Case Results

Bradley & Gmelich LLP has a growing list of favorable verdicts and accomplishments throughout the nearly two decades of service we have provided. Although we have excelled in numerous areas of practice, these case results highlight some of our accomplishments.

Please select a category below to read examples of Bradley & Gmelich LLP case results.

Private Security

Negligent Security – Premises Liability:

FACTS: Plaintiff suffered deep vein thrombosis following a slip and fall at a hospital where our client, a security company, provided security. Plaintiff claimed a dangerous condition and failure to provide adequate care after the incident. Plaintiff’s wife claimed loss of consortium. Plaintiffs sought $1,000,000, including $24,000 in medical specials and $74,000 in loss of earnings.

RESULT: Plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed our client, following our filing of a Motion for Summary Judgment.

Negligent Security – Third-Party Criminal Attack:

FACTS: Plaintiff was at a major grocery store in Inglewood when he was shot by a third party criminal assailant. A security guard was not in the parking lot at the time of the shooting. Our client was the security guard company.

RESULT: Case voluntarily dismissed by Plaintiff following initial discovery.

Negligent Security – Third-Party Criminal Act:

FACTS: Plaintiff attorney had his office safe broken into and property stolen. Plaintiff alleged negligent security and possible conversion by a security officer. The suspect was never found. We represented the security guard company. Plaintiff sought punitive damages.

RESULT: Our Motion for Summary Judgment was granted.

Negligent Security – Third-Party Criminal Attack:

FACTS: Plaintiff was attacked at his beach home. Security officer working at a different location failed to apprehend the fleeing suspect. Allegations included security guard negligence and negligence per se.

RESULT: Our Motion for Summary Judgment based on lack of either statutory or contractual duty was granted.

Negligent Security – Premises Liability:

FACTS: Plaintiff slipped and fell in an office building in front of the security consul manned by our client, a security guard company. Plaintiff claims that security guards failed to notice the condition of the marble floor and that the marble floor was a dangerous condition. Both plaintiff’s and defendants’ experts agreed that the floor was dangerous. Defendants argued that the procedures for ensuring safety of the tenants were adequate. Alleged damages included permanent injury in the form of fibromyalgia and over $250,000 in past and future medical expenses and loss of earnings.

RESULT: Defense Verdict after one week trial.

Negligent Security – Tender of Indemnification:

FACTS: An Amusement Park sought contractual indemnity and defense for an injury sustained by a security guard, an employee of our client. The security guard slipped and fell outdoors at the park during a holiday party.

RESULT: Our Motion for Summary Judgment was granted, thereby barring Amusement Park’s suit for indemnity.

Negligent Security – Wrongful Death:

FACTS: Plaintiff brought a wrongful death action, alleging a security officer at an urgent care facility failed to call an ambulance for her deceased husband as she pulled up to the curb. Plaintiff also alleged medical malpractice against doctors involved. Damages included burial and funeral expenses. Punitive damages were also sought.

RESULT: Case dismissed voluntarily under threat of demurrer and 128.7 sanctions.

Security Defense – Assault and Battery by Employee:

FACTS: Plaintiff claims he was assaulted and battered by a Loss Prevention Agent, following Plaintiff’s arrest for petty theft at a national supermarket chain. Plaintiff was subsequently convicted. Our client’s Loss Prevention Agent had problems in his personnel file and independent witnesses confirmed Plaintiff’s version of events and beating. Medical specials included $4,500 (chipped tooth, cracked rib; soft tissue), and punitive damages were also sought.

RESULT: Settled for $6,500 (including $1,000 contribution from co-defendant national supermarket chain)

Negligent Security – Premises Liability:

FACTS: Plaintiff tripped and fell while attending a “Super Bowl NFL experience” event at a large shopping area. She was an out of state resident and was treated for soft tissue after one year. Plaintiff sought $40,000 (alleged) in medical specials.

RESULT: Our Motion for Summary Judgment was granted- recovered legal fees from cross-defendant who refused tender of defense at beginning of litigation.

Security Defense – Defamation/IIED by Employee:

FACTS: This is a private security litigation case where Plaintiff alleged defamation and emotional distress when a security guard at the gated community followed post orders by refusing to allow Plaintiff’s gardener in on a holiday. Argument and physical confrontation ensued. Punitive damages sought.

RESULT: Motion for Summary Judgment granted. Immunity afforded to Security Guard Company by Civil Code section 47c.

Negligent Security – Negligent Hiring/Vicarious Liability:

FACTS: Plaintiff, an employee of a large, nationwide security company, was injured in a fight with another employee of said company. Plaintiff sought $3,770.60 in medical expenses.

RESULT: Motion to Dismiss granted for Plaintiff’s repeated violation of Discovery Rules and court orders.

Negligent Security – Negligent Hiring/Vicarious Liability:

FACTS: Plaintiff fell down an escalator at a courthouse when a security guard abruptly turned off the escalator, causing Plaintiff to fall forward. Loss of Consortium was claimed by Plaintiff’s husband. Plaintiff sought $5,100.00 in medical expenses.

