Nick Rowley | Record Verdict Recognition in CVN’s Top 10 Most Impressive Plaintiff Verdicts of 2025

Nick Rowley | Record Verdict Recognition in CVN’s Top 10 Most Impressive Plaintiff Verdicts of 2025

CVN | January 20, 2026

Breaking Success: Nick Rowley’s Record Verdict Named Among 2025’s Most Impressive

Nick Rowley’s plaintiff victory was recognized by Courtroom View Network as one of the Top 10 Most Impressive Plaintiff Verdicts of 2025, placing it among the most significant civil trial outcomes nationwide this year. The distinction reflects not only the size and impact of the verdict, but also the strategic execution and courtroom advocacy behind it.

According to CVN’s annual rankings, the case stood out for its compelling presentation, trial strategy, and meaningful outcome for the injured plaintiff. The verdict reinforced Rowley’s reputation as a trial lawyer willing to take complex, high-stakes cases to a jury and secure results that resonate beyond the individual matter.

CVN’s Top 10 list evaluates plaintiff verdicts across jurisdictions, highlighting cases that demonstrate exceptional litigation performance and substantial impact. Inclusion in this list underscores the significance of the result and its place among the most notable plaintiff wins of 2025.

For trial lawyers and clients alike, the recognition reflects a continued commitment to aggressive advocacy, careful case preparation, and jury-focused storytelling. This latest distinction adds to a history of high-profile verdicts achieved in complex civil litigation.

Read the entire article at CVN.

Uber’s California Ballot Initiative: What It Means for Crash Victims | TL4J

Uber’s California Ballot Initiative: What It Means for Crash Victims | TL4J

Calmatters | February 24, 2026

A Santa Barbara woman was killed by an Uber Eats driver who was speeding 120 miles per hour while intoxicated, according to the family’s lawsuit. The driver already had a criminal history and was on probation for a second DUI. But he was good enough for Uber.

Uber’s inadequate background check system has resulted in other lawsuits and led to several New York Times stories that portrayed Uber as cheap and negligent when it comes to background checks and safety, for allowing violent convicts to drive and ignoring customer complaints.

Instead of making safety improvements, Uber is making a political investment in the form of a ballot measure in California.

Uber’s initiative would protect negligent drivers in every type of motor vehicle accident case, which would benefit corporations and insurance companies to the tune of billions of dollars each year.

The proposed law also would limit victims’ medical recovery and their freedom to contract with an attorney who’ll stand up against the mega-billion-dollar corporation and its insurance companies.

Uber’s propaganda claims its initiative will protect people from “billboard lawyers,” but that’s far from the truth. Uber’s real goal is getting richer by dodging accountability and driving a wedge between victims and lawyers.

Here’s how Uber’s “evil genius plan” works. 

Most injury victims and families cannot afford a lawyer who bills by the hour. Contingency fee lawyers only get paid if they win and often invest years of work and hundreds of thousands of dollars of their own money into a case. 

Uber’s proposed law says victims must keep 75% of the “total recovery,” which sounds like 25% goes to pay their attorneys, but that’s not true. 

When accident victims need treatment and rehabilitation, providers treat them with the understanding they will be paid when the case is over, or “on a lien.” These medical bills are not recoverable costs under the initiative and would come out of the 25% that would fund the attorneys’ costs. 

That means in many serious injury cases, the more lawyers do to help clients get care, the less they’ll get paid. A $1 million serious injury settlement, for instance, could result in medical liens and bills exceeding $250,000, and the lawyers would get nothing.  

Uber’s law also makes it nearly impossible to find reputable doctors to provide treatment on a lien.

Creating even higher stakes, Uber has announced it would redeploy its self-driving cars and robotaxis on California roads in late 2026, after the election.  

In Arizona in 2018, an Uber robotaxi was the first to kill a pedestrian. The National Transportation Safety Board report said Uber had an “inadequate safety culture,” and noted the Uber vehicle’s system detected the pedestrian six seconds before impact but didn’t hit the brakes. The company had decreased the number of expensive sensors on the car before the accident.

“Fully autonomous vehicles would have to be driven hundreds of millions of miles and sometimes billions of miles to demonstrate their safety in terms of fatalities and injuries,” a report from RAND Corporation has said. Uber’s partner, Nuro, had only logged 210,540 miles in California, according to a 2024 DMV report. 

