Around The Firm

August G. Cifelli successfully defended an appeal of his earlier defense verdict in favor of the General Motors Corp. in Free v. General Motors Corp. In Free, plaintiff’s wife, an asthmatic, died after an auto accident caused an airbag to deploy. As the airbag deployed, airborne particulates triggered the asthmatic reaction that caused the death. However, the airbag worked as designed, so plaintiff’s counsel argued that GM failed to warn of the hazard after the vehicle had been sold. The jury disagreed. Plaintiff appealed, arguing errors in the jury instructions. The Court of Appeals held that the trial court instructed the jury correctly and that plaintiff’s proposed instructions misstated Washington’s law of product liability. Plaintiff sought review before the Washington Supreme Court, which declined to hear the case. … Gus Cifelli also won dismissal for his client in Glubrecht v. Pape Lift Group, which involved a serious injury during the operation of a forklift. Unlike Gus’s client, co-defendants settled for a seven-figure sum. … In [name withheld] v. Seattle Archdiocese, an action alleging priest sex abuse, Michael A. Patterson and Patricia K. Buchanan obtained a voluntary dismissal with prejudice after discovery of evidence casting serious doubt on plaintiff’s credibility and mental stability. The priest denied the 40-year-old allegations and indeed, in his 74 years, never had such a complaint or allegation raised against him. After his videotaped deposition, plaintiff conceded the credibility of the priest and abandoned the claim.

David L. Martin and Alan M. Singer won a defense arbitration award in Williams v. Seattle Iron & Metals Corp. Before the hearing, Dave extracted a litany of damaging admissions from the plaintiff at deposition. The plaintiff then was so committed to this account of events that at the hearing, Dave and Alan persuaded the arbitrator to enter an award for the defense based solely on the parties’ written submissions, without taking any testimony. Plaintiff sought a trial de novo. But because plaintiff’s request for trial de novo was procedurally defective, the court dismissed the entire action with prejudice.

Kenneth E. Hepworth won summary judgment of dismissal in Massey v. Gregerson’s Homes, Inc. In that case, plaintiffs bought a manufactured home in 1994. Plaintiffs contracted with Gregerson’s to prepare the home site, including clearing trees, installing utilities, and earthwork. Gregerson’s finished the work in February 1995. In August 2002, more than seven years after the completion of that work, the Masseys sued Gregerson’s for supposedly poor work, alleging negligence, breach of contract, breach of warranty, and timber trespass. Ken moved for summary judgment because the six-year statute of repose had run. Plaintiffs argued that the parties had a continuing relationship after February 1995 that tolled the statute of limitations, and that they did not discover their claims immediately. The court agreed with Ken that neither argument was correct and dismissed the action.