Charles Law is Endorsed by the Better Business Bureau
Charles Law is Rated AV Preeminent

(844) 775-1977

Contact Us Now

BLOG

CONTACT

AWARDS: $2,350,000 award to automobile accident wrongful death plaintiffs • jury acquittal – double criminal homicide • $1,000,000 award to motorcycle accident wrongful death plaintiffs • jury acquittal – criminal homicide • $465,000 award to medical malpractice plaintiff • jury acquittal – criminal homicide, recklessly endangering another person, neglect of a care dependent person • $325,000 federal jury verdict, UIM and insurance bad faith award to automobile accident plaintiffs • jury acquittal – attempted criminal homicide • $300,000 award to medical malpractice plaintiff • jury acquittal- attempted criminal homicide, aggravated assault with a deadly weapon • $300,000 award to automobile accident/ products liability plaintiffs • jury acquittal – homicide by vehicle while DUI, homicide by vehicle, aggravated assault by vehicle DUI, aggravate assault by vehicle • $115,000 award to truck accident plaintiff • jury acquittal – murder, rape • $100,000 non-jury trial verdict to facial laceration plaintiff • jury acquittal – 1st degree Murder (capital case) • $90,000 award to premises liability/slip-and-fall plaintiff • jury acquittal – DUI, terroristic threats, carrying firearms without a license • $440,000 award to civil rights violation plaintiff • jury acquittal – theft, receiving stolen property • $135,000 award to civil rights violation plaintiff • jury acquittal – possession with intent to deliver a controlled substance (PWI) • $636,000 jury verdict in plaintiffs’ medical malpractice case • jury acquittal – indecent assault, indecent exposure • $550,000 award in plaintiffs’ personal injury case • juvenile case acquittal- solicitation to commit aggravated assault, aggravated assault of unborn child • $250,000 award to mass transit accident plaintiff • jury acquittal – theft, receiving stolen property, conspiracy • $130,000 award to premises liability/slip-and-fall plaintiffs • court-appointed appellate counsel – Supreme Court of Pennsylvania reversal of rape conviction • $465,000 award to automobile accident plaintiff • jury acquittal – aggravated assault • $125,000 award to automobile accident plaintiff • jury acquittal – DUI • non-jury acquittal – dismissal of armed robbery charges • $170,000 award to automobile accident plaintiffs • successful jury verdict in defense of attorney charged with legal malpractice in professional liability case • $140,000 award to injured bicyclist plaintiff • non-jury acquittal – dismissal of 2 counts of criminal homicide • $180,000 award to employment discrimination plaintiff • jury acquittal – indecent exposure • non-jury custody trial – award of primary physical and legal custody of minor to paternal grandparents over natural mother • juvenile decertification petition granted to criminal homicide charges – release at age 21 • non-jury custody trial – award of primary physical and legal custody of minor to father • jury acquittal – DUI • $90,000 award to automobile accident plaintiffs • non-jury custody trial – award of primary physical and legal custody of minor to mother • $50,000 jury verdict for plaintiff- passenger in automobile accident case • non-jury custody trial – award of primary physical and legal custody of minor to father • hung jury – Arson trial (no criminal punishment imposed) • $265,000 award to premises liability plaintiff • jury acquittal – delivery of a controlled substance • $125,000 award to premises liability plaintiff • jury acquittal – DUI • $190,000 award to products liability plaintiff • $150,000 award to premises liability/construction accident plaintiff • $750,000 award to prison medical malpractice and civil rights violation plaintiff • $90,000 award to automobile accident plaintiffs • $108,500 award to automobile accident plaintiff • $80,000 award to automobile accident plaintiff • $150,000 award to truck accident plaintiffs.

Civil Rights Violations

Police Misconduct

PENNSYLVANIA POLICE MISCONDUCT ATTORNEYS

police-misconduct-2

Since 1977, the lawyers at Charles Law Offices have proudly represented police officers holding the ranks of Chief of Police, Deputy Chief of Police, Captain, Lieutenant, Sergeant, Corporal, Patrolman, as well as other essential police personnel. On those occasions, however, when police officers have engaged in misconduct or in the deprivation of citizens’ rights, the attorneys at Charles Law Offices have brought the offenders to justice and have successfully protected the rights of their victims.

Use of Force - Stop -Flight

Under the applicable federal and state law, more than mere presence at the scene of an alleged crime is needed to prove culpability of an actor or an accomplice. An individual who is approached by the police is free to avoid a potential encounter with police by leaving the scene of an alleged crime. The speed in which a person avoids an encounter with the police and leaves the scene of an alleged crime does not provide police with grounds to stop and arrest the individual. Flight alone is insufficient to establish probable cause to arrest or search.