To be clear, Uber’s political strategy has nothing to do with helping people and everything to do with protecting itself and getting richer, just as it launches dangerous technology on California roads.   

Uber and its insurers could hire lawyers without limit and face no penalty for legal delays or frivolous defenses. 

Uber’s proposed law would give the corporation a license to kill, by making it next to impossible for most injury victims to get legal representation to match Uber’s lawyers — blocking fair access to our civil justice system when a person is hurt, maimed, or killed.

 

Read the entire article at Cal Matters.

Nick Rowley Named to Capitol Weekly’s Top 100 | TL4J

Nick Rowley Named to Capitol Weekly’s Top 100 | TL4J

Nick Rowley has been named to Capitol Weekly’s Top 100, a recognition that reflects not just professional success, but lasting impact on California law and public policy.

The annual Top 100 list highlights individuals who shape the state’s political and policy landscape in meaningful ways. Rowley’s inclusion underscores a career defined by strategic litigation, accountability, and a willingness to challenge entrenched systems when the stakes are high.

One of the most significant factors behind this recognition was Rowley’s role in the long-running fight to reform the Medical Injury Compensation Reform Act (MICRA). For decades, MICRA imposed a $250,000 cap on non-economic damages in medical malpractice cases, a limit that failed to reflect the true cost of catastrophic injuries suffered by patients and families.

While previous reform efforts repeatedly stalled, this time was different. Rowley helped drive a ballot initiative that fundamentally changed the negotiating dynamics. By creating real electoral pressure, the issue moved from political deadlock to actionable compromise. The result was a modernized framework that raised outdated caps and acknowledged the realities of medical harm in today’s economy.

What makes this outcome notable is not just the policy change itself, but how it was achieved. The strategy blended courtroom advocacy with public accountability, demonstrating how trial lawyers can influence systems far beyond individual cases. It was a reminder that meaningful reform often requires both legal precision and the courage to apply pressure where it counts.

For Trial Lawyers for Justice, this recognition reinforces a core principle: impact litigation is about more than verdicts. It is about restoring balance when laws no longer serve the people they were meant to protect. The MICRA reform effort stands as a clear example of how persistence, preparation, and principled advocacy can reshape long-standing policy.

Why This Matters

Reforming outdated damage caps directly affects access to justice for patients harmed by medical negligence. Raising those limits restores fairness, recognizes real human costs, and ensures accountability keeps pace with modern realities.

Source Note

This recognition was originally reported by Capitol Weekly.

Don’t sign Uber’s License to Kill petition

Don’t sign Uber’s License to Kill petition

Consumer Alert
This warning is issued to California voters regarding a proposed Uber-backed ballot initiative that could limit the rights of people injured by negligent or reckless conduct.

What This Alert Is About

Uber is once again asking the public to trust it with safety, accountability, and the future of transportation.

At the same time, Uber is circulating a ballot measure in California that would significantly reduce the rights of people injured in accidents to recover full medical costs and to hire an attorney on a contingency fee basis.

That combination should concern every voter.

What Happened Before

There is real video footage of an Uber self-driving vehicle killing a pedestrian in Arizona. This was not a hypothetical risk or a near miss. A person lost their life.

That incident is a reminder that new technology, especially autonomous vehicles, carries real and serious dangers when deployed without proper safeguards and accountability.

What Uber Is Planning Now

Uber has made clear that it plans to bring back self-driving cars and robo-taxis, beginning in the Bay Area in 2026 and expanding from there.

At the same time, the company is asking voters to sign a petition that would weaken legal protections for people harmed by negligent or reckless behavior.

The timing is not accidental.

What the Ballot Measure Would Do

If passed, Uber’s proposed ballot measure would:

  • Limit the ability of injured people to recover full medical costs

  • Make it harder for accident victims to hire attorneys on a contingency fee basis

  • Reduce legal accountability for corporations and reckless drivers

In plain terms, it would shift risk away from powerful companies and onto the people they injure.

Why This Matters

Access to medical care and access to the courts are not technical details. They are core protections that exist to hold corporations accountable when people are hurt.

This measure is being marketed as reform. In reality, it would function as a shield for corporations preparing to deploy risky technology while limiting the public’s ability to seek justice when something goes wrong.

