Michael M. Becker, II - Vernis & Bowling

Michael M. Becker, II, Esq.
Attorney
Vernis & Bowling of Atlanta, LLC 30 Perimeter Park Drive, Suite 200 Atlanta, GA 30341
Phone: (404) 846-2001
Email: MBecker@Georgia-Law.com
Fax: (404) 846-2002
Website: www.national-law.com
V-Card Email LinkedIn

Verdicts and Dispositions

Brooke Donahue v. Nancy Vidal
Michael Becker (Atlanta, GA) (UM/UIM) obtained Summary Judgment on behalf of an uninsured/underinsured motorist carrier in the State Court of Gwinnett County, Georgia.

Plaintiff alleged general damages and over $100,000.00 in medical special damages, including shoulder surgery, from a motorcycle crash. According to the Plaintiff, the defendant made a U-turn in front of her and she could not stop her motorcycle in time, rear-ending the defendant. The defendant denied liability. Plaintiff sought benefits from her uninsured/underinsured motorist carrier.

At Summary Judgment, the uninsured motorist carrier argued that the Plaintiff failed to give prompt notice of the accident as required by the terms of her policy because her first notice was service of the suit almost two years later. Plaintiff countered that 1. she notified the uninsured motorist carrier five months after the accident, introducing a letter she purportedly sent but the carrier never received; 2. that the uninsured motorist carrier waived its right to contest coverage by not reserving its rights before answering; 3. that the uninsured motorist carrier was not prejudiced by the late notice; and 4. She was not aware of her underinsured status until over two years after the accident.

The uninsured motorist carrier argued in response that because the uninsured motorist carrier never received the letter, it never received notice, but that regardless five months was not prompt; that uninsured motorist carriers are not required to reserve rights before defending themselves in a suit; that the dissipation of evidence and fading of witnesses’ memories prejudiced it; and that the plaintiff knew she was underinsured within days of the accident, as evidenced by her notice to a separate uninsured motorist carrier three days after the accident.

The Court agreed and granted Summary Judgment to the uninsured motorist carrier.
Brittney Slade v. Eric Branam and Lori Branam
Kimberly Sheridan, Michael Becker and law clerk, Turner LaFiandra-McCall (Atlanta, GA) (Premises Liability) obtained Summary Judgment in the State Court of Hall County, Georgia. Plaintiff fell down Defendants’ stairs and alleged that the stairs posed a hazard.

The Plaintiff filed suit on a premises liability theory, claiming that she sustained injuries after falling down the stairs at Defendant’s Airbnb rental. In her deposition, Plaintiff stated that she took off her shoes and socks and walked up the stairs barefoot after entering the house, admitting they she placed her feet on each step and looked at the steps while walking up them with her luggage. When descending the stairs, Plaintiff did not use the handrail, lost her footing approximately halfway down and fell. Plaintiff alleged that the stairs were a static hazardous condition in that they were too steep and not compliant with building codes, alleging in her complaint only that there was “…a dangerous condition (to wit: unsafe stairs).” Plaintiff also paid an expert to inspect the stairs and draft a report.

First, the Defense argued that that Plaintiff was on notice of any alleged hazard because she traversed the stairs prior to her fall. Second, the Defense argued that the Plaintiff could not maintain her claim because there was no evidence the Defendants had knowledge of an alleged hazard. Third, the Defense argued that there was no competent evidence on whether a hazard existed. Last, the Defense argued that an alleged hazard was open and obvious to the Plaintiff. There is no duty to warn of the obvious.

The court granted the motion and entered Judgment in favor of the Defense.
Timothy and Jackie Palmer v. Lanier Residential, Inc., JFM Plumbing, NGA, LLC, and LR Plumbing, LLC.
Michael Becker (Atlanta, GA) (Negligence/Property Damage) obtained Summary Judgment on behalf of a defendant plumbing company in the State Court of Forsyth County, Georgia.

The Plaintiffs sought over $250,000.00 in damages, plus attorney’s fees, relating to allegedly negligent plumbing performed during a home remodel. Subcontractors not named as defendants in the suit installed a manifold in the master bathroom. The following night, excessive water pressure caused a factory-installed temporary plastic cap to blow off, resulting in significant water damage. Plaintiffs argued that the Defendants knew or should have known that the house water pressure exceeded code and turned the water off prior to leaving. However, Plaintiffs’ expert testified that an undersized and failed expansion tank plumbed to the water heaters, all of which pre-dated the Plaintiffs purchase of the residence, caused the excessive pressure. None of the named Defendants or the unnamed subcontractors were engaged or asked to perform any inspections or repairs relating to the water heaters, expansion tank, or water pressure.

