Litigation is a battle; a trial is a war. Jack’s philosophy in law as in life is best summed up by a quote of Winston Churchill: “Never give in. Never, Never, Never, Never.” That philosophy has served him well by giving him the drive to become a Junior Golden Gloves boxing champion, a third degree black belt in Shotokan Karate, and to receive the honor of Trial Lawyer of the Year.
For forty years, Jack Denove’s goal has been to become the best trial lawyer he can be. As a California trial attorney, Jack has tried more than 100 civil cases before a jury. He has been invited to and has lectured to both attorneys and physicians. These lectures include such topics as trial practice, medical malpractice, insurance bad faith, products liability and premises liability.
He holds the designation of Diplomate, the highest rank of the American Board of Trial Advocates. He is a past President of the Los Angeles chapter of the American Board of Trial Advocates. He is a past President of the Italian American Lawyers Association, a past President of the Consumer Attorneys Association of Los Angeles and a past President of the Cowboy Lawyers Association. He has been on the Board of Governors and on the Executive Committee of numerous trial lawyer associations, including the Litigation Section of the Los Angeles County Bar Association and the Consumer Attorneys of California.
He has been formally recognized as one of the attorneys who assisted the task force in the preparation of the Judicial Council of California CACI jury instructions. He is a member and was appointed to serve a two year term on the Judicial Council of California’s Civil and Small Claims Advisory committee. Advisory committees are standing advisory groups created by rule of court or the Chief Justice to make recommendations and offer policy alternatives to the Judicial Council for improving the administration of justice within their designated areas of focus.
Jack has been selected by the Consumer Attorneys Association of Los Angeles as a prestigious member of the Plaintiff Trial Academy (PTA) Faculty to teach trial practice to other attorneys. Jack is highly respected by other attorneys and has received several public endorsements and referrals from other attorneys.
As a medical malpractice attorney, Jack has successfully represented clients for over 35 years throughout California in several types of medical malpractice and medical negligence cases, including wrongful death, birth injuries, misdiagnosis, surgical errors, emergency room errors, medication errors, nursing errors and other types of medical negligence.
Jack has helped clients whose insurance claims have been wrongfully denied, or their insurance coverage canceled without merit. When an insurance company is sued for bad faith, it has the money to hire the best defense attorneys. Jack believes the victim of insurance bad faith has the right to an attorney with at least as much experience. With his knowledge of insurance practice, Jack levels the playing field for his clients by aggressively defending his client’s rights. He and his partners and associates have successfully handled insurance bad faith cases against numerous insurance companies.
He was selected by his peers to be included in The Best Lawyers in America, in the specialty of Personal Injury Litigation. He is recognized as one of the Top 500 Plaintiff Attorneys in the United States by LawDragon. The Los Angeles Trial Lawyers Association voted Jack as Trial Lawyer of the Year. He has also been selected to the list of Super Lawyers of Southern California every year since 2005. He is rated AV Preeminent by Martindale- Hubbell.*
He has received recognition from the Members of Congress of the United States of America, California Senate, the California Legislature, the Los Angeles Superior Court, the County of Los Angeles, the City of Los Angeles, the Los Angeles County District Attorney, the Los Angeles City Attorney, the Los Angeles County Bar Association, the Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department and the Metropolitan News Enterprise.
Jack has received the Consumer Attorneys of California Presidential Award of Merit in 1994, 1996 and 2000, and the Pollock Award in 2006. He has received the Consumer Attorney’s Association of Los Angeles Trial Lawyer of the Year Award, Presidential Award in 1995 and 2008, and the Ted Horn Memorial Award in 2001.
Despite his numerous individual accomplishments and awards, Jack believes the best interest of the client is served by a solid team effort by all of the attorneys and staff of the law firm.
Jack received his bachelor’s degree from UCLA and his juris doctor degree from Loyola University School of Law School. He is admitted to practice law in the State of California. His interests outside the practice of law include horseback riding, painting and boxing.
Cheong, Denove, Rowell & Bennett has the extensive resources to handle the most complex legal matters, yet is small enough to offer individualized service to our clients.
At Cheong, Denove, Rowell & Bennett we believe the more you know, the better choice you will make.
After selecting a jury, John Rowell and John Denove successfully settled a products liability case against a major tire manufacturer. Mr. Rowell contended the yen year old tire had suffered a tread separation on the freeway and was then rear-ended by a big-rig. He further contended that as a result of the tread separation and the pick-ups lack of stability, the vehicle rolled over at freeway speeds, causing serious injuries to the client. After the accident, examination of the tire which came apart showed it had sufficient tread and did not exhibit any unusual wear patterns. John took depositions of key tire engineers and tire plant manager level employees of the tire manufacturer, and was able to show, using the manufacturer’s own documents and tire x-rays, that the tire contained manufacturing defects and was badly designed. John retained nationally renowned experts who were prepared to testify that the design and manufacturing defects were the cause of the tread separation. Using the pick-up manufacturer’s internal documents and publicly available materials regarding design of the front axle of trucks and pick-up trucks, John was also able to show the front axle and front steering design made the vehicle extremely difficult to control in the event of a tread separation. Prior to the start of trial Mr. Rowell, during the course of investigation of this case, discovered that the automobile manufacturer had used a design which decreased roof strength. Mr. Rowell secured experts that would have testified that the roof design was the cause of a collapse of the roof over one of his client and made her injuries worse. He was able to settle with the automobile manufacturer before starting trial against the tire manufacturer.
