I started this practice over 30 years ago, because I love the law and the opportunity it provides for any individual with a legitimate claim, no matter how rich or poor, to take on an opponent of any size.

I’ve always been a fan of the story of David and Goliath. The little guy with only a sling and a few stones taking on an over-sized opponent in full battle gear with all the weapons money can buy. The little guy fights — and wins — because he’s on the right side. That’s a story I think my clients can relate to. That’s a story that I definitely can relate to.

As a young lawyer fresh out of law school, I faced one of the biggest challenges of my career.*

In January 1984, my client’s employer reported the theft of $3,100.00 to the Oklahoma City Police Department. During the course of the investigation, a police detective asked my client where he banked. The detective telephoned my client’s bank, advised the bank employee that he was conducting a criminal investigation, and inquired if my client had made any large deposits. The banker responded that my client had deposited a check for approximately $300.00 with a notation that it was for the purchase of camera equipment. Further investigation revealed that the equipment came from my client’s employer, and that the check had been deposited a month before the $3,100.00 theft under investigation. Although my client insisted that he had charged the equipment to his employee account, no record of the transaction could be found.

As the result of the apparently unrelated investigation, my client was fired and charged with embezzlement, and thrown into jail. Subsequently, when my client’s employer remodeled its store, several receipts, including the charge slip to my client’s employee account reflecting the sale of the camera equipment, were found behind the cash register. I filed a motion to suppress the evidence obtained from the bank because the information had been obtained in the absence of either my client’s written consent or a subpoena. The trial court determined that the detective had engaged in an illegal search under the Financial Privacy Act and threw out the criminal charges.

I believed that my client’s bank had unfairly and improperly released his financial records during the investigation, harming him and his reputation. We filed suit against my client’s bank and lost at the trial level. We appealed to the Court of Appeals, and we lost again. Since I believed in the case, and I believed in my client, we took that case all the way to the Oklahoma Supreme Court. And we won. A 9-0 decision. A knockout. Shortly thereafter the bank settled for a confidential amount. Not not only did we win for our client, but we also won for every customer of every bank in our state that values privacy in their accounts.

These days, I focus my practice on representing clients in matters of castle doctrine and personal injury — with a special focus on those who have been treated unfairly by an insurance company or seriously injured. Not all of our cases end up in front of the Oklahoma Supreme Court, but we’re still on the side of the “David”s in our community and we’re still taking on the “giants.”

If you have questions and would like to confidentially discuss your case with no charge and no obligation, please contact our office or submit your information using our online form.

*Haworth v. Central National Bank of Oklahoma (Oklahoma Supreme Court, 1989)