Milan G. Marinkovich & Associates, PLLC

09/27/2023

03/19/2022

Premises liability defense, Exhibit 1.

11/22/2021

November 19, 2021

Supreme Court of Texas No. 20-0964

Pura-Flo Corporation, Petitioner vs. Donald Clanton, Respondent
On Petition for Review from the Court of Appeals for the Fourteenth District of Texas

$50,000 Future-Damages Award against Our Client, Pura-Flo Corporation, is Reversed by the Texas Supreme Court.

Our firm did not represent Pura-Flo Corporation ("Pura-Flo") at trial and did not participate in the trial proceedings. Our firm was retained after the adverse jury verdict. On March 26, 2019, the trial court signed a judgment for Plaintiff, Donald Clanton, in the amount of $69,500 for past and future damages as well as an award of $21,890 in attorneys fees. The $69,500 award represented $19,500 in past damages and $50,000 in future damages sustained by Clanton.

-On April 9, 2019, Milan was designated as lead counsel for Pura-Flo for post-judgment proceedings and the appeal.

-On April 22, 2019, Milan filed a Motion for Judgment Notwithstanding the Verdict, or, In the Alternative, Motion to Disregard Jury Findings, or, In the Alternative, Motion for New Trial on behalf of Pura-Flo. The pleading argued that the only damages proven at trial, other than a referenced to deprivation of income stream were damages suffered in the past. The pleading also asserted because the contract could be terminated by either party at will, Clanton was not entitled to future damages.

-On June 13, 2019, Milan filed Pura-Flo's Notice of Appeal which was docketed at 14-19-00479-CV.

-On appeal to the 14th Court of Appeals, we challenged the jury's answer to the future damages question, and the award of $50,000.00 to Clanton. Our brief indicates: (1) the record discloses a complete lack of evidence on Clanton's future damages; (2) the court was barred by rules of law and of evidence from giving weight to the only evidence offered to prove future damages; (3) the evidence offered to prove future damages was no more than a mere scintilla; and (4) the evidence established conclusively the absence of future damages,

-On August 27, 2020, in a 2-1 decision, the majority opinion from the 14th Court of Appeals disagreed with our arguments and concluded the evidence was legally sufficient to establish Clanton's future losses awarded by the jury in the amount of $50,000.

-On September 25, 2020, we filed a Motion for En Banc Consideration with the 14th Court of Appeals which was ultimately denied on October 27, 2020.

-On December 9, 2020, we filed a Petition for Review in the Texas Supreme Court on behalf of Pura-Flo.

-On June 18, 2021, the Texas Supreme Court requested briefs on the merits. Pura-Flo's Brief on the Merits was filed on July 14, 2021.

On November 19, 2021, the Texas Supreme Court reversed the 14th Court of Appeals Judgment, writing in their Per Curiam opinion: "...no evidence supports the $50,000 amount awarded by the jury. Because both the fact and amount of future damages lacked reasonable certainty, we reverse the court of appeals' judgment."

06/02/2021

For the 3rd consecutive TASIU conference, Milan G. Marinkovich will be presenting a 2 hour seminar on how to Deconstruct the ESI (Epidural Steroid Injection) Buildup in Litigation for Adjusters and SIU personnel at the Pasadena Convention Center on August 25, 2021.

05/14/2021

As a friendly reminder, please review your screen name before speaking with a judge on Zoom.

St. Joseph County judge Jeffrey Middleton was not happy with a man& #039;s zoom name being "Buttf**ker 3000" during a court hearing.

04/26/2021

Supreme Court to Decide Whether Second Amendment Protects Concealed Carry of Fi****ms.

The Supreme Court announced Monday that it will decide whether the Second Amendment requires states to issue concealed carry permits.

04/16/2021

April 14, 2021:
Harris County, Texas, 55th District Court

$67,048.50 Awarded to Milan's Client:

Milan was again retained prior to trial, to try a personal injury case for a Plaintiff where the Defendant's insurance carrier refused to tender the $30,000.00 bodily injury policy limits. Plaintiff sustained $16,748.50 in reasonable and necessary medical care expenses in the past for multi-level cervical disc herniations at C3-C4 and C6-C7. The amount of past medical expenses was not contested by the defendant.

After refusing the Plaintiff's reasonable demand for the $30,000.00 policy limits, the Defendant's carrier offered $27,500.00 prior to jury selection. The Plaintiff rejected this untimely offer, and proceeded to trial. Milan tried the case to a Harris County jury which deliberated for more than than 3 hours. Milan's client was awarded $67,048.50 as follows:

(a) $16,748.50 for reasonable and necessary medical care and expenses in the past;

(b) $7,500.00 for reasonable and necessary medical care expenses incurred in the future;

(c) $13,000.00 for physical pain and suffering in the past;

(d) $20,000.00 for physical pain and suffering in the future;

(e) $600.00 for loss of earnings in the past;

(f) $1,200.00 for loss of earning capacity in the future; and

(g) $8,000.00 for mental anguish in the future;

The jury's award was more than double the insurer's policy limits, and $39,548.50 more than their last offer. This is the second excess jury trial verdict Milan has obtained for a Plaintiff in Harris County.

04/08/2021

Voir Dire in the age of COVID-19.

11/24/2020

While supplies last...

11/07/2020

Texas state officials announced late on Friday afternoon that they have charged a social worker with 134 felony counts of election fraud and other related

10/22/2020

The struggle is real during this pandemic:

A Florida lawyer is accused of being a “serial bank robber,” who was busted this week as he allegedly headed to his sixth raid, federal prosecutors said. Aaron Honaker, 41, is accused o…