Episodes

  • Chance of Life Lost; Justice Found, with Rudy Massa and Devyn Lisi

    Chance of Life Lost; Justice Found, with Rudy Massa and Devyn Lisi
    Nov 23 2024
    Cheryl Pschirer was a lifetime smoker, at the end of her working life, adult children, no surviving spouse. “So some of the facts were stacked against us,” recalls Rudy Massa. “We had to, in essence, try to make this case about something more than that, and that’s where the early detection and the lost chance of life comes in.” Rudy and Devyn Lisi took St. Clair Hospital providers to trial for their failure to inform Cheryl that an x-ray had detected a mass on her lung. She wouldn’t learn of the radiology report for seven months. Eight months later, she died of lung cancer at age 66.With host Brendan Lupetin, Rudy and Devyn discuss how they overcame defense attempts to blame Cheryl for her smoking history and arguments that, regardless of the delay, nothing would have changed the outcome for her. They read from their powerful pre-trial statement and closing. The jury responded by awarding a $750,000 verdict.Learn More and Connect☑️ Rudy Massa | LinkedIn☑️ Devyn Lisi | LinkedIn☑️ Massa Butler Giglione & Dirlam | LinkedIn | Facebook ☑️ Brendan Lupetin | LinkedIn☑️ Lupetin & Unatin, LLC☑️ Connect: Facebook | LinkedIn | YouTube☑️ Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | YouTubeEpisode PreviewRudy believes the pre-trial statement should provide the judge with the essence of the story in the most economical language possible.Background of Pschirer v. St. Clair Hospital, in which 66-year-old Cheryl Pschirer died after a delayed lung cancer detection.How the “battle of the experts” turned into victim blaming because Cheryl had smoked for years.Rudy and Devyn argued that the emergency doctor and the hospital had a duty to inform Cheryl directly of the x-ray showing a mass in her lung. While the results were faxed to her primary doctor, “that duty doesn’t just go...
    Show more Show less
    1 hr and 4 mins
  • Radiologist Misread Image; Patient Blinded; Jury Awards $7.1 Million, with Dominic Guerrini

    Radiologist Misread Image; Patient Blinded; Jury Awards $7.1 Million, with Dominic Guerrini
    Nov 9 2024
    Dominic Guerrini of Kline & Specter discusses the $7.1 million verdict he recently secured for a young woman rendered legally blind after a radiologist misread a CT scan image. With host Brendan Lupetin, Dominic breaks down how he managed the case with multiple defendants, why he decided not call the defendant radiologist to testify, and how consultants prepped his client for testifying. Among other strategies, they had the 23-year-old woman write a letter to younger self to prepare herself for what eventually unfolded. Dominic read the letter at trial. “It was one of the most moving pieces of evidence that I have ever had,” he says.Learn More and Connect☑️ Dominic Guerrini | LinkedIn☑️ Kline & Specter | LinkedIn | Instagram | Facebook ☑️ Brendan Lupetin | LinkedIn☑️ Lupetin & Unatin, LLC☑️ Connect: Facebook | LinkedIn | YouTube☑️ Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | YouTubeEpisode PreviewDominic’s journey started at Kline & Specter three months into his legal career. “It’s been a wonderful ride.”The firm’s founders, Tom Kline and Shanin Specter, influenced Dominic with their own styles: Shanin taught the value of preparation; Tom taught the art of presentation.Great advice: A paralegal once suggested that Dominick smile more in the courtroom to show jurors his true self. “Years later, that has stuck with me.”Background of Mitchell v. AHN Saint Vincent Hospital, in which Dominic won a jury verdict of $7.1 million for his client who was rendered legally blind after a radiologist misread a CT scan image.How Dominic used sound bites of themes and theories for the jury to repeat so they stuck.When it came to trial, the radiologist and hospitalists threw off the gloves and the finger-pointing started. “And, obviously, when you have defendants who are pointing the finger at one another, it’s our best day.”How Dominic countered the defense “comparative fault” argument that his client...
    Show more Show less
    1 hr and 6 mins
  • $9.1 Million Verdict for Estate of Golf Pro Killed During Storm, with David Kwass

    $9.1 Million Verdict for Estate of Golf Pro Killed During Storm, with David Kwass
    Oct 23 2024

    When David Kwass represented the estate of a golf pro who was killed during a fierce storm that swept through the Philmont Country Club, he faced at least three significant hurdles. Was Justin Riegel’s infant, born out of wedlock to Justin’s girlfriend, really his heir? Who was Justin’s employer? And was an “act of God” responsible for the storm?