In those instances where there is no probable cause to arrest or search an individual, there is no justification for the use of any force. If an arrest or seizure is unlawful, any force applied by law enforcement is, by definition, excessive. The use of unreasonable or excessive force during an arrest, investigatory stop or any other seizure of a person’s liberty violates the Fourth Amendment, regardless of whether the use of force was in “good faith” or “maliciously and sadistically for the purpose of causing harm.” Commonwealth v. Wagaman, 426 Pa. Super 396, 627 A.2d, 735 (1993).

“Don’t Tase Me Bro” - Administering Taser/Taser Shocks To Civilians

It is a common practice for police departments to use taser/taser shocks against civilians under circumstances which constitute the use of excessive force. Many police departments began using tasers without having proper policies in place concerning the use of tasers, how to aim a taser and under what circumstances a taser may be used. In many instances the lack of proper polices and inadequacy of training concerning the use of tasers have resulted in violations of an individual’s constitutional rights. Our courts have held that deficiencies in police policies and training concerning the use of tasers has amounted to an extreme and deliberate indifference to the rights of individuals by police departments and municipalities.

Many police departments have failed to investigate, monitor, scrutinize, supervise or take remedial action or disciplinary action of any kind against its police officers for the employment of excessive force and the use and/or overuse of taser shocks.  These police departments have failed to properly afford their officers “End User” training and exposure to a taser shock and its effect on the human body.

Many police departments have further failed to provide an effective “Use of Force Policies and Procedures” defining the departmentally used tasers, the neuro-muscular incapacitation device, taser data port function and the taser’s AFID Cartridge Tracking.  These police departments further have failed to effectuate proper policies concerning taser discharge considerations. In many instances,  these police departments have failed to train their taser instructors concerning proper policies and procedures to inspect and ensure the maintenance of the tasers, to maintain proper records, return damaged tasers and to monitor data download and inventories on a quarterly basis.

Use of Force Continuum

In addition to failing to implement proper policies, procedures and training concerning the use of tasers by its police officers, many police departments have failed to effectuate proper training of its officers concerning the Use of Force Continuum, the Use of Force Matrix and levels of force. Many police departments further have failed to effectuate proper procedures and training of their police officers concerning the use of non-deadly force, non-deadly force implements and less lethal weapons, or concerning the medical treatment necessitated by use of force incidents.

As a result, many officers lack in-service and weapons proficiency training concerning the use of force, deadly force and the utilization of fire arms, tasers, chemical sprays, batons, straight sticks or flashlights. By virtue of the failures of municipalities and their police departments to effectuate proper policies and training for their officers concerning the use of force, excessive force and lethal force and their failure to take proper remedial or disciplinary action against officers for the improper use of force, excessive force or lethal force, violations of the rights of civilians under the laws of the United States of America and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania occur on an alarmingly frequent basis.

The attorneys at Charles Law Offices have defended the rights of citizens who were victims of police misconduct by prosecuting the following claims:

Excessive force and police brutality

Improper use of taser shocks

Wrongful death and Survivorship

Racial profiling

Illegal search and seizures

False imprisonment

False arrest

Malicious prosecution

Assault

Battery

Intentional infliction of emotional distress

Negligent infliction of emotional distress

Conspiracy

Municipal liability

Compensatory and punitive damages

If you, or a family member or friend, have been the victim of excessive force, police brutality, improper use of taser shocks, illegal search and seizure, racial profiling, false arrest or if you have a family member or friend who lost his or her life as a result of police misconduct, contact the attorneys at Charles Law Offices in order to protect the victim’s rights and to bring the wrongdoers to justice.

Contact the attorneys at Charles Law Offices.

An Impressive Track Record

Of big wins

What Our Clients Are Saying

About us

After being turned away and told by two other medical malpractice law firms that my case was “unwinnable,” I contacted Charles Law Offices. Both Attorneys are excellent, hard-working trial attorneys who are extremely knowledgeable and highly ethical. They produced an outstanding and favorable outcome for me.

Catherine R. Van Langen | Retired Radiological (ASRT) and Nuclear Medical Technologist

Contact us now

For a free consultation

I am:


I am looking for information regarding*:

If other, please specify:



A Family History of Devotion to
Law and Public Service

The Charles Brothers’ devotion to the law is derived from a family history in the legal system and of service to others. Their father, Charles “Chink” Charles (depicted in the lower left-hand corner of the photograph) held a 35 year career in law enforcement, and was selected to serve as the personal bodyguard for former United States Presidents John F. Kennedy, Richard M. Nixon and Lyndon B. Johnson during their campaign visits to Allentown.

Learn More