On March 18, 2015, the District Court for Polk County granted the Defendant’s renewed motion for directed verdict in the case of Atzeni v. Quiktrip Corporation, LACL129272. The Plaintiff slipped and fell when exiting the Defendant’s men’s restroom. The Defendant, represented by Patterson Law Firm attorney Michael S. Jones, denied that the Defendant breached its duty of reasonable care to maintain its premises and that Defendant’s alleged negligence was the proximate cause of the damages the Plaintiff was claiming. The Plaintiff failed to present evidence that his injuries resulted from the alleged accident. Accordingly, the Defendant’s motion for directed verdict was granted and the action was dismissed with prejudice in favor of the Defendant. On March 30, 2015, a Linn County jury returned a verdict in the case of Hauptmann v. Penford Products Company & Madsen, LACV77430. The Plaintiff’s thumb was injured when a pipe fell on it while working as an employee of Newell Machinery, a company that was hired by the Defendant. The Defendants, represented by Patterson Law Firm attorney Michael S. Jones, denied that Jeff Madsen, an employee of the Defendant, was at fault. At the close of trial, a jury returned a verdict that the Defendants were not at fault. On May 21, 2015, a Polk County jury returned a verdict in the case of Rhiner v. Quiktrip Corporation, LACL129514. The Plaintiff fell on the sidewalk located on the Defendant’s premises. The Defendant, represented by Patterson Law Firm attorney Michael S. Jones, denied that the Defendant was negligent and that the alleged negligence was a cause of any injury or damages to the Plaintiff. At the close of the trial, a jury returned a verdict that the Defendant was not at fault. On June 10, 2015, a Delaware County jury returned a verdict in the case of Falck v. Agri-King & Bockenstedt, LACV007765. The Plaintiff alleged that the Defendants were negligent, causing damage to her dairy cows. The Defendants, represented by Patterson Law Firm attorney Michael S. Jones, denied the allegations and alleged that any problems with the herd were caused by the negligence of the Plaintiffs. At the close of trial, a jury returned a verdict that the Defendants were not at fault.