Law firm settled 73-year-old carpenter's crash case for $45,000 behind his back. He then took his lawyers to court — and won $4.3 million
Robert Wyrosdick refused to take betrayal from Morgan & Morgan, and ended up winning big
After a box truck slammed into 73-year-old carpenter Robert Wyrosdick at an Atlanta intersection in March 2023, he thought hiring the United States' largest personal injury firm, Morgan & Morgan, was perhaps the best way to get compensation for his injuries. The elderly man expected them to fight in his corner through the legal tussle. However, he was left stunned when the firm settled the case for $45,000, which he said he had never authorized. He then turned to attorney Mike Flint and took the firm to arbitration and it yielded an unprecedented result for Wyrosdick, as per WSB-TV's (@wsbtv) report published in September 2, 2026, garnering over 34,000 views.
The painful collision
The story's roots go back to March 2023, when Wyrosdick was rear-ended by a box truck. The serious collision left him with back injuries, prompting him to hire Morgan & Morgan to pursue compensation, hoping the country's best personal injury practice firm would help him out.
Ghosted by legal counsel
Instead of collaborating directly with a dedicated lawyer, Wyrosdick was relegated to dealing almost exclusively with a paralegal while his lawsuit crawled along for months. His subsequent attorney, Michael Flint, argued that the firm had failed in its duty to communicate with its client. "You are that person's access to the justice system, and you owe them your best efforts," he said. Nonetheless, the biggest betrayal came to light while Wyrosdick was waiting for his deposition. Instead, he was informed that the firm had settled the case without informing him for $45,000.
Arbitration exposes Morgan & Morgan
Refusing to surrender his rights, Wyrosdick teamed up with Flint and decided to drag the corporate giant into binding arbitration. Morgan & Morgan and Aitken disputed that account, telling the arbitrator that Wyrosdick had verbally consented to the $45,000 settlement. This turned the spotlight onto their internal case management. During the arbitration, Flint introduced evidence of other complaints and claims involving former clients who he said had been treated similarly. The arbitrator ultimately ruled in Wyrosdick's favor, awarding him a massive $4.3 million award.
Firm's response
Following the decision, Morgan & Morgan's leadership pushed back against the outcome while acknowledging the documentation issue. "An attorney received verbal client consent but then did not document it in writing," the firm's chief executive stated. They further explained that the firm didn't agree with the arbitration outcome but respects the process and will be moving forward. At the same time, they maintained that they are fully transparent with their clients. Wyrosdick has since been paid the award, providing profound financial relief and allowing the carpenter to retire and enjoy his life.
Different perspectives on the matter
The mistreatment of Wyrosdick by the firm highlights the expectation gap between attorneys and clients. According to a Case Status report, while 72% of attorneys believe they are caring toward their client, only 40% of clients feel the same way about their attorney. Additionally, just 21% of clients said they felt reassured that their legal team cared about their experience or asked for feedback. This shows the disconnect between how the service is delivered and how it is perceived by the person.
'Never hire billboard attorneys'
Amid this, people came forward with their own suggestions on what to do when they require legal assistance on a matter. @minerva8344 suggested, "Never hire billboard attorneys; go get a local attorney who’s going to actually work for you." Meanwhile, @TheValidation shared, "I have had some very brief dealings with Morgan and Morgan, and I found them to be very unprofessional and a little on the crooked side."
More on Scoop Upworthy
He requested a $5.5 million loan to buy his dream house — then sued the bank for agreeing
Share on Facebook
