“I cannot say enough about their attention to detail and respect for my privacy. I love these guys.”

Tim Z

“Kellie Snyder and Mark Brown ARE AWESOME!!!!! I can’t express how much I am thankful and blessed to have had them as my attorneys.”

Markez E

“Outstanding knowledge and precise communication. Our case was complicated but we were guided through it with confidence, and we had a great result.”

Seth A

“Very knowledgeable, professional, experienced and easy to work with. He negotiated an excellent settlement for me.”

John H

“He’s even argued a case before the Illinois Supreme Court, which is pretty impressive. I highly recommend Mark Brown”.

Andy F

Man Beaten at White Sox Game Obtains Confidential Settlement

Lane Brown, LLC Partner, Scott D. Lane, recently settled a case involving misconduct on the part of security personnel at a White Sox game for an undisclosed amount.

Witnesses Recorded the Beating

The incident occurred on August 23, 2008, after a White Sox game at U.S. Cellular Field when our client, a 49-year-old man, was attacked and beaten by several security guards simply because he told them to leave some young men alone.

A woman and her son witnessed the beating. In fact, they photographed and videotaped portions of the beating. The security guards picked our client up, handcuffed his hands behind his back, and placed him in the rear seat of a security cart so that he could be transported to the stadium’s security office. Because the guards failed to fasten the seat belt, our client fell out of the cart during one of the turns and sustained further injury.

As a result of the beating and the fall, our client sustained bruising to much of his body and multiple fractures and ligament damage to his ankle.

The security guards were actually employed by Standard Parking, which had a contract with the White Sox to provide parking lot security at White Sox games. Standard Parking paid the settlement.

Awarded: Confidential

DISCLAIMER: The results are specific to the facts and legal circumstances of each of the clients’ cases and should not be used to form an expectation that the same results could be obtained for other clients in similar matters without reference to the specific factual and legal circumstances of each client’s case.