RESULT: Dismissed by plaintiff under threat of 128.7 sanctions.

Negligent Security – Negligent Hiring/Vicarious Liability:

FACTS: Plaintiff was allegedly assaulted and battered by a security supervisor. Supervisor admitted to assault and to destroying the incident report. Punitive damages sought against client as security officer involved was in policy-making position.

RESULT: Case settled for $7,500.00.

Security Defense – Civil Rights Violation:

FACTS: Federal Court action alleging civil rights violations against the homeless residing in a particular city. Claim that Plaintiffs were being harassed by police, city, and security company during homeless rights demonstrations.

RESULT: FRCP rule 12(6) (6) Motion to Dismiss granted – affirmed on appeal

Negligent Security – Negligent Hiring/Vicarious Liability:

FACTS: Security guard caused Plaintiff to fall and sustain serious injuries at hospital where she worked. Plaintiff sought over $10,000 in medical expenses including two surgeries.

RESULT: Voluntary dismissal after agreement with plaintiff’s counsel that security guard company was a “special employer” at the hospital and as such, that plaintiff was limited in recovery to workers compensation benefits.

Negligent Security – Third Party Criminal Act:

FACTS: Plaintiff’s motorcycle was stolen from his apartment building, where a security company provided security. Plaintiff asked for general damages as well as punitive damages in addition to recovery of property loss of $1,249 not covered by insurance.

RESULT: Dismissal following filing of demurrer under threat of 128.7 sanctions.

Negligent Security – Subrogation:

FACTS: Subrogation claim ($9,999.99) for recovery of workers compensation proceeds paid to injured worker at premises where National Banking Company not only provided guard services, but maintenance as well. Underlying employee slipped and fell in the office building.

RESULT: Dismissed for waiver of costs following threat of 128.7 motion and sanctions – no right to subrogate under the applicable service contract.

Security Defense – Civil Rights Violations:

FACTS: Plaintiff filed suit in Federal Court alleging Civil Rights violations under Unruh Act and ADA. He was denied the right to park for free at a government building after the government removed the handicapped stalls from the lot. Security forced Plaintiff to leave. Punitive Damages sought as well as recovery of attorneys’ fees under 42 USC 1983 and injunctive relief.

RESULT: Rule 12 (b)(c)(6) Motion to Dismiss granted.

Negligent Security – Third-Party Criminal Attack:

FACTS: This was a security negligence case where Plaintiff was assaulted in hospital bed by an unknown assailant who stabbed him with a surgical needle in his eye. No report ever made to police. Plaintiff sought over $75,000.00 in medical expenses and future surgery for loss of vision to left eye.

RESULT: Petition for Writ of Mandate to Court of Appeal granted, ordering lower court to grant earlier summary judgment in favor of client.

Negligent Security – Third-Party Criminal Attack:

FACTS: Plaintiff assaulted in parking lot outside a movie theater by unknown assailants. Allegations included negligent security by a nationwide security company for allowing “tailgate party” in parking lot. $4,000 sought in medical expenses.

RESULT: Plaintiff voluntarily dismissed under threat of sanctions.

Security Defense – Excessive Force/False Imprisonment:

FACTS: Plaintiff physically restrained when she tried to take her son out of the hospital without authorization while under the influence. Claims included security guard excessive force and false imprisonment. Punitive damages were sought, as well as medical specials in the amount of $1,044.86. Independent witnesses supported plaintiff’s contentions.

RESULT: Dismissed for waiver of costs. Case was defensed at arbitration.

Negligent Security – Third Party Criminal Act:

FACTS: Plaintiff’s apartment, located in a secure building, was burglarized. Claims negligent security allowed the loss to occur. Property loss alleged to be $26,789.25 plus additional unspecified damages in the sum of $5,000. Co-defendant property owner also sued for negligent misrepresentation

RESULT: Settled for $3,500 prior to depositions and arbitration.

Negligent Security – Negligent Hiring:

FACTS: Plaintiff stopped and detained by Loss Prevention Agents. Plaintiffs were observed putting merchandise in purse, but when purse was opened, merchandise was gone. Plaintiff claimed stop and detention was humiliating and also caused physical injuries. Punitive damages were sought and medical specials were unknown.

RESULT: Case settled for $450.00 at deposition of plaintiff.

Negligent Security – Plaintiff’s Comparative Fault:

FACTS: Plaintiff was assaulted and battered by a security guard in a large nationwide grocery store while in the process of apprehension for stolen goods. Medical specials were $54,211.

RESULT: Dismissal for waiver of costs prior to arbitration.

Negligent Security – Premises Liability:

FACTS: Cross-Complaint filed against a large, international Security Company for slip-and-fall in office building parking lot. Security Company provided security in the parking structure where the accident occurred. Plaintiff sought $19,000 in medical damages, plus future surgery.