At Summary Judgment, Defendants argued that the subcontractors were independent contractors and therefore Defendants were not liable for their negligence. Defendants further argued that Georgia law does not impose a duty upon plumbers to inspect, repair, or warn beyond the work for which they are hired. Plaintiffs argued in response that Defendants were liable based upon statutory exceptions imposing liability where the work is wrongful in itself and where the wrongful conduct violates a duty imposed by an express contract. As to the first argument, Defendants replied that the exception only applies when the contract itself calls for wrongful conduct, not when an independent contractor commits a wrongful act beyond the terms of the contract. As to the second argument, Defendants replied that the exception only applies where the contract contains an express provision that the principal will be liable for the conduct of its independent contractors. The only contract in the record, Defendants argued, contained no such provision, and further, the parties executed it after the occurrence and water damage at issue, so it did not govern the previous work.

The Court agreed and granted Summary Judgment to the Defendants.
Jane Doe v. Stablegold Hospitality, LLC, Affordable Hotel, LLC, and Taurus Protection Agency, LLC
Michael Becker and Kimberly Sheridan (Atlanta, GA) (Premises Liability/Negligent Security) obtained a Dismissal in the State Court of DeKalb County. Plaintiff was assaulted outside of a hotel and her room was robbed.

The Defense argued that there was no evidence of Plaintiff’s room being robbed because Plaintiff was unconscious at the alleged time, that Plaintiff’s security expert affidavit was based on uncertified or unsworn police reports that were not produced, and that the same affidavit failed to show proximate cause because it only contained summary legal conclusions about foreseeability rather than examining any role of the defendant’s security failures. The Defense also pointed out that Plaintiff’s other expert affidavit only spoke to how Plaintiff’s memory could be affected by trauma, which impermissibly served as an expert opinion on how credible the Plaintiff was.

Last, the Defense argued that even if improvements were made that it would not have prevented the acts, pointing out that Plaintiff forgetting to lock her door or her invitation of the perpetrators inside were equally (if not more) likely to be the case with what little evidence the Plaintiff presented. The only evidence the jury would have considered would be impermissible speculation regarding security failures.

The court granted the motion and entered judgment in favor of the Defense.
Qur’an Abdul Khaliq v. Office Depot
Michael Becker and Kimberly Sheridan (Atlanta, GA) (Premises Liability/Slip and Fall) obtained a Dismissal in Federal Court. Plaintiff Qur’an Abdul Khaliq filed suit for injuries allegedly sustained in a slip and fall at Office Depot. She alleged a concussion, alleged a brain injury, and injuries to her teeth and knee and claimed damages for lost income, medical expenses, and pain and suffering.

