Learning Center
Plans & pricing Sign in
Sign Out

Profile Betts Patterson Mines


									                                Maggie Diefenbach

Defense Litigation, Construction Litigation, Personal Injury, Product Liability, Professional Liability, Retail & Hospitality
and Transportation

For over ten years, Maggie Diefenbach has dedicated her practice almost exclusively to the defense of insurance
companies and their insureds. Her litigation practice emphasizes personal injury and construction matters.

Ms. Diefenbach’s personal injury practice focuses primarily on retail and hospitality, motor vehicle, product,
transportation, and general premises liability matters.

Her construction practice focuses on the defense of developers, declarants, general contractors, and subcontractors in
lawsuits arising out of residential and commercial construction projects, including both construction defect and worksite
injury claims.

Prior to joining Betts Patterson Mines, Ms. Diefenbach was a partner at an International law firm. Prior to that, she
worked in-house, as claims litigation counsel for a major insurance company.

  Defended a developer/declarant in a condominium conversion case. Condominium Owner’s Association filed suit
   against developer/declarant seeking damages for construction defects and breach of duties under the Washington
   Condominium Act and Washington Consumer Protection Act. The trial court granted the declarant’s motion for
   partial summary judgment, thereby dismissing the Condominium Owner Association’s claims for violation of the
   Washington Consumer Protection Act; misrepresentation, and for failure to deliver a Public Offering Statement.
   This victory resulted in the dismissal of over $1.4 million in claimed damages.
   Defended business through appeal. Plaintiff suffered personal injuries after a ceiling fan fell and struck him in the
    head. Plaintiff claimed that the business was liable for his injuries under the theory of res ipsa loquitur. The
    Washington Court of Appeals (Div. I) upheld the summary judgment dismissal of Plaintiff’s claims against the
    business. affirming that the plaintiff failed to satisfy the elements of the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur. Price v.
    Beacon Pub, Inc., 162 Wn. App. 1020 (2011).

One Convention Place | 701 Pike St. | Suite 1400 | Seattle, WA 98101                                
   Defended a tavern from case inception through appeal. Plaintiff was rendered quadriplegic in a motor vehicle
    accident. Plaintiff sued the driver, the tavern, and two other bars that served the driver alcohol, alleging that the
    driver was apparently under the influence of alcohol at the time of service. The tavern successfully excluded
    hearsay evidence and prevailed on summary judgment. The tavern prevailed on appeal. Plaintiff’s petition to the
    Washington Supreme Court was denied. Ensley v. Mollmann, 155 Wn. App. 744 (2010).
   Defended a tavern bartender from case inception through appeal. The plaintiff was rendered quadriplegic in a
    motor vehicle accident. In Ensley v. Mollmann, Plaintiff sued the tavern. After the tavern prevailed on summary
    judgment, the plaintiff filed a separate lawsuit against the tavern’s bartender, alleging that he negligently served
    alcohol to the driver when she was apparently intoxicated. The Washington Court of Appeals (Div. I) reversed the
    trial court’s denial of the bartender’s motion for summary judgment. The Court of Appeals agreed that Plaintiff’s
    claims against the bartender were barred under the res judicata doctrine. Plaintiff’s lawsuit against the bartender
    was dismissed on remand. Ensley v. Pitcher, 152 Wn. App. 891 (2009).
   Defended a general contractor in a suit arising out of a commercial fire. Plaintiff claimed property damage and
    business interruption damages arising out of a fire at his business. Plaintiff claimed that the general contractor
    was vicariously liable for its subcontractor’s improper disposal of oil-soaked rags. The trial court granted the
    client’s motion for summary judgment, ruling that the client was not vicariously liable for the subcontractor’s acts or
    omissions because he was an independent contractor, not an agent, as argued by Plaintiff.
   Defended a Seattle nightclub in a wrongful death action arising out of a bar fight. The deceased’s estate and
    surviving minor child sued the nightclub and its security company, alleging that the security company failed to
    properly intervene/secure weapon in a bar fight that resulted in the patron’s death. The trial court dismissed the
    vicarious liability claim against the nightclub, holding that it was not vicariously liable for the security company’s
    acts or omissions because it was an independent contractor, not an agent, as argued by the plaintiffs.

University of Southern California School of Law, J.D., 2000
Pacific Lutheran University, B.A., 1997, Magna Cum Laude

Washington State Bar, 2001
United States District Court, Western District of Washington

Washington Law & Politics, “Rising Star” (2007, 2009, 2011, 2012)
Northwest Immigrant Rights Project Amicus Award (2005)

Washington State Bar Association
King County Bar Association
Washington Women Lawyers
Defense Research Institute
The Harmonie Group (National network of elite and vetted law firms providing defense services to companies)
Washington Defense Trial Lawyers
Mother Attorneys Mentoring Association of Seattle

One Convention Place | 701 Pike St. | Suite 1400 | Seattle, WA 98101                                

To top