Significant Recoveries. Proven Trial Experience.
Initials are used to protect client privacy. These are selected results. Every case is different, and past results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Dollar amounts reflect gross verdicts or settlements before attorney fees, costs, and applicable deductions.
Auto Accident – Los Angeles County
$5,000,000.00 settlement recovered in a confidential settlement holding multiple defendants accountable and delivering a substantial recovery for our client.
When the defendant contested liability, Nehme Law Firm took the fight to a jury—and won. The jury found that the defendant’s negligence caused our client’s injuries, securing a $1,000,000 recovery under a pretrial agreement. A powerful result backed by courtroom advocacy and the determination to see the case through trial.
$5,000,000.00 settlement recovered in a confidential settlement holding multiple defendants accountable and delivering a substantial recovery for our client.
Nehme Law Firm secured a confidential settlement for clients in a hard-fought business ownership dispute. Through persistent litigation and focused negotiation, the firm achieved a comprehensive resolution of multiple related proceedings.
$5,000,000.00 settlement recovered in a confidential settlement holding multiple defendants accountable and delivering a substantial recovery for our client.
Auto Accident – Los Angeles County
Nehme Law Firm secured a $1 million settlement on behalf of an injured client. Beyond obtaining a substantial financial recovery, the firm successfully negotiated a significant reduction in the client’s Medi-Cal reimbursement claim, preserving more of the settlement proceeds for the client.
S. v. D. | Automobile Accident | Orange County Superior Court
Jury Awards 6.7 Times Defendant’s Pretrial Settlement Offer
Nehme Law Firm secured a $670,000 jury verdict in a contested automobile accident case after rejecting the defense’s $100,000 statutory settlement offer under California Code of Civil Procedure § 998.
Despite substantial injuries, documented medical evidence, and a scheduled surgical procedure, the defense offered only $100,000 to resolve the case. Nehme Law Firm maintained its $400,000 § 998 settlement demand and refused to undervalue its client’s injuries.
The firm proceeded to trial, presenting medical expert testimony and challenging the defense’s medical evidence. The jury ultimately returned a $670,000 verdict—$570,000 more than the defense’s pretrial offer.
G. v. C. | Civil Litigation Against Los Angeles County
Jury Awards Nearly 8 Times the County’s Final Pretrial Settlement Offer
Nehme Law Firm secured a $235,775.07 judgment following a contested jury trial against the County of Los Angeles in Los Angeles Superior Court.
Prior to trial, the County’s final settlement offer was just $30,000.00.
Rather than accept an inadequate offer, Nehme Law Firm took the case to trial and secured a judgment of $235,775.07—nearly eight times the County’s final pretrial offer and more than $205,000 above what the County had offered to pay.
Auto Accident – Emilia M. – Stanley-Mosk Courthouse
Plaintiff was rear-ended at a speed of 10 miles per hour. Insurance denied liability, and we filed a lawsuit on Plaintiff’s behalf. Three months after the lawsuit was filed, the insurance company tendered the full policy limits.
People v. Fabio T. – Metropolitan Courthouse
In a two week jury trial we were able to show the jury the scientific flaws in the blood test. The jury saw the truth and understood the flaws in the scientific evidence. Client was found not guilty after approximately 35 minutes of deliberation.
United States v. E.M. | Federal Firearms Prosecution | U.S. District Court, Central District of California
Nehme Law Firm secured the dismissal of a federal felony indictment charging its client with unlawful possession of firearms under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). The prosecution involved multiple firearms, including so-called “ghost guns,” and relied in part on disputed forensic DNA evidence.
The defense conducted a critical examination of the government’s evidence, identifying significant weaknesses in its theory of possession.
Rather than accept a plea agreement, the client elected to fight the charges. As the defense prepared for trial and a Daubert challenge to the government’s forensic DNA evidence, federal prosecutors dismissed the indictment.
DUI DMV Hearing – Brenda I.
Client was involved in an accident, and was later arrested for DUI and for hit and run. DMV suspended client’s license for 2 years for refusing to submit to a chemical test after a DUI arrest. The arrest was deemed unlawful and in violation of client’s 4th amendment rights to be free from unreasonable search and seizure. The suspension was set aside, and client’s license was never suspended.
DUI DMV Hearing – Michael N.
DMV suspended client’s license for 2 years for refusing to submit to a chemical test after a DUI arrest. Client had one prior DUI conviction within the last 10 years. We filed a lawsuit against the DMV seeking a writ of mandate, and for a court order to reinstate client’s driver license. The license suspension was set aside, and client’s driver license was reinstated.
People v. Anthony S. – Van Nuys Courthouse
Client arrested for Domestic Violence and Criminal Threats after ex-wife made a false police report of abuse. Case dismissed on motion of the defense.