Plaintiff filed suit shortly before the statute of limitations and failed to correctly serve the complaint until after it expired. After removing to federal court, the Defense filed a motion to dismiss based on defective service and the statute of limitations. The Court granted the motion and entered judgment in favor of the Defense.
Smith v. Cornelius, et. al.
Kimberly Sheridan and Michael Becker (Atlanta, GA) (Commercial Auto) obtained Summary Judgment for an employer in a commercial automobile claim. Following a serious motor vehicle accident, Plaintiff/passenger Kelsey Smith filed a lawsuit against the driver of her vehicle, Keegan Lenderman, and the driver of the other involved vehicle, George Cornelius. Smith and Lenderman both alleged significant injuries in the crash. Plaintiff also sued, and Lenderman likewise crossclaimed against Elite Comfort Solutions, which they alleged employed Cornelius at the time of the accident. Discovery revealed that Elite retained Mr. Cornelius, an Illinois attorney, to be their outside general counsel as an independent contractor. At the close of discovery counsel moved for Summary Judgment arguing that Mr. Cornelius was not their employee but rather an independent contractor, and therefore Elite was not responsible for his conduct under a vicarious liability theory. Following extensive briefing and oral arguments, Judge Shawn Bratton concluded that Cornelius was not Elite’s employee as clearly set out in his retainer agreement and granted Elite’s motion for Summary Judgment. Plaintiff and crossclaim plaintiff did not appeal.
Cooks v. Holt, et. al.
Kimberly Sheridan and Michael Becker (Atlanta, GA) (Commercial Auto) obtained a Dismissal for youth group Young Life in a bus crash case. Plaintiff Medgar Cooks was driving Young Life Campers in a chartered bus when it broke down. His chartering company sent a relief driver from a separate bus chartering company, Travis Holt, who picked up Plaintiff and the campers and drove them to Young Life’s camp in Jasper, Georgia. After unloading the campers, Holt crashed the bus with Plaintiff inside as a passenger, allegedly causing him injuries. Plaintiff sued Young Life on the theory that Holt was its employee and/or agent. However, counsel’s investigation revealed that Young Life’s relationship to all of the other parties in the case was that of an independent contractor, and Holt was an independent contractor of another independent contractor, further insulating Young Life from liability. Counsel sent to the plaintiff a frivolous and abusive litigation warning threatening to seek damages and fees if the Complaint was not dismissed within 30 days. Counsel simultaneously sent a statutory offer of settlement pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 9-11-68 in the amount of $50.00; and filed a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. Thanks to an aggressive up-front defense, Plaintiff opted to dismiss his case against Young Life voluntarily rather than risk an award of attorney’s fees and expenses under O.C.G.A. § 9-11-68 or a subsequent abusive litigation suit.
Spaine v. Kiwec Storage
Michael Becker (Atlanta, GA) (General Liability) obtained a Defense Verdict in a lawsuit alleging Kiwec Self-Storage improperly auctioned the contents of Anne Spaine’s storage unit following her failure to make monthly rental payments. The evidence at trial revealed Spaine regularly let her account fall into delinquency for several months at a time, and then she would pay to bring her account current just before auction. However, she did not notify Kiwec of an address change and so after letting her account go delinquent for several months, the contents of her storage unit were sold at auction. Spaine alleged she was not notified of the date of an auction sale and therefore that Kiwec failed to give the proper statutory notice of the auction date and time because they sent the notice to her old address. However, at trial the court determined that under her written contract Spaine had the obligation to give written notice of her address change, which she failed to do, and entered a verdict for the defense. Plaintiff did not appeal.
Siegel v. Segal
Kimberly Sheridan and Michael Becker (Atlanta, GA) (Premises Liability) obtained a Dismissal for homeowner Katherine Segal in a dog-bite case. According to the allegations of Plaintiff Siegel’s complaint, Ms. Segal re-homed her dog, Scout, to a new owner, Kristina Thrower. Five months later, Plaintiff Siegel was visiting Thrower’s home when Scout allegedly bit her in the face, allegedly causing injuries and scarring. Plaintiff Siegel sued Scout’s former owner, Defendant Segal, on a dog-bite/failure to warn theory. Counsel filed a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. Counsel argued that under O.C.G.A. § 51-2-7, which governs liability for owners or keepers of dogs, liability lies only against the current owner or keeper of a dog, not against former owners or keepers. Rather than respond to the motion, Plaintiff dismissed her lawsuit. Plaintiff did not renew the suit and the dismissal is therefore final
Bucher v. Pace
Michael Becker (Atlanta, GA) (UM/UIM) obtained a Dismissal for MGA Insurance Company, a purported underinsured motorist carrier. Plaintiff Danielle Bucher, a Tennessee resident, was involved in a collision in Georgia with a Georgia driver. She obtained the $25,000 liability policy limits from the Georgia driver. She then attempted to obtain $25,000 in underinsured motorist benefits from MGA by filing suit against the driver in Georgia. Counsel filed a Motion to Dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. Counsel argued that because Tennessee law, not Georgia law, governs the insurance policy, there was no additional underinsured motorist coverage. Georgia follows the doctrine of lex loci contractus, which means that although the crash occurred in Georgia, interpretation of an uninsured/underinsured motorist policy is governed by the law of the state in which it was written and delivered, in this case Tennessee. Under Tennessee law, (unlike Georgia law) there is no “add-on” underinsured motorist coverage, and the UM/UIM carrier is entitled to offset any liability coverages/payments against the UM/UIM coverage. Therefore, counsel argued, MGA provided no further UM/UIM coverage over the $25,000 plaintiff had already received from the liability carrier. Plaintiff failed to respond to the motion and the court dismissed the lawsuit with prejudice.
Dycus v. Member Select Insurance Company
Kimberly Sheridan and Michael Becker (Atlanta, GA) (Commercial Auto/Coverage) obtained Dismissal of a direct action against MemberSelect Insurance Company in a commercial motor vehicle claim. Plaintiff alleged he was injured by Reverend Gaines, who was returning from a religious conference and pulling a trailer of parishioners’ luggage and insured by an MSIC personal lines policy. Plaintiff alleged that because his vehicle and trailer together exceeded 10,000 pounds, and because he was operating his vehicle “for hire,” Rev. Gaines was a motor carrier and filed a direct action against MSIC. Plaintiff refused a tender of the policy limits, opting instead to advance a novel theory that MSIC should have known that their insured would be, at times, a motor carrier and therefore should have sold him a commercial liability auto policy with the statutorily required limits rather than a personal lines policy. Following discovery counsel moved for summary judgment arguing that if Rev. Gaines was “for hire,” coverage was wholly excluded by the business use exclusion in his personal lines policy; alternatively, if he was not “for hire,” then he did not meet the statutory definition of a motor carrier and therefore a direct action against MSIC was not authorized by law. Faced with committing to either position, Plaintiff dismissed MSIC.
Martin v. Garcia
Michael Becker (Atlanta, GA) obtained a dismissal with prejudice on behalf of Mercury Insurance Company in the matter of Martin v. Garcia. Plaintiff Carola Martin alleged she sustained injuries in a motor vehicle accident with an uninsured driver and served her insurance carrier, Mercury Insurance Company, seeking uninsured motorist benefits. After plaintiff failed to respond to written discovery for over ten months, the trial court on Mercury’s motion dismissed the plaintiff’s case with prejudice and assessed attorney’s fees against her and in Mercury’s favor as sanctions for her noncompliance.
DIRECTV, LLC, v. White (Appeal)
Michael Becker (Atlanta, GA) (Premises Liability Appeal) Plaintiff Angela White sued her satellite service provider on a premises liability theory after she tripped and fell over wires in her bedroom. During her deposition, Plaintiff testified that she knew about the wires prior to tripping over them, they were visible and out in the open, and that the morning of the incident she jumped up out of bed and ran to the bathroom without looking, tripping over the wires on the way. She also testified that the fall took place more than two years before she filed her complaint, making her claims untimely. Following discovery, DIRECTV moved for Summary Judgment, arguing that the statute of limitations barred her claims; that the hazard was open and obvious; that Plaintiff failed to exercise ordinary care for her own safety; and that an independent contractor installed the wires, and so DIRECTV could not be liable as a matter of law. In response, the Plaintiff filed an affidavit contradicting her earlier testimony regarding the statute of limitations without explanation for the contradiction. The trial court denied DIRECTV’s motion for Summary Judgment. DIRECTV requested and was granted an Interlocutory Appeal in which it argued that Plaintiff’s complaint was time-barred and the trial court was required to disregard her contradictory affidavit under Georgia law. The Court of Appeals agreed and reversed the trial court, finding Summary Judgment to DIRECTV proper.

