09/29/2026
$3.55 Million Across Three Settlements
It has been a busy close to summer and start of fall at Furman Honick Law. We recovered $3.55 million for three clients in a short span. Two of those cases resolved before a lawsuit was filed. Five other firms turned down the third case on the initial call.
We would rather be posting jury verdicts. After enough trial wins, insurers often decide they would rather pay what a case is worth than sit through another one. That is good for clients: a settlement is certain money, without the delay and risk of trial and appeal. These three matters show how that works in practice.
$1.5 million — Rear-end collision, minimally insured defendant
A defendant with thin liability coverage rear-ended our client. The gap between that policy and the harm was large. Our client had strong underinsured-motorist coverage, which is what made a full recovery possible.
The defense leaned hard on her pre-existing conditions and tried to treat the surgeries as unrelated. We built the medical chronology, isolated the new injuries, and kept the pressure on until the carriers tendered the available limits. This was a difficult venue. The carriers knew our results in that same county and paid accordingly.
$1.25 million — Tesla in Autopilot, head-on crash
The other driver was operating a Tesla in Autopilot when her sunglasses fell to the floor. She reached down, touched the steering wheel, Autopilot disengaged, and she crossed the double yellow lines into our client. Both of our client’s legs were catastrophically fractured.
Maryland’s noneconomic damages cap made a pre-suit limits demand a hard sell. We still prepared the case as if it were going to trial: liability reconstruction, as Tesla was not to blame. With our record and our relationship with the carrier’s appointed counsel, we recovered every dollar of the policy without filing suit.
$800,000 — Premises trip-and-fall after five firms said no
Other lawyers told our client no case. The building owner had just resurfaced the asphalt and sidewalk. Instead of raising the curb so the height change was obvious, they laid new asphalt flush with the old curb. The contractors warned the owner it would be a tripping hazard. The owner told them to do the work anyway.
Our client tripped on that lip on her first day back at the building after construction. She broke her leg and needed multiple surgeries.
From day one, the insurer called it a no-offer, defensible case. Filing the lawsuit and taking discovery is what forced them to change their mind. The contractor warnings came out in discovery. Litigation was the only path to a result that matched the harm.
These are not volume settlements. We prepared to try them from day one. Two resolved because the carriers understood that. One resolved only after we filed and proved them wrong.
If another firm has already told you the case is not worth pursuing, that is often when you should call us.
