Table of Contents:
- 2014 – Overturning The “No Pay, No Play” Statute
- 2015 – An International Lawsuit on Behalf of an Injured Child
- 2015 – Legal Protection for a Private Investigator
- 2019 – Saving a Client from Over 25 Years of Incarceration
- 2019 – Securing Freedom After 28 Years of Wrongful Incarceration
- 2020 – Securing the Right to a Jury Trial for all Oklahoma Residents
- 2021 – Standing Up for a Car Wreck Negligence Victim
- 2021 – Protecting an Exonerated Man from Police Misconduct
- 2022 – Securing the Largest Excessive Force Settlement in the Northern District of Oklahoma
- 2022 – Saving Client from At Least 10 More Years of Prison Time
Mr. Norwood has had success in several areas of litigation, including arguing personal injury cases in front of the Oklahoma Supreme Court, counsel in international product liability lawsuits and civil rights work like overturning wrongful convictions.
2014 – Overturning The “No Pay, No Play” Statute
In representing a client injured in an automobile collision, Mr. Norwood persuaded the Oklahoma Supreme Court to unanimously find a statute unconstitutional. The so-called “no pay, no play” statute was part of Oklahoma Governor Mary Fallin’s tort reform campaign platform when she ran for Governor.
The “no pay, no play” tort reform statute deprived victims of car wreck negligence of recovering for pain and suffering damages in court if they did not have auto insurance at the time they were victims of auto negligence.
Mr. Norwood’s automobile collision victim client was prevented from recovering for pain and suffering in court, so Mr. Norwood filed a declaratory judgment moving the courts to find the statute unconstitutional. The trial court and the Oklahoma Supreme Court agreed.
This decision allowed car accident injury victims in Oklahoma to be able to recover for pain and suffering when insurance companies would otherwise not have to pay victims. The consequences of this decision are felt every day and have allowed victims to recover many millions of dollars that would have been cut off to them if the law stood.
Montgomery v. Potter, 2014 OK 118, 341 P.3d 660 (2014)
2015 – An International Lawsuit on Behalf of an Injured Child
While representing a child who was run over by an automated lawn mower, Mr. Norwood sued the Italian manufacturer of the automated lawn mower on product liability grounds. Suing a foreign entity like a manufacturer is a complicated procedure provided for in the Hague Convention.
After successfully getting the Italian manufacturer into an Oklahoma Court and litigating the case, Mr. Norwood was able to secure a very favorable settlement for his client.
Tulsa County Case No. CJ-14-3069
2015 – Representation for a Private Investigator Against Their Business Insurance
Mr. Norwood represented a private investigator whose insurance company refused to cover a claim the investigator made with his business insurance. The private investigator was sued by a person who was being investigated because the investigator placed a GPS unit on the subject’s car.
After successfully getting the suit filed by the subject of the investigation dismissed, Mr. Norwood turned around and sued the private investigator’s business insurance company for bad faith and breach of contract for refusing to defend the lawsuit against the private investigator.
Mr. Norwood was able to secure a very favorable settlement for his private investigator client from his insurance company for refusing to handle the claim.
Tulsa County Case No. CJ-15-3822
2019 – Saving a Client from Over 25 Years of Incarceration
When representing a man charged with murder, Mr. Norwood was able to secure a verdict from a jury that saved his client 25 years of incarceration over what the charge carried and what the prosecutor offered as a plea deal.
Mr. Norwood’s client was found not guilty of two different theories of murder in the second degree, not guilty of assault with a deadly weapon, and was convicted of the lesser included charge of assault and battery.
Individuals convicted of assault and battery generally serve about one-third of their sentence, and those convicted of murder must serve at least 85% of their sentence. This reduction resulted in Mr. Norwood’s client doing 25 years less prison time than what the prosecutors were going for.
2019 – Securing Freedom After 28 Years of Wrongful Incarceration
In representing a man wrongfully convicted of murder, Mr. Norwood was able to prove his client’s innocence in a post-conviction proceeding, securing Mr. Norwood’s client’s freedom after 28 years of wrongful incarceration.
