Contact Lanny Vines & Associates, LLC in Alabama to speak with a personal injury, medical malpractice, or wrongful death lawyer today.

PO BOX 361138
Birmingham, Alabama 35236-1138

Ph. (205) 933-1277

If you would like to receive the Lanny Vines Litigation Group quarterly newsletter, fill out the form below and click "Subscribe".

To unsubscribe:
Send an email to with the subject "Unsubscribe Newsletter" and the email address you wish to unsubscribe in the body of the message.

Alabama Wrongful Death and Personal Injury Lawyer Lanny Vines Gets Results

Our years of legal experience have allowed us to secure some of the biggest settlements in Alabama history.  From product liability and personal injury cases to wrongful death, lawyer Lanny Vines handles all types of, and always goes the extra mile for his clients.  Finding a personal injury lawyer who provides aggressive legal representation can be hard, but you can trust Birmingham’s Lanny Vines to obtain the kind of positive results that you deserve.  Below are just a few of the many success stories we have been a part of. 


Plaintiff’s wife was a passenger in her sport utility vehicle when its left rear tire suffered a tread seperation.  The tread seperation caused the driver of the vehicle to loose control and the vehicle to roll over several times on the highway ejecting and killing Plaintiff’s wife.  Plaintiff sued the defendant company which had negligently repaired the subject tire months before the crash. 


  • $12,500,000 VERDICT IN TANKER TRUCK CRASH-  Anderson v. Schneider National, Inc., et al., Jefferson Co. AL, CV-03-5753

Defendant tank truck driver blacked out for a few seconds as he was approaching a red light where the plaintiff’s husband was stopped. When the truck driver regained consciousness, he slammed on his brakes but failed to stop before, or otherwise avoid, killing the plaintiff’s husband. The truck driver had a long history of chronic health problems that made his blackout absolutely predictable.  Schneider possessed and actually reviewed ten years of the driver’s DOT exams evidencing these health problems.  Despite this knowledge Schneider allowed their driver to operate their tanker truck.  Schneider also failed to properly train the driver in the proper handling of tanker trucks, including emergency maneuvers that may have prevented the crash.  Shortly after the jury returned its verdict, the case was settled for a confidential amount.

If you have lost a loved one in an auto or truck accident, contact Alabama wrongful death lawyer Lanny Vines today.  We have the resources necessary to provide your family with aggressive legal representation and help get you the compensation you deserve.

Learn more about truck accidents and see whether you have a case. 

  • $2,500,000 VERDICT IN MOTORCYCLE CRASH AGAINST UNDERINSURED MOTORIST INSURER- Shari Tyler v. Progressive American Insurance, et. al, Calhoun Co. AL, CV-05-566

Plaintiff’s husband was killed while riding his motorcycle when a car attempting to make a left turn pulled out in front of him.  The at-fault motorist’s insurer tendered its limits prior to trial, as did the primary underinsured motorist insurer which held a policy on the motorcycle.  A second underinsured motorist insurer settled prior to trial for a confidential amount.  The third underinsured motorist insurer, Progressive, defended at trial solely on damages.  Under Alabama law Progressive was entitled to a credit for all moneys paid by the other insurers.  The verdict was sufficient to collect the limits of available insurance from Progressive.

Learn more about motorcycle accidents and see whether you have a case.


Plaintiff’s wife was driving her full-size sport utility vehicle when she was cut off in traffic by another motorist.  When plaintiff’s wife attempted to avoid this other vehicle, her SUV, because of its inherent instability, rolled on the highway.  Plaintiff’s wife was ejected and killed during the rollover.  The defendant failed to equip the subject vehicle with electronic stability control, which would have prevented the rollover, despite the fact that they had installed this technology in other similar vehicles prior to the subject vehicle’s manufacture.  The defendant also failed to utilize the decades-old technology of laminated safety glass in the passenger windows of the vehicle even though it knew of its importance in preventing ejections during rollovers and had installed it in previous SUV models.   

If you or a loved one has been injured in an auto accident or by a defective product, don't hesitate to contact Alabama personal injury lawyer Lanny Vines.  He has years of experience in litigating these types of complicated cases and can help you obtain the results you deserve.   

  • $12,500,000 SETTLEMENT FOR GIRLS ABUSED WHILE IN THE CUSTODY OF THE ALABAMA DEPARTMENT OF YOUTH SERVICES- Hoover, et. al. v. Zeigler, et. al., Jefferson Co., AL, CV-02-0314; Campbell, et. al. v. the Alabama Department of Youth Services, et. al., USDC No Dist. Ala, CV-01-1433.

The firm’s attorneys represented 35 young women who were sexually abused as children at the Alabama Department of Youth Services Chalkville Campus.  Claims were brought in State and Federal Court under Title IX and Section 1983.  


