On November 8, 2007, a former KSLN attorney obtained Summary Judgment in a significant auto accident case. (A motion for summary judgment is typically brought before a Court prior to trial in an attempt to demonstrate that a trial is not warranted based upon the facts of the case.)

The attorney for the Plaintiff argued in Court that the Defendant should have promptly applied his brakes in order to avoid the accident. In fact, the Defendant had to swerve all the way to the left in an attempt to avoid the accident, resulting in an impact between the passenger side front quarter panel of the Defendant's vehicle and the passenger side rear quarter panel of the Plaintiff's vehicle.

The Plaintiff's counsel argued that the Defendant should have applied his brakes sooner based on the Defendant's testimony that "it couldn't have been more than 3 seconds" from the point that the Plaintiff began his left turn and the Defendant applied his brakes. The Plaintiff's counsel also argued that the Defendant's speed must have been a significant contributing factor to the cause of the accident, despite the fact that there was absolutely no evidence to support this allegation.

Judge Sconiers ultimately rejected both of the Plaintiff's arguments, determining that the Plaintiff, in fact, was the sole proximate cause of the accident. The Court said that the Plaintiff was solely negligent for the accident, and dismissed the case.

According to KSLN counsel, "What's really significant about the Judge's decision in this case, is that frequently in matters where there are similar facts and entitlement to dismissal under the law, a Judge might err on the side of finding an 'issue of fact,' rather than deny the Plaintiff the opportunity to have his or her day in court." Counsel further noted: "It's encouraging to see a decision rendered purely on the basis of the law."