Consumer advocates have rightly warned that this kind of measure creates a future where companies can act recklessly with reduced consequences.

That is why many are calling it what it is: a license to kill.

A Short Explainer on What’s at Stake

Consumer Watchdog has released a short explainer video outlining the risks posed by Uber’s proposed ballot measure and why it matters for California voters.

The video explains how Uber is preparing to bring back self-driving cars and robo-taxis while simultaneously supporting a ballot initiative that would limit the rights of people injured by negligent or reckless conduct.

Watch the explainer video here

This explainer provides essential context for understanding how this ballot measure could affect your access to medical recovery and legal representation if you or a loved one is harmed.

What Voters Should Do

If you are asked to sign this petition:

  • Stop

  • Do not rely on talking points or clipboards

  • Read the official, non-partisan title and summary prepared by the California Attorney General

Once legal rights are signed away, restoring them is extraordinarily difficult.

A Final Word

No company should be allowed to experiment with public safety while simultaneously cutting off the public’s right to accountability.

Don’t sign away your rights.
Don’t sign Uber’s ballot measure.
And don’t confuse innovation with immunity.

This consumer alert is provided for informational purposes only and is not legal advice.

 

Jury Awards Iowa Woman $19.8M in Mayo Clinic Malpractice Case

Jury Awards Iowa Woman $19.8M in Mayo Clinic Malpractice Case

KROC – AM | November 26, 2025

Jury Reaches Multimillion-Dollar Verdict

Ultimately, the lawsuit says Nelson underwent another series of operations at Mayo Clinic in an effort to correct the problems with her digestive organs. The lawsuit claimed that negligent care by Lightner caused Nelson to “suffer numerous other medical issues and problems, including severe scarring and disfigurement, pelvic floor disorder, fibromyalgia, post-traumatic stress disorder, and other medical complications.”

Read the entire article at KROC – AM.

Jury awards Iowa woman $19.8 million for “botched” Mayo Clinic surgery

Jury awards Iowa woman $19.8 million for “botched” Mayo Clinic surgery

Stephen Swanson | CBS NEWS | November 26, 2025

A jury has awarded an Iowa woman a $19.8 million verdict against Mayo Clinic and a colorectal surgeon in a lawsuit brought in Minnesota courts, according to her attorneys.

The Iowa-based Hixson & Brown Law Firm represented patient Linette Nelson, of Fort Dodge, Iowa. They alleged in a June 2018 procedure — the second in a series of three surgeries — Dr. Amy Lightner was supposed to move her entire rectum, but “botched a multi-stage operation” and “left 5-7 cm of diseased rectum inside her body.”

The suit alleged Lightner dismissed a CT scan that showed “a long rectal cuff” remained inside Nelson and “pushed ahead with the third surgery anyway,” according to attorneys.

A month later, Nelson was informed by Mayo that Lightner “is gone and we’re not sure if she’ll be back,” according to the law firm. The chief of colorectal surgery for Mayo, Dr. David Larson, then examined her and determined the surgeries needed to be redone, a process that took more than a year to complete.

The firm said the actions of Lightner, who now works in California, “left [Nelson] with permanent disfigurement, pelvic floor disorder, fibromyalgia, PTSD, and lifelong chronic pain.”

Court records show the verdict includes $3.7 million for pain and emotional distress, with another $12.1 million for her future emotional distress. The law firm said the monetary award for Nelson, a mother of two, “is expected to exceed $27 million” when adding in interest.

“The jury’s verdict speaks truth and justice: world-class reputations don’t excuse life-altering medical negligence,” said attorney LaMar Jost. “This verdict is a step toward accountability for a wife and mother who will suffer for the rest of her life because of medical negligence.”

A Mayo Clinic spokesperson gave this statement to WCCO on Wednesday morning: “Mayo Clinic respects the jury’s time and the judicial process, but is disappointed in the verdict. The organization will evaluate next steps while remaining steadfast in its commitment to providing the highest standards of care and patient outcomes.”

U.S. News and World Report recently named Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota, as one of the best hospitals in the country, and also named it the best hospital for diabetes, endocrinology, gastroenterology, and GI surgery.

Read the entire article at CBS NEWS.