Jeffrey D Bohn | Fresno Personal Injury Lawyer

Mr. Bohn graduated from San Joaquin College of Law in 2001 where he was invited to be a member of the San Joaquin College of Law, Law Review. This is an honor reserved for the top 5% of each class. While attending San Joaquin College of Law he received the Mirviss Alumni Scholarship for academic excellence. Mr. Bohn achieved this while working full time and balancing his duties as husband and father of three boys. Mr. Bohn worked as a law clerk for Baker Manock and Jensen, Baradat & Edwards and the Law Office of H. Wayne Green.

Mr. Bohn was a double major at Brigham Young University in Linguistics and Philosophy. He speaks seven languages including: Hmong (white and green dialects), Lao, Thao, Mandarin Chinese, German and Spanish. Mr. Bohn was elected the Honors Student Counsel President in 1993 and represented Brigham Young University’s Honor’s Program in making a presentation to the National Collegiate Honors Society.

While attending BYU, Mr. Bohn wrote the first Hmong Grammar and taught at the Missionary Training Center. He founded the Association for Peace and Prosperity in Laos, a non-profit organization whose goal it is to benefit the impoverished citizens of Laos through economic development stimulation and international collaborative partnerships.

Position	Organization	Location	Duration
CEO	Association for Peace & Prosperity in Laos		2004 - 2013
CEO/Founder	International Translation & Interpreting		1996 – 2006

School	Degree	Major	Graduation
San Joaquin College of Law	J.D.	Law School	2001
Brigham Young University	BA	Philosopy and Linguistics	1994

State / Court	Date
California	2006

• Million Dollar Advocates Forum | Attorney Member | 2013 - Present
  Hmong Clean Water Fund        | Donor        | 2013 - Present
  Personal Injury Attorney Network | Member | 2011 - Present
  Brain Injury Litigation Network        | Member | 2011 - Present
  Dental Negligence Claims | Member | 2011 - Present
  National Association of Personal Injury Lawyers        Members        | 2011 - Present
  Medical Negligence Lawyers Network | Member | 2010 - Present
  United States District Court for the Eastern District of California | Admitted to Practice | 2008 - Present
  Sacramento County Bar Association | Member | 2007 - Present
  United States Court of Appeals For the Ninth Circuit | Admitted to Practice | 2007 - Present
  Central Valley Trial Lawyers Association | Member | 2006 - Present
  Central California Trial Lawyers Association| Member | 2006 - Present
  Supreme Court of the State of California | Admitted to Practice        | 2006 - Present
  Fresno County Bar Association | Member | 2006 - Present
  Consumers Attorneys of California | Member | 2006 - Present
  State Bar of California        | Member | 2006 - Present
  Association for Peace and Prosperity in Laos | President | 2003 - Present
  San Joaquin College of Law Allumni Association | Attorney Member | 2001 - Present
  Boy Scouts of America | Scoutmaster | 1998 - Present
  Brigham Young University Alumni Association | Allumni | 1994 - Present
  Brigham Young University Honors Student Counsel        | Allumni | 1994 - Present
  Brigham Young University Honors Student Counsel | Vice President | 1992 - Present
  Brigham Young University Honors Student Counsel        | President | 1993 - 1994

• Super Lawer | Super Lawyers | 2016
  SuperLawyer | San Francisco Magazine and Law & Politics Magazine | 2015
  Norther California Super Lawyer        | Super Lawyers Magazine | 2015
  Street Fighter of the Year (Nominated) | California Association of Consumer Attorneys | 2014
  Super Lawyer | SuperLawyers | 2014
  Top Lawyers in California | American Lawyer Magazine | 2013
  Member        | Million Dollar Advocates Forum | 2013
  Silver Sponsor        | Sacramento Hmong New Year, Inc. | 2012
  Spirit of San Joaqun Academic Scholarship | San Joaquin College of Law | 1999
  Honors Student Counsel Leadership Scholarship | Brigham Young University | 1993
  Honors Student | Counsel Leadership Award | Brigham Young University |        1992

