Description: A workers’ compensation case involving the acute onset of occupational asthma against a multi-national corporation. The client was exposed to dangerous airborne particulate that caused him to become permanently disabled. Due to his inability to return to work, client was terminated from employer. The employer denied all responsibility and had to be taken to trial before the North Carolina Industrial Commission. After the trial was complete, the employer entered into the six figure settlement.
Description: On Saturday, February 16, 2011, Rapper Juaquin Malphurs aka Waka Flocka Flame was in Charlotte in order to have his stereo equipment worked on and/or installed at a retailer on Independence Boulevard at 2:00 in the afternoon . Mr. Malphurs mingled with the general public and signed autographs as requested. Mr. Malphurs was managed by Mizay Entertainment, INC who hired a security detail to protect Mr. Malphurs at public events. The security detail was supervised by Mizay, who created and instilled various procedures and protocols on how the security detail was to act in various situations. These procedures and protocols allowed the security detail to be armed at all times and to fire weapons as needed. SeiferFlatow, PLLC client Antonio Stukes drove to meet Mr. Malphurs on this day in order to get an autograph and offer a demo CD that he recorded. As Mr. Stukes and his two friends got out of the vehicle, Mr. Stukes observed a member of Mr. Malphurs’s security detail brandishing a large handgun and started shooting his gun in the general direction of Mr. Stukes, without provocation. As Mr. Stukes was retreating towards Independence Boulevard, this second member of the security detail fired two shots from his handgun in the general direction of Mr. Stukes. One of the bullets fired by the members of the security team struck Mr. Stukes in the shoulder. Defendant Mizay was found liable to Mr. Stukes as the employer of the security detail on the grounds that the negligent acts and/or omissions undertaken by the members of the security detail. Defendant Mizay was further found liable for punitive damages.
Description: In February of 2013, SeiferFlatow obtained an acquittal of all charges for a client who was accused of Driving While Impaired, possession of marijuana, possession of drug paraphernalia, and failing to stop at a stop sign by challenging the lack of reasonable suspicion to stop the vehicle.
Description: In March of 2013, SeiferFlatow obtained a dismissal from a Judge on all charges for a client charged with Driving While Impaired, reckless driving, and other related offenses by challenging the officer’s lack of probable cause for the arrest.
Description: In April of 2013, SeiferFlatow won an outright dismissal for a client charged with Driving While Impaired and related charges due to a violation of the client’s statutory and Constitutional rights while in the custody of law enforcement. The judge agreed with SeiferFlatow’s assessment that law enforcement had deprived his client of the right to develop his defense by not releasing him promptly after meeting all conditions of his bond.
Description: SeiferFlatow’s client was charged with Driving While Impaired and other charges. In May of 2013, SeiferFlatow obtained a dismissal of all charges based on a violation of their client’s statutory and constitutional rights when the jail did not allow him access to family and friends and did not take him before a judicial official for a bond determination without unreasonable delay.
Description: In May of 2013, SeiferFlatow obtained a dismissal of all charges against a client accused of DWI, reckless driving, and open container on the grounds that law enforcement violated her statutory rights and her Fourth and Sixth Amendment rights under the Constitution.
Description: SeiferFlatow’s client was charged with Driving While Impaired. In June of 2013, a Judge dismissed the charges against SeiferFLatow’s client on the grounds that the officer did not have reasonable suspicion to pull over Defendant’s vehicle and on the grounds that the Officer lacked probable cause to arrest the Defendant.
Description: SeiferFlatow’s client was charged with assault against a female. The client, through previous counsel was unsuccessful in District Court. SeiferFlatow was hired to appeal the case to Superior Court and try the case before a jury. After putting on the evidence, the jury took approximately 20 minutes to come back with a not guilty verdict.