Mr. Norwood is now representing his client in a civil rights lawsuit against the City of Tulsa, Oklahoma, which deprived his client of his constitutional rights.
2020 – Securing the Right to a Jury Trial for all Oklahoma Residents
In representing a businessman who had cashier’s checks wrongfully dishonored and who was defamed by Bank of America, Mr. Norwood was able to persuade the Oklahoma Court of Civil Appeals to rule for the first time that Oklahoma residents cannot have their right to a jury trial deprived by contract.
This case dealt with a jury trial waiver in a bank deposit agreement, but due to this ruling, all waivers of jury trials in a contract are unlawful and not enforceable. Home Vest Capital v. Retirement Application Services, 2020 OK CIV APP 15, 466 P.3d 1
2021 – Standing Up for a Car Wreck Negligence Victim
When representing a car wreck negligence victim who was severely injured by an illegal immigrant construction worker who was hauling equipment for a construction company he worked for, as many lawyers do, Mr. Norwood encountered a trial judge who made an extremely misguided ruling.
The judge dismissed Mr. Norwood’s client’s case because the Court found the illegal immigrant construction worker was not within the scope of his employment with the construction company when the auto collision occurred.
Mr. Norwood appealed the dismissal, and the Oklahoma Court of Civil Appeals unanimously reversed the trial court’s dismissal and remanded the case back to the trial court for a jury trial.
The automobile collision case was settled very favorably for Mr. Norwood’s client after the Court of Civil Appeals remanded it back to trial court for jury trial.
2021 – Protecting an Exonerated Man from Police Misconduct
In representing a man accused of shooting with intent to kill, Mr. Norwood secured a not-guilty jury verdict. Mr. Norwood’s client had been wrongfully convicted in 1995 and was exonerated in 2016. Mr. Norwood’s client then filed a lawsuit against the City of Tulsa and the Tulsa police officers that were responsible for wrongfully convicting his client.
While the civil lawsuit was pending against the City of Tulsa and the Tulsa Police Officers Norwood’s client was charged with shooting with intent to kill. The new charge was weak and smelled of a setup. After Norwood thoroughly investigated the case, it became clear that Norwood’s client was innocent.
Norwood and his co-counsel, John Coyle, tried the case to a jury in May of 2021, and after five days of trial and 5 hours of jury deliberation, the jury rendered a not guilty verdict.
Part of the reason for the successful verdict was that the primary Tulsa Police Officer investigating the crime was discovered in the investigation not to be allowed to testify in federal court due to previous alleged misconduct.
The Monday following the jury verdict, which was rendered later the Friday night before, the lead investigator resigned from the Tulsa Police force.
Tulsa County Case No. CF-2019-3829
2022 – Securing the Largest Excessive Force Settlement in the Northern District of Oklahoma
When representing a family who had their son shot and killed by a local police officer Mr. Norwood and his co-counsel were able to secure a settlement that was one of the largest excessive force settlements ever in the jurisdiction.
Northern District of Oklahoma Case No. 18-cv-491
2022 – Saving Client from At Least 10 More Years of Prison Time
When representing a man accused of murder in the first degree, Mr. Norwood was able to secure a jury verdict of not guilty on the first-degree murder charge. Still, Mr. Norwood’s client was convicted of second-degree murder and sentenced to 20 years. The prosecutor offered a plea agreement for 30 years on a murder in the second degree, which carries a minimum of 85%.
A conviction on murder in the first degree carries life, which is calculated as 45 years at a minimum of 85% to serve, or life without parole. By securing a jury verdict of 20 years on second-degree murder, Mr. Norwood was able to save his client 10 or more years in prison.
Tulsa County Case No. No. CF-2020-4028.
Choose an Attorney Who Gets Results
Tulsa attorney Joe Norwood has proven his capabilities in the courtroom through years of dedication to his clients. Mr. Norwood handles personal injury, business, family, criminal defense and civil rights cases. If you’re interested in hiring an attorney with a track record of success, contact Norwood Law Firm for a free consultation on your unique case.