• Case: Lee v. Lee Summary: APPEAL from a judgment of the Fresno County Superior Court. Adolfo M. Corona, Judge. Law Office of Myron F. Smith and Myron F. Smith for Defendants and Appellants. Law Offices of Jeffrey D. Bohn and Jeffrey D. Bohn for Plaintiffs and Respondents. oo0oo Appellants, George Tong Lee (George) and Kathy Maiker Lee (Kathy), challenge the trial court's finding that their interest in property owned by various members of the Lee family was validly transferred to respondent, Fue Sue Lee (Fue Sue).1 Appellants acknowledge that, following their request that the property be sold, they received $50,000 from George's mother and brother pursuant to an oral agreement. Appellants assert this payment was a no interest loan. In contrast, George's mother and brother contend they bought George and Kathy's interest. Four years after receiving the payment, George and Kathy executed and delivered a quit claim deed that transferred their interest in the property to Fue Sue. 1 The parties are referred to by their first names for purposes of clarity. No disrespect is intended. Appellants argue the sale of their property interest violated the statute of frauds and therefore is invalid. Appellants further contend that the quit claim deed was not sufficient to take the transaction outside the statute of frauds. Additionally, appellants assert that the trial court erred when it failed to exclude certain promissory notes that were produced only a few days before trial. As discussed below, the deed was an executed contract and, as such, validly transferred the real property interest. Further, the trial court did not abuse its discretion when it admitted the disputed evidence. Accordingly, the judgment will be affirmed. BACKGROUND In 1985, numerous members of the Lee family pooled their resources to purchase four contiguous five-acre parcels. Appellants owned a 50 percent interest in one of the parcels, referred to as “Lot 5.” In 1998, George spoke to his mother, Yeng Yang Lee (Yeng), about selling Lot 5. However, Yeng did not want to sell. Thereafter, George and Yeng orally agreed that George would receive $50,000. Yeng and George's brother, Vah Houa Lee (Vah), borrowed this money from other relatives and friends. These loans have been repaid. 3 Appellants argued that this $50,000 payment was an interest free loan to be paid back when Lot 5 was eventually sold. However, Yeng and Vah testified that they purchased George and Kathy's interest in Lot 5. Vah further testified that, despite this purchase, the family wanted George to keep his name on the property because he is both educated and fluent in English. In 2002, George was facing a lawsuit and decided he should have his name taken off the Lot 5 deed. George and Kathy prepared and executed a quit claim deed conveying their interest in the subject property to Fue Sue. The consideration for the transfer was noted as “GIFT.” Fue Sue is Vah's only child. George had Fue Sue also sign the deed and then sent it to relatives for recording. George, Kathy and Fue Sue were living in South Carolina at the time. However, before the deed was recorded, someone added Ge Lee (Ge) and Vong Lee as additional grantees. In 2005, George had Fue Sue execute a deed reconveying Lot 5 to himself and Kathy. Respondents Ge and Fue Sue filed the underlying complaint against appellants alleging causes of action for quiet title, slander of title, fraud, cancellation of instrument, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and constructive trust. Following a bench trial, the court found that the $50,000 payment to George was a buyout of appellants' interest in Lot 5, not a loan. As to the 2002 deed, the court held that appellants did not intend to convey their interest to Ge and Vong Lee and therefore the transfer was invalid as to those grantees. However, the transfer to Fue Sue remained valid. The court further found that the 2005 deed to George was procured by misrepresentation and therefore was invalid. Result: Verdict for plaintiffs Case: Mao Lor v. Mercury Insurance Summary: Ms. Lor was seriously injured when her car collided with that of a vehicle abandoned in the fast lane. The driver was unlicensed, uninsured and illegal. She asked that her insurance company, Mercury Insurance, pay for her medical bills of $350,000 and her pain and suffering. They refused, stating that they believed the unlicensed, uninsured, illegal driver over her. His story was that he was traveling in the fast lane when another vehicle in the lane next to him made some threatening gestures, causing him to swerve and collide with the center concrete median and then come to rest in the fast lane. Mercury Insurance's reasons for believing the defendant driver was that pursuant to the California "phatom vehicle statute" that there was required at least some minimal touching between the phantom vehicle and Ms. Lor's vehicle. The "phantom vehicle" statute was created in the 1960's to discourage fraudulent claims made by drivers who staged their collisions. But the supreme court stated that an insurance company should always give their insureds version of the facts at least as much credence as any other party. Ms. Lor hired Mr. Bohn when there appeared to be no other option. Mr. Bohn wrote a 12 page brief to Mercury Insurance explaining that their decision has been in "bad faith" and that they were in fact in violation of the "phantom vehicle statute" by taking the word of the unlicensed, uninsured, illegal driver of the defendant's vehicle. Within two weeks, Mercury Insurance agreed to Mr. Bohn's demand of $250,000 as compensation in full for Ms. Lor. Further, Mr. Bohn was able to negotiate Ms. Lor's medical bill from $350,000 down to $2,500. Because Mr. Bohn only charged Ms. Lor 25% for his services (most attorneys charge 33% on up) Ms. Lor was able to maximize her settlement. Result: Settlement of $250,000 Case: Buendia v Seibert Oil Summary: Ms. Buendia, a 65 year old retired grandmother, went to the Walker Car Wash to vacuum out her car. As she walked around the front of her car she fell into a two foot deep by four foot wide gap in the concrete sidewalk, which has been removed when an old vacuum had been replaced. Ms. Buendia fractured her radius and ulna which required surgery and the placement of a metal plate screwed into both bones. This missing section of sidewalk was left by the owner because he didn't have the time. He admitted in his deposition that he was familiar with concrete work and could have fixed the section for about $200. Ms. Buendia's fractured radius and ulna failed to heal due to her age and her severity of the break. Trial was imminent when the parties engaged in mediation with Lee Jacobsen. The parties settled the case for $275,000. Result: Mediated settlement of $275,000.00 Case: Vang v. Havlock Summary: A hit and run driver entered an on-ramp of highway 50 which interfered with the driving of defendant who was under the influence. Defendant then collided with Plaintiff causing her multiple bone fractures and internal injuries. The case involved complicated issues regarding apportionment of fault between the defendant and the hit-and-run driver. Result: $1,300,000.00

• Fresno Bee | Fresno Dentist Sued for Negligence        | 2013
  Fresno Bee | Fresno Jury Finds Dentist Guilty of Dental Negligence | 2013
  Top 10 Things to do to Maximize Your Personal Injury Settlement        | Top 10 Things to do to Maximize Your Personal Injury Settlement | 2012
  The Importance of Utilizing Diagnostic Testing to Achieve your Differential Diagnosis | Value Drivers in Personal Injury Software | 2012

Sun.	Mon.	Tue.	Wed.	Thu.	Fri.	Sat.
	9:00 am - 5:00 pm	9:00 am - 5:00 pm	9:00 am - 5:00 pm	9:00 am - 5:00 pm	9:00 am - 5:00 pm

 Available 24 Hours a Day.

• LinkedIn
• For More Information
• General Law Firm Information