Peetluk Law Firm, P.A.

Case Studies

While I am very proud of every case that I have handled, I have selected a few cases that epitomize how we represent our clients. 


Deighan v. Cornerstone Businesses, Inc. $2,500,000 settlement at the close of evidence

In 2011 while on his way to his monthly chiropractic adjustment, Mr. Deighan came to a stop behind the vehicle ahead of him that stopped when the traffic light turned yellow. The Bobcat tractor behind him did not stop and reared them causing a five-car accident. Mr. Deighan sustained serious back injuries and underwent three surgeries. He lost his job, his house and just about everything except the love of his family. The insurance company blamed the man in from Mr. Deighan. They blamed Mr. Deighan for years for something that they never explained – ever. They accused Mr. Deighan of undergoing multiple surgeries for profit. They were shameless. After they used every underhanded trick in the book, the insurance company had enough and paid Mr. Deighan what they owed him.

HARPER V. INGLES MARKETS, INC.$5,800,000.00 Mid-Trial Settlement

In 1996, on the outskirts of Atlanta, Georgia, a terrible tractor-trailer accident took the lives of two beautiful children and injured several other people in a multiple vehicle – tractor-trailer collision. The tractor-trailer, owned by Ingles Markets, Inc. was unable to stop in time as the Atlanta traffic backed up at rush hour. The driver attempted to change lanes to avoid what he knew would be a horrific accident, but he was unable to avoid the collision and ran over the Ford Escort in which Andrea and Allen Harper were riding. At first blush, it appeared that the collision was due to driver error because he failed to pay proper attention to the road, but our investigation revealed that the four out of six brakes on the tractor were out of adjustment and two brakes trailer were the same. While the driver was responsible for his negligent driving and the company was responsible for the negligent driving of its employee; the corporate owner, Ingles Markets, Inc. was independently negligent.

Not only did the corporate owner fail to properly maintain the brakes, but by finding and interviewing mechanics who had been terminated from the company we discovered outrageous violations of federal law. In an attempt to save money, Ingles Markets got rid of its senior mechanics and allowed unskilled mechanics who were barely supervised to maintain its fleet of tractors and trailers. Ingles did this despite the fact that it had nearly doubled the size of its distribution center and the number of tractors and trailers in its fleet. Without its experienced mechanics, Ingles could not keep up with its scheduled maintenance and inspection duties. When federally mandated inspections fell behind, Ingles instructed its mechanics to drive around the lot in golf carts to find the vehicles that needed to be inspected and fraudulently place the inspection stickers on the tractors and trailers without ever conducting the inspections.

By appealing to these mechanics, who had since left Ingles Market employment, we were able to get two of them to actually testify in Federal Court that they had personally committed these criminal acts at the insistence of their employer.

As a result of intense investigation and recourse to the Courts, the family received a 5.8 million dollar settlement on the third day of trial.

WILLIAMS V. INGLES MARKETS, INC.$1,500,000  Verdict

Another one of our clients was involved in the multiple-vehicle – tractor-trailer collision described in the HARPER case above. Mr. Williams was in the last vehicle to be struck by the tractor-trailer. He was left with chronic low back pain as a result of an annular tear to his vertebrae which caused pain to shoot from his low back down his leg. Mr. Williams worked in the construction field and his injuries greatly affected his future ability to earn.

After a weeklong trial in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, the jury returned a verdict for Mr. Williams in the amount of $1,500,000.00.

NORRIS V. DIAMOND HOLDING CORP.$900,000.00 Settlement

Lynn Norris was on her way to work just as she had done many times before when a delivery truck ran a red light and crashed into her driver’s door. Lynn never regained consciousness and died only minutes after she arrived at the hospital. The corporation admitted its liability for the running of the red light, but denied that it had committed any negligence itself. Furthermore, they argued that Lynn did not leave behind a husband or children and that she did not experience any pain and suffering because she passed away so quickly without regaining consciousness.

Unfortunately, it was our firm that had to explain the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations to the corporate owner and how they applied to its trucking operation. At the end of the case, they came to understand that if they had followed the law and properly trained its driver as required by the regulations this catastrophe might have been avoided. As the end of the forensic pathology for the State of Georgia. While Dr. Kris Sperry could not say what Lynn felt or experienced, he was able to testify that Lynn’s nervous system was intact and that her brain was capable of experiencing the tragedy that was to take her life.

In the end, the corporation settled just before the jury was to be empanelled for $900,000.

CRIMINAL CASES OF INTEREST

I have tried over thirty criminal felony trials, including ten murder cases. Here are just a few examples of those trials.

STATE V. GEORGE CHAVOUSConviction Overturned; Acquittal at Retrial

Mr. Chavous was in his kitchen one afternoon preparing a roast for dinner when he and his adult stepson, with whom he did not get along, got into a fight. His stepson’s friend joined the fight and, as Mr. Chavous was holding a carving knife when he was attacked began, the friend was stabbed twice in the back and once in the chest. Mr. Chavous defense was a combination of self-defense and accident. The fatal wounds happened when he was defending himself from the attack by his stepson and the stepson’s friend, and it was also an accident because when Mr. Chavous was fighting off the attack he did not intend to stab anyone, he just had a knife in his hand when he was attacked.

