Let’s face it—results matter. We’re glad you are reviewing this page to see whether our firm is the right fit. After your review, we’re confident you will see that we are a serious trial firm whose matters are staffed and litigated collaboratively—from intake through trial and appeal.
WRA Law is built for contested litigation—from jury trials and court trials to arbitration and appellate briefing—with lawyers who collaborate across investigation, motions, trial, and appeal.
Our team has secured outcomes recognized among California’s top verdicts, together with numerous settlements achieved shortly before trial when defense exposure became clear—including a $2.6M negligent-hiring verdict ranked among the Top 100 Verdicts of 2018.
Prior results do not guarantee, warrant, or predict a similar outcome in any future matter.
Outcomes—including verdicts, judgments, settlements, and select arbitration awards—are listed below in one combined list, ordered from highest to lowest recovery amount. Brief summary-only entries appear alongside fuller narratives. Where the same recovery already appears elsewhere as a longer narrative entry, the duplicate summary-only card was omitted.
Our trial team served as counsel in a case involving a woman who attended a cheerleading audition. While she was there, she was essentially forced to perform a stunt. During the stunt, the plaintiff fell and suffered serious injuries. The lawsuit targeted the production company and various other defendants. The verdict made history and was recognized among the Top 100 Verdicts of 2018—an extremely difficult case to litigate.
Following contested termination and related employment claims, the matter resolved for $1,250,000. Specific facts and employer identity are omitted here subject to confidentiality where applicable.
Our African American client was repeatedly subjected to racial epithets at work. After he complained, he was terminated.
This matter arose from a vehicle collision early in the morning while the plaintiff was a passenger in a transport vehicle to the airport. The plaintiff sustained significant injuries requiring extensive medical care and attributed the collision to unsafe operation of the vehicle.
Our client was paid improperly and was terminated after complaining about wage-and-hour violations.
While crossing the street, our client was struck by a driver who failed to notice the pedestrian. In a heavily contested case, the client recovered a substantial settlement shortly before trial.
Our client was driving when another vehicle prematurely entered an intersection, causing severe head and hand injuries.
Our client worked for the company for many years without write-ups. After he was severely injured, the company terminated him for allegedly “breaking policy.”
Our client was rear-ended. Property damage was minimal, but the injuries were serious. After multiple surgeries, the defense resolved the case.
Shortly after leaving the hospital, the client’s wife was recommended for physical therapy. She was left unattended, fell, and passed away days later.
Our client’s supervisor sexually harassed her. After she complained, she was fired. We secured this settlement within months of filing the lawsuit.
Our client was walking at an inn. After new construction, the inn failed to warn guests of a step. The plaintiff did not see the step, fell, and suffered serious injuries. After heavy litigation, the case settled shortly before trial.
Our client was harassed at work by her supervisor. The defense attacked her credibility, but ultimately paid to resolve the case.
Employment and workers’ compensation matter involving allegations of workplace-related injuries, employment disputes, and resulting damages.
Claims alleging termination motivated by disability-related bias and failure to accommodate—resolved before trial. Details are summarized consistent with confidentiality.
Our client was injured in an auto collision and suffered serious pain. She obtained a strong settlement.
Employment-related action involving allegations of unlawful workplace conduct, retaliation, and damages arising from the employment relationship.
Our client was paid improperly, worked off the clock, and ultimately resigned due to unsafe conditions.
Our client was briefly employed when a manager began sexually harassing her, resulting in psychological injuries. The employee was subjected to repeated harassment by a supervisor—including explicit comments, unwanted advances, and threats to her job if she did not comply. After she reported the misconduct, the employer terminated the supervisor; nonetheless, she continued to suffer emotional distress, lost income, and ongoing psychological harm. The matter included claims of harassment, retaliation, and economic damages arising from the loss of employment and emotional injuries.
Our client was sexually harassed over a period of roughly four to five weeks by a supervisor. The defense’s maximum offer was $15,000.
A long-term warehouse employee developed serious medical complications related to diabetes and repeatedly requested assistance and flexibility. Rather than engaging in a good-faith interactive process or offering reasonable accommodations, the employer ignored his medical needs, increased his workload, and terminated him. He lost his livelihood and benefits, suffered severe emotional distress, and required ongoing psychological treatment. The case sought recovery for lost wages, emotional harm, and damages arising from the employer’s failure to comply with disability rights laws.
In a separate matter, similar wrongful termination and disability-discrimination themes settled without trial under a confidentiality-restricted description.
Our client was injured while working. After raising complaints, the employer issued write-ups and terminated him. The case settled shortly after litigation began.
Our client was sexually harassed; the manager initially claimed the conduct was not sexual in nature. A longtime employee performed well until a new supervisor engaged in repeated unwelcome personal comments and invitations, creating discomfort at work. After she objected and reported the conduct, the employer scrutinized her performance and placed her on a performance improvement plan shortly after her complaint. She was pressured to keep working under the same supervisor despite fear and emotional distress. The situation caused significant stress, sleep loss, and the need for medical and psychological treatment—ultimately leading her to resign to protect her well-being. The lawsuit sought accountability for harassment, retaliation, and emotional harm.
Disputed-liability collision producing a solid recovery without surgeries and with limited treatment.
