Notable Case Result

$3,800,000

settlement for wrongful death when decedent fell from the roof of a building under construction.

$1,200,000

settlement for wrongful death and premises liability arising out of shooting at an apartment complex.

$2,150,000

settlement for wrongful death and premises liability arising out of shooting at an apartment complex.

$15,000,000

against Bank of America for misclassified loan officers for wage and hour violations.

Appellate Success

Success Stories

Latest Blog

Wrongful Death Statute of Limitations in California
California Law: Limits on Wrongful Death Claims The complexities of wrongful death ... Read More
Will Uber Insurance Pay for My Accident
Unveil the Truth: Uber Insurance Coverage Have you ever wondered what happens... Read More

Driving Directions

Haffner Law helps the victims of accidents and bad faith insurance obtain the compensation and justice they deserve.

Track Record of Appellate Success

Rogers v. Justmugshots.com, Corp.

October 2015 by

Rogers v. Justmugshots.com, Corp. (2015) 2015 WL 5838403 – An October 7, 2015, decision by the California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, affirming the trial court’s denial of a motion to dismiss an action for misappropriation of likeness and unfair business practices related to a website’s practice of posting persons’ arrest mugshots, and charging a fee for their removal from the website.

Rogers v. Justmugshots.com, Corp.

August 2015 by

Brasch v. K. Hovnanian Enterprises, Inc. (2015) 2015 WL 4940632 – A case related to the Chiang v. D.R. Horton case for defective pipes in newly constructed homes in the Ladero Ranch area of Orange County. On August 19, 2015, the California Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District, reversed the trial court’s decision dismissing the class action claims.

Chiang v. D.R. Horton Los Angeles Holding Co., Inc.

August 2015 by

Chiang v. D.R. Horton Los Angeles Holding Co., Inc. (2015) 2015 WL 4940630 – An August 19, 2015 decision by the California Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District, reversing the dismissal of class claims for defective pipes in newly constructed homes in the Ladero Ranch area of Orange County.

R.S. v. PacifiCare Life and Health Insurance Company

April 2015 by

R.S. v. PacifiCare Life and Health Insurance Company (2015) 2015 WL 1887184 – An April 27, 2015, decision by the California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, reversing the dismissal of a wrongful death case brought by the spouse of an insured claiming the insured died after he was denied life-saving medical treatment by his insurer.

Henderson v. Farmers Group, Inc

October 2012 by

Henderson v. Farmers Group, Inc. (2012) 148 Cal.Rptr.3d 385 – A decision reversing the granting of an insurance company’s motion for summary judgment, and holding that insurers must show substantial prejudice to deny a claim for failure to submit a proof of loss.

Christopher v. Residence Mutual Ins. Co.

April 2011 by

Christopher v. Residence Mutual Ins. Co. (2011) 2011 WL 1367419 – A decision affirming the denial of an insurance company’s anti-SLAPP motion in a case alleging bad faith litigation conduct by an insurance company in relation to a subrogation claim.

21st Century v. Superior Court

March 2005 by

21st Century v. Superior Court (2005) 127 Cal.App.4th 1351 – A decision affirming the denial of the insurance company’s request to strike claims for punitive damages in insurance bad faith cases arising out of the Northridge earthquake under Code of Civil Procedure section 340.9, as violating the United States’ constitution’s ex post fact rule.

 
The cases referred to on this website were handled by Joshua Haffner at Haffner Law or his prior law firm.
 

RESULTS

$15,000,000
PROPERTY DAMAGE / BAD FAITH
$97,284,817
Class Action / Rest Break
$10,000,000
Bad Faith
$8,820,000
Brain Injury
$7,500,000
Medical Malpractice
$8,250,000
Wrongful Death / Accident
$1,000,000
Construction Defect

INJURED ? CALL (213) 212-6946

or

FILL OUT THE FORM BELOW FOR A

FREE CASE REVIEW

THE USE OF THE INTERNET OR THIS FORM FOR COMMUNICATION WITH THE FIRM OR ANY INDIVIDUAL MEMBER OF THE FIRM DOES NOT ESTABLISH AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT RELATIONSHIP. SENDING TIME SENSITIVE MATERIAL TO THE FIRM VIA THIS MESSAGE, WILL NOT BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE FIRM. PROCEED IF YOU’VE READ THIS DISCLAIMER.
Footer Form
\