy limits.
Zachar Law Firm recently represented a client who was involved in a very serious rear-end collision on a valley freeway. The medical bills were extensive, and there was not enough insurance coverage to provide payment to all of his medical providers.
Had the client not retained us, his entire settlement would likely have been used to pay for medical expenses. Obviously, this would have meant little to this client.
After becoming involved, ZLF was able to settle for the limits of the adverse policy as well as the limits of our clients’ underinsured motorist coverage. WE then set out to do what we could to assure that our client was compensated for his injuries. ZLF was able to negotiate significant reductions or complete waivers of the medical bills, as a result of the severe injuries our client sustained, and as a result of the limitations in insurance monies available for the loss. At the conclusion, not only did the amount of the settlements pay for all medical expenses, but Zachar Law Firm was able to put a sizable sum in our client’s pocket for his injuries and damages.
We are very proud to have helped this gentleman through this complicated matter.