JUSTICENTER Personal Injury Lawyers operates from their Encino office at 16633 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 1011, serving accident victims throughout the San Fernando Valley. The firm traces its roots back to 1980, accumulating over a century of combined legal experience among its attorneys. This personal injury practice focuses exclusively on representing individuals injured through negligence, positioning itself as a dedicated advocate for victims rather than insurance companies or corporate defendants.

The legal team consists of three principal attorneys who bring distinct backgrounds to the practice. Andrew Shapiro leads with four decades of litigation experience, having secured over $100 million in settlements and verdicts for clients. His credentials include a 5.0 Preeminent AV rating from Martindale-Hubbell and multiple Super Lawyer designations from Los Angeles Magazine. Thomas Cecil brings nearly thirty years of experience handling catastrophic injury cases, while David Bobrosky takes a notably hands-on approach, occasionally accompanying clients to medical appointments.

Case types handled by the firm span the typical personal injury spectrum. Car accidents, motorcycle crashes, and truck collisions form the core of their vehicle accident practice. Premises liability cases including slip and fall incidents receive significant attention. The firm also pursues product liability claims, wrongful death actions, and brain injury cases. Their experience extends to pedestrian accidents, with particular emphasis on incidents involving government entities and unsafe public infrastructure.

The firm's track record includes recovering hundreds of millions in settlements and verdicts since its founding. While specific case results aren't detailed on their main pages, client testimonials reference outcomes exceeding initial expectations. David Bobrosky receives particular praise in reviews for securing awards that surpassed what insurance companies initially offered. This history of substantial recoveries forms a central part of their marketing message to potential clients.

Professional recognition comes from several legal rating organizations. Beyond individual attorney accolades, the firm has earned acknowledgment from Super Lawyers, Best Lawyers, and Martindale-Hubbell. These peer review distinctions reflect both legal ability and ethical standards within the California legal community. Such recognitions often influence referrals from other attorneys and can impact client confidence in representation quality.

The consultation process begins with a free case evaluation, available by calling 833-852-3600. During these initial meetings, attorneys assess case viability, explain legal options, and discuss potential compensation. The firm operates on contingency fees, meaning clients pay attorney fees only if recovery occurs. This payment structure allows injured individuals to pursue claims without upfront legal costs.

Client service philosophy emphasizes personal attention over volume processing. The firm explicitly states that clients won't be treated as case numbers, promising regular communication about case status. This approach contrasts with larger firms that might delegate client interaction to paralegals or case managers. Reviews consistently mention responsive communication and attorneys who demonstrate genuine concern for client welfare.

Geographic coverage extends throughout the San Fernando Valley, with specific mention of serving Encino, Sherman Oaks, and Tarzana. The office location in the Union Bank Building provides accessibility for Valley residents, sitting near Los Encinos State Historic Park and the Encino Community Center. Proximity to the Van Nuys Courthouse East, roughly four miles away, facilitates court appearances for local cases.

Support services extend beyond basic legal representation. The firm handles all aspects of claims management, from initial paperwork through settlement negotiations. They coordinate with medical providers, gather police reports, interview witnesses, and manage insurance company communications. This comprehensive approach allows clients to focus on recovery while attorneys handle procedural requirements and deadlines.

California-specific legal knowledge influences their practice approach. The firm navigates state-specific statutes including the two-year limitation period for personal injury claims and California's comparative negligence rules. They also understand local court procedures in Los Angeles County Superior Court and federal venues when cases involve government entities or interstate commerce issues.

Economic damage calculations form a crucial part of their case preparation. The firm pursues compensation for medical expenses, lost wages, property damage, and future care costs. Non-economic damages for pain, suffering, and diminished quality of life also factor into settlement demands. In cases involving egregious conduct, they pursue punitive damages designed to punish defendants rather than compensate victims.

The office maintains standard business hours for scheduled appointments, though the 24/7 phone line suggests availability for urgent situations. The website contact form provides an alternative to phone communication for those preferring written initial contact. Response times to inquiries aren't specified, though client reviews suggest prompt attention to new cases.

Educational resources on the website include links to California DMV services, Department of Transportation updates, and local government resources. While not extensive, these connections provide practical information for accident victims dealing with vehicle repairs, medical treatment, and insurance claims. The resource section demonstrates awareness of broader client needs beyond legal representation.

The firm's longevity since 1980 suggests financial stability and established referral networks within the legal community. Operating for over four decades in the competitive Los Angeles legal market requires consistent results and client satisfaction. This tenure provides institutional knowledge about local insurance companies, defense firms, and judicial preferences that newer practices might lack.

---