Civil employment dispute involving claims related to workplace treatment, compensation, and alleged statutory violations.
Our client was constantly belittled with “jokes” about his race. He complained, but nothing changed. We secured a settlement shortly before trial.
Our client worked for years without write-ups. Right after he was injured, he was let go despite doctor’s notes.
Disparate treatment and related FEHA claims on behalf of a male employee—resolved by settlement without admission of liability.
Our client was riding with his mother-in-law when she caused a crash. The client accessed available insurance coverage for his injuries.
Our client, who had walking difficulties, was forced to stand for an x-ray. She fell and suffered serious injuries.
Our client was riding a motorcycle when another driver caused a collision. He suffered serious fractures but recovered well.
Employment and workers’ compensation case involving alleged workplace injuries, disability-related issues, and related employment claims.
Civil action involving allegations of unlawful conduct arising out of a professional or employment relationship.
Our client worked for years without write-ups. When she developed a serious mental illness, her position was mysteriously “moved out of state.” She hired us close to the statute of limitations; we filed suit and obtained this result.
Employment dispute involving allegations of wrongful workplace conduct, damages, and statutory labor violations.
Employment-related matter involving claims of workplace misconduct, retaliation, and related damages.
Civil employment case involving allegations of discrimination, retaliation, and damages stemming from workplace treatment.
Employment-related action concerning alleged unlawful workplace practices and resulting emotional and economic harm.
Employment and labor dispute involving allegations of wrongful treatment in the workplace and related damages.
| Year | Matter | Type | Forum |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 | Personal injury jury trial. | Personal injury | Jury trial |
| 2026 | Pending employment arbitration. | Employment | Arbitration |
| 2025 | Employment arbitration. | Employment | Arbitration |
| 2024 | Attorney–client fee dispute submitted to arbitration. | Fee dispute | Arbitration |
| 2024 | Employment dispute involving an instrumentation / technology employer. | Employment | Jury trial |
| 2024 | Personal injury trial with disputed liability or damages. | Personal injury | Jury trial |
| 2024 | Personal injury collision matter. | Personal injury | Jury trial |
| 2023 | Employment dispute defended through jury verdict. | Employment | Jury trial |
| 2023 | Personal injury jury trial. | Personal injury | Jury trial |
| 2023 | Hospitality-sector wage dispute resolved after court trial. | Employment | Bench trial |
| 2022 | Multi-issue employment arbitration with contested liability and damages. | Employment | Arbitration |
| 2022 | Employment dispute with a restaurant operator. | Employment | Jury trial |
| 2022 | Workers’ compensation injury causation dispute. | Workers’ comp (AOE/COE) | Administrative hearing |
| 2022 | Broad employment dispute tried to a jury. | Employment | Jury trial |
| 2022 | Hostile work environment / sexual harassment arbitration. | Sexual harassment | Arbitration |
| 2021 | Retail wage-and-hour claims against a national department-store employer. | Employment (wage & hour) | Arbitration |
| 2019 | Personal injury matter tried to jury; resolved during jury selection. | Personal injury | Jury trial |
| 2018 | Multi-party collision case involving disputed liability and injuries. | Personal injury | Jury trial |
| 2018 | Motor-vehicle collision with significant injury damages. | Personal injury | Jury trial |
| 2018 | Unlawful detainer trial. | Unlawful detainer | Court trial (judge) |
| 2016 | Civil restraining-order proceeding. | Restraining order | Court hearing (judge) |
| 2016 | Financial claims following the end of a long domestic partnership–style relationship. | Palimony | Jury trial |
| 2016 | Landlord–tenant unlawful detainer matter. | Unlawful detainer | Court trial (commissioner) |
| 2016 | Medical negligence claims involving a major integrated health provider. | Medical malpractice | Arbitration |
| 2014 | Residential eviction / possession dispute. | Unlawful detainer | Court trial (judge) |
| 2014 | Wage-and-hour dispute arising out of a deli / food-service workplace. | Employment | Court trial (judge) |
| 2012 | Software-development contract dispute between a vendor and an individual stakeholder. | Breach of contract | Bench trial |
The Court of Appeal reversed summary judgment on most claims, holding triable issues of fact existed as to disability discrimination, age discrimination, failure to accommodate, failure to engage in the interactive process, and failure to prevent discrimination—while affirming only the dismissal of the retaliation claim. The court emphasized conflicts in the evidence regarding essential job duties, accommodation, and pretext that required resolution by a factfinder rather than on summary judgment.
The Court of Appeal reversed summary judgment in part, holding the trial court erred in dismissing the FEHA harassment and failure-to-prevent-harassment claims, as well as the intentional infliction of emotional distress claim, because triable issues of fact existed. The court affirmed dismissal of the retaliation, assault/battery, and wage-and-hour claims and remanded for further proceedings on the surviving causes of action.
The Court of Appeal affirmed denial of the defendants’ petition to compel arbitration, holding nonsignatory defendants were not bound by arbitration provisions and that equitable estoppel and agency theories did not apply. The court further held the trial court acted within its discretion under Code of Civil Procedure section 1281.2(c) to avoid conflicting rulings by allowing the case to proceed in court. The matter was covered by MetNews.