    But the biggest question David faced was how could an 83-foot-tall, 36,000-pound tree – the tree that killed Justin when it toppled onto a cart storage building where he was sheltering during the storm – be both healthy and hazardous?

    Tune in as David joins host Brendan Lupetin for a behind-the-scenes look at how he navigated all these challenges to secure a $9.1 million verdict.

    Learn More and Connect

    ☑️ David Kwass | LinkedIn

    ☑️ Saltz Mongeluzzi Bendesky

    ☑️ Brendan Lupetin | LinkedIn

    ☑️ Lupetin & Unatin, LLC

    ☑️ Connect: Facebook | LinkedIn | YouTube

    ☑️ Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | YouTube

    Episode Preview
    • David’s focus on catastrophic injury, wrongful death, and construction accidents, especially those involving a crane or large equipment tipping over.
    • When he worked on the defense side, David was a “square peg in a round hole.”
    • Background of Hannon v. Concert Golf Management, in which David represented the estate of golf pro Justin Riegel, who was killed when a tree fell at the club where he worked.
    • David’s legal theory in the case: The tree that fell during the storm should have been removed before the storm hit and the club’s weather preparedness program should have been more robust.
    • The issue that a focus group outlined and that David hadn’t expected: Was Justin Riegel the father of his girlfriend’s infant, born just weeks after the accident?
    • The other complicating issue: Who actually controlled the club where the accident occurred?
    • How David’s team prevailed on the issue of who employed Justin Riegel.
    • Was the storm that felled the tree an “act of God”? David’s team prevailed in getting “act of God” off the verdict form.
    • The biggest problem: The tree was healthy. How to convey that a tree can be both healthy and a hazard?

    Ready to refer or collaborate on med mal, medical negligence, and catastrophic injury cases? Visit our attorney referral page at PAMedMal.com/Refer. We handle cases in Pennsylvania and across the United States.
    Show more Show less
    1 hr and 6 mins
  • $1.5M Verdict in Challenging Nursing Home Death Case with Reza Davani

    $1.5M Verdict in Challenging Nursing Home Death Case with Reza Davani
    Oct 9 2024
    Despite challenges including an absent plaintiff, an expert witness’ last-minute withdrawal, and a death certificate identifying Covid as the cause of death, Reza Davani secured a $1.5 million verdict for pain and suffering. In this conversation with host Brendan Lupetin, Reza shares how he exposed the nursing home’s negligence that led to the death of a patient – not from Covid, but rather from staff’s failure to properly turn the patient in his bed, which caused pressure wounds. Reza discusses how he centered his strategic opening and closing on principles of right and wrong and how he trusted the jury to use their common sense when presented with the facts. Learn More and Connect☑️ Reza Davani | LinkedIn | Phone☑️ KBA Attorneys | LinkedIn | Instagram | X☑️ Brendan Lupetin | LinkedIn☑️ Lupetin & Unatin, LLC☑️ Connect: Facebook | LinkedIn | YouTube☑️ Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | YouTubeEpisode PreviewReza’s path from mass torts to lead exposure to his current focus: nursing home cases.Why Reza enjoys mining documents to secure victory in nursing home cases How documents often reveal the true story that Reza wants to tellHow Reza ensures that the defense steps on its own landminesBackground of Nelson Anderson v. Alice Manor, in which a jury awarded Reza’s client $1.5 million for pain and suffering based on the death of a patientReza’s litany of woes: the death certificate that identified Covid as the cause, the out-of-state plaintiff who couldn’t attend trial, the lack of pictures of the injury, the wound expert who failed to showHow Reza leveraged staff’s assessments that proved the patient was in painReza’s strategy of giving the jury the facts, and letting them use their common senseThe question Reza asks himself when crafting his opening: DoI have an explanation for what happened and why? If he doesn’t, “the story sucks.”Why Reza focuses his closing on what is right and wrong rather than evidenceReady to refer...
    Show more Show less
    53 mins
  • “Invisible injuries” lead to $15 million verdict, with Dan Purtell