At trial, the jury acquitted Mr. Chavous of murder, but convicted him of felony murder. They did not think he intended to kill anyone, but felt that using a knife was an aggravated assault from which the victim died. However, Mr. Chavous conviction was overturned because the judge refused to instruct the jury on self-defense and accident. The judge insisted that Mr. Chavous could not argue both accident and self-defense, but the appellate courts made it clear that if there is any evidence of accident and self-defense that the jury must be instructed on both. At the retrial, Mr. Chavous’ stepson admitted that he and his friend had planned and carried out the attack on Mr. Chavous and Mr. Chavous was acquitted.

STATE V. PHONSAVANH KANUANABOUTConviction Overturned; Acuittal at Retrial

Mr. Kanuanabout went to a community soccer game. He was the driver of a vehicle that arrived at the same time as two other vehicles. The testimony was that men got out of the other two vehicles and opened fire on the victim in the case. There was no evidence that anyone in Mr. Kanuanabout’s vehicle did anything, but run back to the car after the shots were fired and drive away, as did hundreds of other people.

The State did not indict the case as a gang related crime, but at the trial the government went about to prove that it was a gang killing and that Mr. Kanuanabout was in the gang. Obviously, we objected strenuously to this evidence. The Court even allowed the State to put up a witness who purported to be an expert in gang activity who testified that Mr. Kanuanabout was a gang member. Mr Kanuanabout was convicted, as we knew he would be once he was labeled a gang member, but the conviction was overturned and he was granted a new trial. After a trial limited to the evidence in the case, Mr. Kanuanabout was found not guilty.

STATE V. EMMA LOVEJOY Not Guilty; By Reason of Insanity

Ms. Lovejoy’s case is a most tragic one. She had been in and out of psychiatric hospitals, but each time they would stabilize her and then she would be released. It was a vicious cycle. One day she showed up at a hospital under a delusion that she was pregnant and when the emergency room doctor refused to confirm her pregnancy she picked up a golf club and hit him in the head with it. In her mind, the doctor was part of a larger conspiracy to steal her unborn children. After extensive consultations with her family, it was clear that Ms. Lovejoy was on a course destined to end in disaster. We were able to convince the judge during a bench trial to find Ms. Lovejoy not guilty by reason of insanity. She is still in a mental hospital, but she has regular visits with her family and she is safe.

STATE V. MARTY BALLARD Not Guilty; Classic Self Defense

Mr. Ballard’s situation presented the classic self-defense case. His wife had borrowed twenty dollars from a local loan shark called “Bill Willie.” One day, Big Willie saw Marty and demanded one hundred dollars as repayment. Marty would have paid him forty or maybe even fifty dollars, but he refused to pay the one hundred dollars. Big Willie forcefully insisted, so Marty made a run for it. Big Willie continued the case by car. Marty sped to a cousin’s door with Big Willie right behind him. Marty pounded on the door to get in, but as his cousin tearfully testified, she was afraid of what Big Willie would do to her and her family if she opened the door. Marty, who was all of five feet eight inches and one hundred sixty five pounds, found himself face to face with a very angry Big Willie, who stood six feet four inches and weighed two hundred and eighty pounds. Big Willie pulled out a 45 caliber pistol and struck Marty in the face with it. Somehow during the life or death struggle, Marty gained the advantage and wrestled the gun from Big Willie and pulled the trigger to save his life. Big Willie was shot in the forearm and the neck, and died from his wounds.

The State prosecuted Marty Ballard for murder claiming that the only way he could have gotten the better of Big Willie was if Big Willie was rendered unconscious in the struggle and then while Big Willie was out Marty picked up the weapon and shot him in cold blood. However, under cross examination, the State’s forensic pathologist absolutely proved the State’s theory was untrue. The gunshot to Big Willie’s forearm entered at a forty five degree angle which indicated that Big Willie’s arm was up and extended toward Marty when the shots were fired; as if he was reaching up at Marty to continue the struggle. The State’s own expert witness testified that if his arm was up and extended, then Big Willie was conscious and the State’s theory was impossible. Marty was acquitted on all charges.

STATE V. WILLIAM BUTLER Not Guilty; Ten Minute Verdict

Mr. Butler went to his ex-wife’s apartment to pick his son up for the weekend. His relationship with his ex-wife was strained enough as it was, but her boyfriend added fuel to the fire. There was an argument and Mr. Butler left with his son. Later, he was arrested and charged with pointing a weapon at his ex-wife during the argument. Mr. Butler routinely carried a firearm, but he did not point it at anyone in that apartment.

It has been said the cross examination is the greatest engine in the search for truth and this case was a perfect example. Under cross examination, it became abundantly clear that the boyfriend had forced the ex-wife to go along with his false accusations. They each testified that she could barely hear what Mr. Butler said because he spoke in whispered tone, but the boyfriend claimed that Mr. Butler was yelling at the top of his voice. After the jury left the courtroom to begin deliberations, Mr. Butler and I went outside so that he could smoke a cigarette, but before he could finish his first cigarette we were called back into the courtroom to hear the jury announce its verdict of not guilty.

Quite Frankly, this case is not of special significance, except for the fact that it is not only the quickest not guilty verdict in any of my trials, but it is the quickest not guilty verdict of which I have ever heard. How could I not include it here.