Lanny Vines & Associates, LLC attorneys achieved a settlement well in excess of eight figures for a 45-year-old client who suffered amputations of portions of all four of her limbs as a result of her reaction to an influenza (“flu”) vaccination. The vaccine manufacturer knew that vasculitis was a known autoimmune response to the influenza vaccination.  It also knew that vasculitis was particularly hazardous to those with compromised immune systems like the Plaintiff, who lost her spleen in a prior auto accident. Despite this knowledge, the defendant’s package insert disclaimed any causal relationship between their flu shot and vasculitis and did not warn medical professionals with regard to administering it to individuals with compromised immune systems.  Plaintiff’s treating physician testified that he would have provided the plaintiff with information and advice about this serious risk had the defendant’s package insert adequately warned about it.  Plaintiff testified that had she been provided with such information, she would not have agreed to the flu shot.

  • $1,725,000 SETTLEMENT IN TRUCK CRASH- Deramus v. P&S Transportation, Inc., Jefferson Co. AL, CV-05-4030, 4031 & 4556

A tractor trailer loaded with steel plates crossed the median and traveled nearly five miles on the wrong side of I-65 before colliding head-on with the plaintiff’s vehicle, causing injuries to the three occupants. The crash was the result of the trucking company's failure to ensure their driver's compliance with the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administrations Hours of Service regulations limiting driving time. The three plaintiff's medical bills combined totaled approximately $100,000. 


Defendant driver crashed into the rear portion of Plaintiff’s vehicle as Plaintiff was crossing the northbound lanes of a state highway. Plaintiff was attempting to reach the median of the highway so that she could then turn left. Defendants claimed that Plaintiff was contributorily negligent in crossing the highway without determining whether it was safe to do so. The Defendant driver testified that he never saw the Plaintiff before crashing into her, despite the fact that he had adequate time and distance to have seen and avoided her. Eye-witnesses to the crash testified that defendant never braked or tried to maneuver into the empty right lane. Plaintiff’s accident reconstruction expert testified that, had defendant done either of these things, he would have avoided crashing into the Plaintiff. Although eye-witness testimony was conflicting Plaintiff established that the Defendant was speeding at the time of the crash. Defendant’s cell phone records explained why he never saw and made no effort to avoid Plaintiff. These records revealed that Defendant was on the phone with one of his employer’s customers at the time of the crash. Defendants’ argued that the phone records showed a gap of several minutes between the last phone call and the first 911 call reporting the crash and that, therefore, Defendant was not on the phone. Plaintiff proved through discovery that, while the times on the cell phone company’s records were admittedly inaccurate by as much as a few minutes, the 911 call center’s clock was accurate and that therefore; the cell phone records, the 911 call records and the circumstances of the crash proved that Defendant was distracted by his cell phone use. Plaintiff also retained a human factors expert who has done many studies on cell phone use and driving. He opined that the circumstances of the crash were consistent with a driver distracted by cell phone use and supported the conclusion that Defendant driver was on the phone at the time of the crash. Plaintiff suffered a cervical spine injury that left her permanently disabled. Defendant driver was working for his employer at the time of the crash.


Plaintiff’s father, a tractor trailer driver, lost control of his truck and rode along the top of a concrete median barrier. At the end of the barrier was a crash cushion which had been carelessly installed by Defendants approximately twelve hours earlier . The crash cushion required a guard or “transition” piece be attached to protect people approaching the sides of its sharp metal frame from the rear. Defendants failed to attach this known needed safety device despite the fact that it was required by the device’s installation manual. Plaintiff acknowledged that the deceased was speeding at the time of the crash and that he lost control of his vehicle. Plaintiff argued, however, that the decedent and all motorists are entitled to a forgiving roadside. Defendants’ expert recognized that up to one-third of all highway fatalities are caused by vehicles running off the road and impacting objects in the median or on the roadside and that the people who work on our roads recognize this risk. Defendants argued that decedent’s speed in heavy fog was the sole cause of his death. They denied that the installation was negligent, argued that he would have died even had they installed it properly, and claimed that being cut in half by the crash cushion was not what killed him. The jury assigned the decedent twenty-five percent fault under Tennessee’s comparative fault law.


Plaintiff’s decedent had been involved in a minor accident that left his vehicle stranded in the middle of an interstate highway. The Defendant tractor trailer driver loss control of his vehicle when a co-defendant impacted his truck trying to avoid decedent’s stalled vehicle. The tractor trailer then struck decedent’s vehicle where it was stalled in the interstate. Plaintiff alleged that the defendant truck driver was speeding as he approached the prior accident, that he failed to sufficiently reduce his speed to avoid decedent’s vehicle, and that he failed to account for the co-defendant’s vehicle despite his superior view of the prior accident. Plaintiff also made direct claims against the truck driver’s employer. The Defendant truck driver and his employer argued that decedent was contributorily negligent because he allegedly caused the prior minor accident and that the co-defendant was the cause of the fatal crash. The case settled during trial.

Contact Our Wrongful Death Lawyer

If you have lost a loved one in Alabama due to wrongful death or have a personal injury claim, lawyer Lanny Vines can help.  Contact Lanny Vines & Associates, LLC today for aggressive legal representation in your personal injury case.

back to top