    “Invisible injuries” lead to $15 million verdict, with Dan Purtell
    Sep 23 2024
    Almost 6,000 pounds of copper wire falls on a railroad electrician, causing debilitating personal injuries. Defendant Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority admits liability. The catch? The injuries aren’t clearly visible, and the defense leans into this. How does the plaintiff’s lawyer convey the catastrophic extent of the injuries to the jury and go on to win a $15 million verdict?In this episode of Just Verdicts, Daniel Purtell, founding partner of McEldrew Purtell, tells host Brendan Lupetin how he did just that, using the defense’s strategy against it to prevail.Tune in as Brendan and Daniel discuss how to frame the jury’s damages paradigm and reframe the defense’s surveillance video theory. They also share strategies for harnessing the power of focus groups and offer a bonus mini masterclass on building a firm business for maximum growth.Learn More and Connect☑️ Daniel Purtell | LinkedIn☑️ McEldrew Purtell | LinkedIn | Facebook |X| Instagram☑️ Brendan Lupetin | LinkedIn☑️ Lupetin & Unatin, LLC☑️ Connect: Facebook | LinkedIn | YouTube☑️ Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | YouTubeEpisode PreviewDaniel’s mini masterclass on turbocharging a personal injury firm’s growthHow Daniel uses referrals, and just referrals, to grow his firmThe power of delegating to add value to the practiceBreaking down the firm’s $15 million win for William Meszaros against the Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (SEPTA) How Daniel conveyed the severity of a non-diagnostic injury to carry the dayTurning around the defense’s attempt to use surveillance videos to show the plaintiff was uninjured by juxtaposing it against all the dead footage conveying that plaintiff was incapacitated Using the “Man in the Black Suit” argument model effectively at...
    Show more Show less
    57 mins
  • Jury Awards $21 Million in Civil Rights Case, with Noah Geary

    Jury Awards $21 Million in Civil Rights Case, with Noah Geary
    Sep 9 2024

    “Come and get me! Come and get me!” That’s what the 34-year-old man suffering from a mental health breakdown told state troopers responding to his family’s call for help.

    At least that’s what one of the troopers testified during cross-examination in federal court. Attorney Noah Geary brought civil rights claims against the trooper, arguing that he used excessive force when he fatally shot Anthony Gallo during that tragic encounter in 2017.

    In this unique episode of Just Verdicts, Noah and host Brendan Lupetin dramatically re-enact the exchange between Noah and the trooper, Chad Weaver.

    “When did you come up for the first time with this new claim that Gallo said, ‘Come get me! Come get me!’” Noah says, reading from the transcript.

    “Uh, just the other day,” says Brendan, reading for Weaver.

    Tune in to hear details of this case, including the roadblocks that Noah overcame to a $21 million verdict.

    Learn More and Connect

    ☑️ Noah Geary | LinkedIn | Email

    ☑️ Brendan Lupetin | LinkedIn

    ☑️ Lupetin & Unatin, LLC

    ☑️ Connect: Facebook | LinkedIn | YouTube

    ☑️ Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | YouTube

    Episode Preview
    • Why Rule 12, qualified immunity, poses a challenge for plaintiffs’ lawyers in civil rights cases
    • Factors motivating the increasing rate of excessive force by police
    • The constitutional basis for civil rights claims
    • Noah’s case against a state trooper who fatally shot Anthony Gallo as he was going through a mental health breakdown
    • The “total sham” of a coroner’s inquest and the “nauseating” state police investigation
    • What the defendant’s state police personnel file revealed about his behavior
    • “This guy's going to kill somebody”: Four women reported their fears about the defendant after a disturbing interaction with him nine days before the Gallo killing.
    • Noah’s opening: “I let it all hang out.”
    • Noah’s message to the jury on punitive damages: “Folks, this is a death case.”

