PartnersGlenn E. BargerSean D. LanzAssociatesStacey DarlingParalegalsKrissy R. Watson
|
Professional BackgroundGlenn has defended injury claims since the beginning of his legal career in 1997. He has extensive experience litigating and trying cases with injures that range from minor soft-tissue injuries to major catastrophic injuries resulting in permanent paralysis, loss of limb and loss of life. Glenn works with medical experts, engineers, accountants, forensic examiners and engineers regularly to aid in his clients’ cases. He has developed skills litigating claims involving the Oregon Employer Liability Law, premises liability, excessive consumption and service of alcohol, product liability, property damage and defamation claims. Glenn has proven experience in all litigation areas, including mediation, arbitration and jury trials in State and Federal Courts of Washington, Oregon and California. Significant RepresentationGlenn engages a significant practice handling claims against the hospitality industry, including hotels, restaurants, and amusement parts. He represents two multi-national hotel chains and their individual properties in both Oregon and Washington. Glenn also represents one of the largest personal lines auto insurers and their insureds in Oregon, Washington and California. In addition, he represents several local and regional commercial and personal line insurers and their insureds in Oregon and Washington. Glenn is a member of the American Board of Trial Advocates. Eligibility for this select organization is dependent on the member’s character, professionalism and verifiable trial experience. Glenn maintains an “AV Preeminent” peer rating from Martindale-Hubbell. Since 2003, Glenn has tried over 50 cases to jury verdicts. Jury trials in today’s judicial climate are rare, and as such Glenn has one of the most active trial practices in the area. Some of his more memorable trials include: Lazott v. Brown, Polk County, Oregon, 2002 —Glenn defended Mr. Brown when an accident occurred directly in front of him when a wrong way driver collided head on with Ms. Lazott and her fiancè. Mr. Brown was unable to avoid a second collision with the rear of Ms. Lazott’s vehicle. Ms. Lazott suffered life threatening injuries and underwent spinal surgery as a result of the accident. Ms. Lazott claimed that while the collision was initially caused by the front end impact with the other driver, most of her injuries were caused by the rear end collision with Mr. Brown, and that Mr. Brown should have avoided the crash. Ms. Lazott sued Mr. Brown for more than $1,000,000.00. Glenn retained several experts in the case, including an accident reconstruction expert as well as a biomechanical engineer/emergency room physician to explain to the jury that first, Mr. Brown had no opportunity to avoid the collision and further, the injuries Plaintiff suffered were due to the front end impact. After several days in trial, the jury returned a defense verdict in less than one hour. Ray v. Lockwood, Washington County, Oregon 2005 — Glenn represented a Tavern owner in Aloha, Oregon, arising from a premises liability claim. The Tavern owner’s husband, who was distraught due to his pending divorce with the Tavern owner, entered the Tavern with a gun holding the Tavern owner and others hostage. Two patrons, the Rays, were also held hostage. In their attempts to flee out the back door, the Rays asserted the fire escape was in a defective condition and impeded their escape. Mr. Ray claimed he hurt himself opening the door and sued the Tavern owner for permanent injury to his shoulder. After presenting his case in chief, Mr. Ray’s claims were dismissed on Directed Verdict by the Judge. Bogdanov v. King, Clark County, Washington, 2005 — This lawsuit arose out of collision at a controlled intersection where Plaintiff and Mr. King collided. Liability was in dispute as the Defendant believed the Plaintiff waved him into the intersection. After Mr. King proceeded into the intersection, Plaintiff T-boned Mr. King’s vehicle. Plaintiff claimed he could never work as a tile setter again due to knee and back injuries. Trial lasted 6 days, including testimony from various eyewitnesses to the collision, and several medical experts, vocational rehabilitation experts, economists and accident reconstructionists. Plaintiff asked for several million dollars in damages associated to his medical care, lost wages and lost earning capacity. The jury determined Defendant was not at fault for the accident and returned a defense verdict. Plaintiff appealed the decision to the Washington Court of Appeals. The jury’s decision was affirmed. Estes v. Sweet Home Evangelical Church, Linn County, Oregon 2006 — Plaintiff sued a Linn County Church and its men’s club that sponsored a charitable “honors” tree lot on Church property. Plaintiff was walking through the lot, failed to watch where she was going, tripped, fell and shattered her hip and arm. Plaintiff sued for several million dollars asserting the tree lot was an unreasonably hazardous area and she should have been warned of the conditions. After a two day jury trial, the jury returned a defense verdict. Dixon v. Embassy Suites Hotels, Multnomah County, Oregon 2008 — Plaintiff claimed to have been exposed to toxic mold while a long term guest at a local Embassy Suites Hotel. She claimed to have been so damaged she suffered from an inability to concentrate along with immune deficiencies. Plaintiff further claimed that due to the exposure she suffered from higher sensitivity to molds and pollens and thus was required to wear a hazardous materials suit and respirator whenever outside her home. She attended the entire Trial dressed in the suit and respirator. Glenn retained, among other experts a toxicologist and endocrinologist to defend the medical causation case. After six days of trial, several experts and many other witnesses, Glenn obtained a directed verdict and dismissal of Plaintiff’s claims. Wills v. Clark County Holiness Association, Clark County, Washington, 2009 — Ms. Wills was attending a revival meeting at the local Church association. She slipped and fell on a handicap ramp at the property suffering severe injury. Plaintiff claimed the condition of the ramp was excessively slippery and she was not warned of the slippery condition. Glenn retained engineers and medical experts to aid in the defense. This trial lasted five days. In closing argument the Plaintiff asked for millions of dollars in compensation. The jury returned a defense verdict in one hour. Glenn proved that the condition was no more slippery than anyone would have anticipated and that the fall was caused by Plaintiff’s inattention combined with her own poor choice in shoes. McGregor v. May, Multnomah County, Oregon, 2010 — Plaintiff sued Defendant and his employer arising out of a passenger vehicle and truck accident. Plaintiff and Defendant were traveling on a rural road outside Portland, Oregon. Plaintiff was in a small passenger vehicle and attempted to pass Mr. May who was operating a short box tractor trailer. Plaintiff alleged and argued to the jury that Mr. May swerved across the center line to prohibit the passing maneuver causing the Plaintiff to enter the gravel on the opposite side of the road. Plaintiff lost control of the vehicle causing him to reenter the road, pass in front of Defendant’s truck, continuing off the road hitting a dirt berm, bouncing back in front of the Defendant’s vehicle causing a collision with the truck. Mr. McGregor suffered catastrophic, near death injuries. Plaintiff was permanently injured as a result of the collision. Plaintiff sued for more than $6 million. Glenn retained several experts in the case including accident reconstruction engineers, a neurologist, and a neuropsychologist, among others. The initial Trial was planned for two weeks; however ended in a mistrial. Upon retrial, the case was limited to liability issues and lasted 5 days. The jury returned a defense verdict after 15 minutes of deliberations. Sarmadi v. Sideras, Multnomah County, Oregon, 2012 — Plaintiff was involved in a fairly straight forward rear end collision, where fault was admitted. However, she claimed to have suffered a traumatic brain injury in the collision. She sued Ms. Sideras for $1.8 million dollars in damages. Glenn retained a neurosurgeon and neuropsychologist among many other experts to defend the claim. Plaintiff retained similar experts including an out of state neuropsychologist that claimed Plaintiff was permanently altered as a result of the collision. After a five day jury trial, and asking the jury for well over a million dollars, Plaintiff received a $5,000.00 award. Fitzgerald v. Shelby, Columbia County, Oregon, 2014 — Plaintiff was involved in a catastrophic accident with defendant in St. Helens, Oregon, while operating a motorcycle. The accident crushed the plaintiff’s lower right leg. The injuries were so severe, that after multiple attempts to salvage his limb, plaintiff suffered an amputation of the limb below the knee. Plaintiff, at the time of trial, was fighting osteomyelitis (infection) in his residual stump and was facing further amputation of the limb. Plaintiff sued for $4,270,000.00 in economic damages, including past medical expenses, future medical expense, past wage loss and future impaired earning capacity. In addition plaintiff brought a claim for $4,000,000.00 in noneconomic damages. Defendant caused the accident, and thus the focus of the case was defending the injury to an appropriate value. Glenn retained several witnesses, including an orthopedic surgeon who specialized in lower leg surgery, a prosthetist, vocational rehabilitation expert as well as an accident reconstruction engineer to help defend that value of the claim. Plaintiff was operating his motorcycle uninsured. Plaintiff was not permitted to recovery noneconomic damages due to his uninsured status unless he could show defendant acted recklessly in causing the accident. The defense was able to prove defendant was not reckless, and the $4,000,000.00 noneconomic damages claim was not permitted to go to the jury for verdict. After 8 days of trial, the jury returned a verdict of $1,600,000.00. While a significant jury verdict, particularly in a rural County in Oregon, the defense of the case resulted in a substantial reduction of the claimed $8,270,000.00 in damages. Howell v. Pham, Multnomah County, Oregon, 2014 — Plaintiff, a mail carrier, was delivering mail to a community postal box in an unincorporated area just outside the City of Portland. In delivering the mail plaintiff placed her postal vehicle right behind a boat parked on the residential street. Plaintiff was obscured from the view of defendant who was traveling in the opposite direction on the residential street. After delivering the mail, plaintiff attempted to pass the boat and a collision occurred between plaintiff and defendant. Plaintiff claimed she suffered multiple injuries in the accident. She argued that the accident resulted in 5 separate surgeries, an ankle arthroscopy, bilateral knee arthroscopies, and eventually bilateral knee arthroplasties (knee replacements). Plaintiff sued for $850,000 in medical expenses and wage loss. In addition she asserted a $1,500,000.00 noneconomic damages claim. Due to the configuration of the road and the parked boat, plaintiff argued defendant was a fault for the accident. Glenn, through the aid of witnesses and an accident reconstruction engineer, proved the accident was plaintiff’s fault. After six days of trial the jury returned a defense verdict
EducationWillamette University, College of Law University of California, Davis, Linfield College 1989 - 1990 Claremont High School, Claremont, California 1989 Columbia University School of Business, Executive Education 2009 Bar AdmissionsState of Oregon 1997 Professional Certifications and OrganizationsMartindale Hubbard - AV Preeminent rating 2013-2014 PersonalGlenn enjoys spending time with his wife, Stacy and their three daughters, Lily, Reese and Bryce.
|
HOME | OUR TEAM | CONTACT US Copyright © 2019