Areas Of Practice

Appellate Practice
Automobile Liability (PIP/PD/BI/UM)
Civil Litigation
Coverage & Declaratory Judgment Actions
First and Third Party Property and Casualty Claims
Liability Defense
Mediation and Alternative Dispute Resolution
Premises Liability
Product Liability
Trucking
Uninsured/Underinsured Motorist Liability
Wrongful Death

Bar & Court Admission

Georgia Bar
Superior and State Courts of Georgia
Supreme Court of Georgia
United States District Court for the Northern District, Southern and Middle District of Georgia
Georgia Court of Appeals
Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals

Education

Graduate:
Georgia State University College of Law, J.D.
Honors: Pro Bono, With Distinction
Undergraduate:
Georgia State University, B.A. English Literature

Originally from Macon, Georgia, Michael Becker moved to Atlanta in 2007 where he attended Georgia State University for college and law school, earning his Juris Doctorate in 2017. Michael immediately joined the defense bar after obtaining his law license and has defended individuals and businesses in civil litigation ever since. Michael has handled jury and bench trials, argued countless motions, won numerous dispositive motions, and written and won several appeals. He seeks and achieves favorable results for his clients through aggressive tactics, procedural acumen, hard work, and attention to detail.

Michael’s practice includes appellate advocacy, automobile liability, trucking, premises liability, coverage and declaratory judgment actions, products liability, uninsured/underinsured motorist defense, and wrongful death, among other areas. He is admitted to practice before every court in the State of Georgia including all federal and state trial and appellate courts.

Outside the courtroom, Michael spends his time in the great outdoors with his wife and children.

Footer