    Ready to refer or collaborate on med mal, medical negligence, and catastrophic injury cases? Visit our attorney referral page at PAMedMal.com/Refer. We handle cases in Pennsylvania and across the United States.
    Show more Show less
    1 hr and 14 mins
  • Exposing ExxonMobil and Winning $725.5 Million, with Andrew DuPont

    Exposing ExxonMobil and Winning $725.5 Million, with Andrew DuPont
    Aug 23 2024
    Gasoline is refined from crude oil that contains benzene, a known carcinogen, but oil companies have long considered removing benzene from the gasoline manufacturing process a “dollars-and-cents” decision. Jurors considering whether ExxonMobil’s gasoline caused a Pennsylvania man’s leukemia made this decision: $725.5 million for the plaintiff.Andrew DuPont, partner at Locks Law Firm, won that verdict by framing his argument as ExxonMobil’s failure to warn consumers about benzene’s health hazards, even though its dangers were known by the time his client was using gasoline as a solvent to clean automotive parts in the 1970s. Breaking down complex scientific evidence in a way that would stick with the jury, Andrew fended off ExxonMobil’s defense that “gasoline’s not benzene, gasoline doesn’t cause cancer.” Tune in to hear Andrew share his successful strategy with host Brendan Lupetin.Learn More and Connect☑️ Andrew J. DuPont | LinkedIn | Email ☑️ Locks Law Firm on Facebook | LinkedIn | X | YouTube ☑️ Brendan Lupetin | LinkedIn☑️ Lupetin & Unatin, LLC☑️ Connect: Facebook | LinkedIn | YouTube☑️ Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | YouTubeEpisode PreviewThe history behind benzene and its link to cancerHow defendants try to distract jurors in cases involving benzene exposureHow the oil and gasoline industry protects profits over peopleThe background of Andrew’s case against ExxonMobil and his $725 million verdictHow Andrew leveraged ExxonMobil’s “significant mistake” in its opening statementReady to refer or collaborate on med mal, medical negligence, and catastrophic injury cases? Visit our attorney referral page at PAMedMal.com/Refer. We handle cases in Pennsylvania and across the United States.
    Show more Show less
    57 mins
  • $7 Million Verdict for Misdiagnosis with Richard Godshall and Christine Clarke

    $7 Million Verdict for Misdiagnosis with Richard Godshall and Christine Clarke
    Aug 9 2024
    An inexperienced physician’s assistant misdiagnosed Richard Godshall and Christine Clarke’s client. But when they tried the case, they took it in an opposite direction than many would expect: not from the incident up, but from the top down.In the end, the Clarion County jury awarded their client $7 million. In this conversation with host Brendan Lupetin, Richard, owner and managing partner of Ostroff Godshall Injury and Accident Lawyers, and Christine, partner and head of the firm’s medical malpractice division, reveal the “secret sauce” to winning that verdict. Tune in to hear how they proved that their client was a victim – not of the PA but of systemic failures at the facility itself.Learn More and Connect☑️ Richard Godshall | LinkedIn☑️ Christine Clarke | LinkedIn☑️ Ostroff Godshall Injury and Accident Lawyers on LinkedIn | X | Facebook | YouTube | Instagram☑️ Brendan Lupetin | LinkedIn☑️ Lupetin & Unatin, LLC☑️ Connect: Facebook | LinkedIn | YouTube☑️ Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | YouTubeEpisode PreviewThe background of Delaverne v. Health Services of ClarionMessage to the jury: Good people make bad mistakesRevealing the failure to communicate between physician’s assistant and physician Why their closing focused on the system, not the client’s sufferingHow the jury broke down responsibility Ready to refer or collaborate on med mal, medical negligence, and catastrophic injury cases? Visit our attorney...
    Show more Show less
    57 mins