Recent Cases

 Jeppesen v et al

$1,095,000.00 settlement January 15, 2010 Attorney Bernie Allen finalized a settlement concerning the following case. On July 15, 2007, Davis County resident, a long haul truck driver, came over a rise in the I-15 freeway to find that a California driver had lost the load in his rooftop carrier and it was spread about the road with people scurrying about trying to pick up the mess. Unfortunately, no one thought to run up the freeway to signal the problem ahead. When Jeppesen came upon the scene he knew he could not stop in time and manuevered his loaded semi into the median to avoid injuring others at the scene. He attempted to swing back onto the road but the truck flipped injuring Jeppesen. When he came into my office I knew I would have to associate with my friend and colleague and also an exceptional personal injury attorney, Jon Remmel, of Remmel and Speer in Las Vegas, Nevada, as the accident occurred there. The combination proved to be very effective as we proceeded against the driver and the roof rack manufacturer and obtained a million + settlement for Mr. Jeppesen while manuevering through difficult allegations of comparative negligence.

$80,000.00 Dog Bite Settlement

11 yr. old animal lover, CP, was admiring recently born St. Bernard puppies when the mother dog bit her on the right side of her face. I was surprised that a dog with my same name would be so hard on my client. We were able to negotiate an $80,000 settlement, in addition to the initial guest medical coverage that paid all the initial medical costs for hospital care and plastic surgery.  The recovery included almost $11,000 for upcoming scar and facial muscle repair as well as a $43,000 structured settlement that will pay CP almost $70,000 at key points in her future. I am pleased to say that CP still wants to work with animals when she grows up!

  Kimball v. Wilkinson
On January 24, 2011 Attorney Randy Richards tried a case on water rights in a subdivision lot.  The developer defendant refused to provide water to an improved lot purchased by Richards client.  The trial judge agreed with Richards that the contract and the city ordinance both required the developer to provide the water share to Richards client. After a trial on the case, the Judge granted a verdict against the developer in the full amount requested, as well as awarding all costs of bringing the suit to be paid by the developer.

Roy City v. Frazier
On December 6, 2010 Attorney Randy Richards represented a client on an Assault charge that was alleged to be domestic violence related.  Despite a claim by the police that the defendant had confessed to the crime, the court returned a NOT GUILTY verdict.  The primary defense was that any alleged assaultive behavior  fell under the doctirne of defense of a habitation (which is a derivative of the self defense theory).

State v. Ethridge
On October 28, 2010 attorneys Randy Richards and Bernie Allen negotiated a settlement in a capital homicide case which resulted in the defendant avoiding both the death sentence as well as a life without parole sentence. The defendant pled guilty to murder charges with a maximum of 20 years to life with the possibility of parole. This was a case where there was no genuine issue regarding the facts of the murder, since the defendant had fully and voluntarily confessed to the police and provided significant supporting evidence to the police before contacting an attorney. The official sentencing will occur on December 13, 2010.

State v. Ahalat
On September 29, 2010 Attorney Randy Richards represented client in a felony jury trial in Salt Lake District Court. The defendant was tried on 2 charges of Theft by Deception, both were 2nd degree felonies with a possible sentence of 1-15 years in prison.
A NOT GUILTY verdict rendered by the jury.

State v. Augustine

On August 6, 2009 Attorney Randy Richards won an interlocutory appeal to the Utah Court of Appeals on a ruling by the trial court in the Salt Lake District court denying the appointment of an expert psychologist.  The Utah Court of Appeals reversed the trial court and ordered the trial judge to determine whether or not a psychologist was needed in the case. (See Case # 20090024-CA)  The trial court judge then ordered the appointment of a psychologist as requested by attorney Richards