Subscribe in a reader


Issaquah Law Group: Experienced Counsel; Client Focus

PHILOSOPHY: Formed in 2014, Issaquah Law Group is a law firm with one focus: providing businesses and insurers with high quality legal representation with the responsiveness of a smaller firm. ILG was founded on the principle that strong client relationships are the key to successful legal representation and strong relationships are built upon clear and consistent communication. 

LITIGATION: We work closely with our clients to fully and accurately understand their goals, work collaboratively to formulate specific legal strategies, and execute the agreed plan of action utilizing methods most likely to result in the efficient and effective resolution of the matter. ILG attorneys have a broad base of litigation experience to draw on in all Federal and State courts from on-the-ground investigations to Supreme Court appeals in the areas of personal injury and wrongful death, product liability, commercial general liability, labor & employment, construction litigation, and catastrophic losses due to fire and explosion.

BUSINESS LAW: Rarely is the path from point A to point B a straight line, so our role in a business law practice is to find alternatives, devise workable strategies, and keep your business ideas, goals and objectives moving toward realization. ILG’s business attorneys help clients achieve their goals with respect to business formation, intellectual property, labor and employment, CAN-SPAM, copyright and trademark

COMMUNITY: In addition, the Lawyers at Issaquah Law Group remain active in the legal and civic community. A core commitment of our Issaquah Attorneys is community service. Our attorneys' civic involvement includes the King County Civil Rights Commission; the City of Issaquah Planning Policy Commission; the Northwest Screenwriters Guild, service as a pro tem judge. We live and work in the Pacific Northwest, and we aim to make it a better place.

In addition, through The Amateur Law Professor Blog and LinkedIn postings, we share pertinent opinions and decisions of the Washington State Supreme Court, as well as the pertinent opinions and decisions of the Washington State Courts of Appeal so that our clients can be as update to date on cutting legal issues as we are.

WA Legal Roundup: Division I

Singh v. Edwards Lifesciences Corp.

Paramjit Singh went to Providence Everett Medical Center in October 2004 for a relatively routine heart bypass surgery. During the surgery, an Edwards Lifesciences’ monitor malfunctioned causing a catheter in Mr. Singh’s heart to heat up and destroy the heart. He was kept alive by a mechanical heart for 11 weeks until a heart transplant became available. Anti-rejection medication caused Mr. Singh to develop blood cancer.

Mr. Singh sued Edwards Lifesciences (which was apparently uninterested in both life and science in Mr. Singh’s case). The lawsuit sought punitive damages against Edwards Lifesciences. The evidence presented at trial revealed that Edwards knew about the flaw in their heart monitor as early as 1998. In October of 2002, the same devise had caught fire during a surgery in Japan. Edwards did not recall the product or warn any of the users of the defect.

Edwards admitted liability, but alleged that Providence shared in that liability for using a defective cable. The jury returned a verdict of $31,750,000 and awarded punitive damages under California law. Punitive damages amounted to $8,350,000. Edwards appealed, arguing that because Washington disfavors punitive damages, none should have been awarded because the case was litigated in Washington. California law provides for punitive damages.

The Court of Appeals rejected this argument, relying on the Restatement (Second) of Conflict of Laws. The Court held that “[e]ven though Washington has a strong policy against punitive damages, it has no interest in protecting companies that commit fraud. Where, as here, an entity headquartered in California, committed the conduct in California that resulted in the plaintiff’s damages, California had the greater interest in deterring such fraudulent activities.”

Note to self: Pay careful attention to what Paul Luvera does. He is a living legend.  Joel Cunningham, Robert Gellatly, Deborah Martin, Howard Goodfriend and Andy Hoyal aren’t bad either.

Subscribe in a reader

Copyright 2014-2018 by Issaquah Law Group, PLLC. Powered by Squarespace. Background image by jakeliefer.