Cases
The lawyers of Barr Sternberg Moss & Partners have a long track-record of establishing important legal precedent in many areas of the law. Here are some examples:
Mother of crash victim wins $1.8M from methadone clinic
(Published 4/10/10, Rutland Herald/Times Argus)
Car Dealers and Relatives of Bad Drivers Found Liable for Negligent Entrustment: In the case of Vince v. Wilson, 151 Vt. 425 (1989), our firm's client was rendered a paraplegic when the teenage driver of a car in which he was a passenger was involved in a crash. The firm sued the teenager driver's grand-aunt, who had given him the car as a gift, and the car dealer who sold the vehicle, because both were well aware that the teen had no license and had failed the driver's test several times. In a decision that appears in law school textbooks throughout the country, the Vermont Supreme Court with Mr. Lawrence's arguments, and determined that the car dealer and the grand-aunt were liable to our client, who ultimately received a large award.
Injury Victims Allowed to Recover for Each Day of Pain: The firm's client in Debus v. Grand Union Stores of Vermont, 159 Vt. 537 (1993) was severely injured when a pallet of boxes, piled high and imbalanced, fell on her while she was shopping. The firm made new law when Mr. Lawrence persuaded the Vermont Supreme Court to permit lawyers in personal injury cases to ask the jury to award a sum for each day of pain and suffering experienced by the victim. Prior to this case such reasonable arguments had not been allowed in our state's court system.
Firm Gets $1.2 Million for Estate of Elderly Motorist who Collides with Motor Home: Our firm's legal team was able to persuade the U.S. District Court Judge to exclude from the trial defense evidence that Mr. Heekin was legally blind in one eye and was on his way to see his opthamologist when the accident occurred. We successfully argued that since Mr. Heekin's vision met minimum standards for Vermont drivers, and that introduction of the evidence of his eye surgery more prejudicial than probative. Our cross examination of the defendant truck driver and defendant escort vehicle driver left no doubt that the collision was caused by their negligence, including parking the escort car facing the wrong way in Mr. Heekin's lane of traffic with the high beams on.
Corporate Flim-Flam Scheme Foiled: Until recently, some business flim-flammers in Vermont could avoid the legitimate demands of creditors by simply abandoning their indebted corporations and continuing their existing businesses under the flag of a new entity. In Gladstone v. Stuart Cinemas, Inc., 178 Vt. 104 (2005) the Vermont Supreme Court condemned such reprehensible schemes, and made new law on the important legal doctrine of successor corporate liability.