John Rowell and John Denove commenced trial in a products liability case against a major tire manufacturer. Mr. Rowell contended that the tire has suffered a tread separation causing the vehicle to lose control on the freeway. The vehicle was then struck by a big rig. Mr. Rowell asserted that tire was both defectively designed and manufactured. The tire manufacturer contended that it was not a fault and that the tire failed because it was more than 10 years old. Mr. Rowell’s tire expert established that the tire had less than 20,000 miles of wear and that the seller of the tire had represented that these tires were safe if there was adequate tread left on the tire. Before trial Mr. Rowell settled with the driver of the big rig who negligently failed to avoid striking the disabled car. After Mr. Denove conducted his Voir Dire and the jury was selected, the tire manufacturer settled the case. The injured client sustained a traumatic brain injury. The tire manufacturer argued that although she had suffered brain injury, her brain was much improved and would continue to improve. Mr. Denove had prepared the following medical illustrations that refuted the tire manufacturer’s claim.
John Denove was appointed to serve a two year term on the Judicial Council of California’s Civil and Small Claims Advisory committee. Advisory committees are standing advisory groups created by rule of court or the Chief Justice to make recommendations and offer policy alternatives to the Judicial Council for improving the administration of justice within their designated areas of focus.
Justice Day – John Denove traveled to Sacramento and met with a number of Assemblypersons and Senators to discuss upcoming legislation which impacts consumers and litigants.
Mr. Denove spoke at the Beverly Hills Bar Association on the topic of “Evidence.”
Mr. Denove was a speaker at the recent CAALA annual convention on the topic: “Mirroring to Build Rapport with Judges, Jurors and Witnesses.”
Mr. Denove was a speaker on “Proving Causation and Overcoming Defenses In Medical Malpractice Cases” at the recent CAOC annual convention.
Mr. Denove is a past president of CAALA and a recipient of their Trial lawyers of the Year Award. Mr. Denove is on CAALA’s Board of Governors and chairs the Governmental Relations Committee.
John Denove received acknowledgement from the Advocate the Journal of Consumer Attorneys Associations for Southern California and Plaintiff , the magazine for Northern California plaintiffs’ attorneys, for his article, “Mirror, Mirror on the Wall.”
John F. Denove attended the reception for the Super Lawyers. John F. Denove was selected to be included on the list of Southern California Super Lawyers, an award for legal excellence earned by only 5 percent of lawyers in the state.
John Denove received the Consumer Attorneys of California (CAOC) Award of Merit in recognition of his work to reform the injustices of MICRA.
John Denove was again selected as one of the Southern California Top Rated Lawyers.
John Denove was again selected as one of Los Angeles’ Best Lawyers by Best Lawyers in America.
The result of any case depend upon a variety of factors unique to each case; and case results listed on this page do not guarantee or predict a similar result in any future case undertaken by the this firm or any of its attorneys or associates.
Our attorneys are licensed to practice in the State of California.
* The materials appearing on this website are provided for informational use only, and are in no way intended to constitute legal advice of this law firm or any of its attorneys. Our website has been designed for informational purposes and should not cause you to form an expectation about the results that you may achieve based upon your potential legal claim or issue.
The AV Preeminent rating is issued by Martindale-Hubbell, www.martindale.com. The Best Lawyer rating is issued by US News & World Report, website bestlawfirms.usnews.com. The SuperLawyers.list is issued by Thomson Reuters. Lawdragon 500 is chosen from a combination of submissions from law firms; votes and comments through our online voting form; and their own editorial research, which remains the most important factor in their selection process. Lawdragon.com. Lawyers are not required or allowed to pay a fee to be listed. These designations are based upon the proprietary analysis of each awarding organization. Lawyers are not required or allowed to pay a fee to be listed. A listing does not guarantee a desired legal result. Description of the selection methodology for each award can be found on the award providers websites.
Civil Rights Lawsuit:
John Denove and Shane Hapuarachy tried a Federal Civil Rights/Section 1983 case involving a claim of excessive force against the LAPD regarding a fatal shooting. The jury found in favor of the mother of the deceased. (LA Times)
Mr. Denove tried a medical malpractice action against Citrus Valley Medical Center. The client was co-administered antibiotics through an IV line. She developed complex regional pain disorder, myofascial pain disorder and chronic pain syndrome. The Hospital denied any wrongdoing, denied causation and disputed the nature and extent of the damages. After a three week trial, the jury found in favor of the injured client. The image above is one of the trial exhibits used by trial attorney, Mr. Denove.
Mr. Denove tried a forklift accident case. The client claimed that the forklift operator negligently struck him when he was in a cargo area. He suffered carpal tunnel syndrome, aggravated a pre-existing degenerative spine condition and developed a piriformis syndrome. He eventually underwent a piriformis/pudendal surgery. Despite the fact that their client did not complain of any back or piriformis complaints for 53 days, they were successful at trial. One of the exhibits prepared for trial is shown above.
After beginning trial in Long Beach, Mr. Denove settled a negligence case against Burger King for a injury wherein his 74 year old client broke her neck while leaving the restaurant. As part of the settlement, Burger King agreed to make the premises wheelchair accessible. In addition, Mr. Denove was able to negotiate the right to pursue an Unruh Civil Rights Act violation in arbitration for discrimination against his client who was denied wheelchair access. Mr. Denove contends that the failure to provide wheelchair access as required by the California Building Code was the cause of her injury. Burger King alleged that Mr. Denove’s client did not fracture her neck in the fall but had suffered from a chronic neck fracture for years. A comparison of x-rays taken before and after the fall disproved this defense.
Mr. Denove settled two medical malpractice lawsuits against the United States of America. The clients are veterans. They went to the VA for treatment for macular edema. The doctors intended to treat the condition with Avastin. Each of them had injections into their eye but instead of Avastin, Velcade (a chemotherapy drug) was injected. Both men sustained serious loss of vision. A lawsuit was filed in federal court. A equitable settlement was reached. A third veteran was also mistakenly injected with Velcade. His case is scheduled to go to trial in the United States District Court in June.