RESULT: Plaintiff dismissed case upon written stipulation to waive costs.

Security Defense – Negligence/ Intentional Spoilation of Evidence

FACTS: This is a security guard litigation case where Plaintiff is alleging Negligent and Intentional Spoilation of Evidence by hospital and security. Security guards took photos of defective ladder that fell, injuring Plaintiff. In underlying suit, Plaintiff discovered that the lost photos and the hospital destroyed the ladder. Punitive damages, loss of earnings ($350,000), and medical specials ($200,000) sought.

RESULT: Motion for Summary Judgment GRANTED on issues of negligent and intentional spoilation of evidence.

Negligent Security – Third Party Criminal Act:

FACTS: $1.2 Million in laptop computers stolen at a freight yard where a large, international security company supplied security. Allegations of breach of contract, negligence and conversion alleged. Client considered Motion for Summary Judgment based upon third party beneficiary to contract. Plaintiff sought $1.8 million in damages.

RESULT: Settled for $90,000

Negligent Security – Negligent Hiring:

FACTS: This is a security guard litigation case where Plaintiff was stabbed by female patron while attending a concert. A large, nationwide security company provided crowd control. Allegations included negligent hiring and inadequate security. Damages included loss of earnings in $10,000-15,000 and medical specials In excess of $20,000.

RESULT: Motion for Summary Judgment Granted.

Security Defense – Assault/Negligence:

FACTS: Plaintiff alleges she was assaulted by a security officer employed by a large, nationwide security company with a baton while she was at work after her son refused to walk through the metal detectors. Alleged negligence and intentional tort and sought punitive damages. Plaintiff sought $2,000 in medical specials, punitive damages, and an alleged $3,000 in loss of earnings. We cross-complained against Plaintiff’s son.

RESULT: Settled for $750.00 prior to discovery.

Negligent Security – Contribution:

FACTS: Security guard involved in vehicle accident at large maritime port while patrolling area. Our client, a Security Company, owned vehicle, and employed driver. Co-Defendant, a Major shipping firm, employed other driver and owned other vehicle. Damages included $200,000 in medical specials and $150,000 in loss of earnings.

RESULT: Co-Defendant settled with plaintiff, globally, for $125,000.00 and dismissed client on complaint. Co-Defendant pursued cross-complaint against client. Cross-Complaint settled for $5,000.

Security Defense – Limitations of Liability:

FACTS: Plaintiffs’ house was burglarized. $156,225 (alleged) worth of jewelry stolen. Defendant client installed and monitored alarms.

RESULT: Settled for $350 before filing an answer after B&G attorneys invoked the limitations of liability

Negligent Security – Premises Liability:

FACTS: Plaintiff, a patron of the facility where the Defendant provided security, tripped on carpet, causing her to fall. Economic damages were $44,000 and general damages were $250,000.

RESULT: Case settled at mediation for $10,000

Negligent Security – Tender of Indemnification:

FACTS: Plaintiff was accosted in the parking lot of a supermarket by a transient. Plaintiff was hospitalized. Defendant property owner cross complained against the security guard company. Contract provided for indemnification by property owner. Plaintiff claimed over $40,000 in medical damages.

RESULTS: Under threat of cross-complaint, the security guard company was DISMISSED in exchange for a waiver of costs. (Property owner paid $100,000 at mediation to plaintiff.)

Security Defense – Excessive Force:

FACTS: Plaintiff left a hospital pharmacy after refusing to pay for a prescription drug, essentially shoplifting the product. Security was called and plaintiff ran. Plaintiff struggled with the security guard, who used force. Plaintiff claimed permanent hand and hip injuries, including $126,000 in medical specials. General damages were $400,000.

RESULT: The case settled for $7,500 following vigorous discovery from B&G’s attorneys.

Negligent Security – Premises Liability:

FACTS: Plaintiff, a patron inside of a government building, walked into a glass partition, breaking her nose. She claimed the dangerous condition should have been prevented. Medical specials were $10, 400 and general damages for $80,000.

RESULT: Plaintiff voluntarily dismissed the security company in exchange for a waiver of costs.

Security Defense – Civil Rights Violation:

FACTS: Plaintiff’s photo was posted at a government facility, placing her in a bad light. A large, international security company provided security at the location. Plaintiff alleged civil rights violations against the security company and government entity. Plaintiff sought $75,000 in punitive damages and attorney fees per statute.

RESULT: Case successfully settled $20,000 for our security company client.

Negligent Security – Third Party Criminal Act:

FACTS: Plaintiff worked in the building as a security receptionist-usher and responded to a call about the bank being robbed. Plaintiff arrived in the bank’s lobby just as an armed security guard employed by the defendant, who was employed by a large international security company, was chasing down the two robbers. By that time, Plaintiff was allegedly standing a few feet away when the security guard pointed a gun at Plaintiff’s face and yelled obscenities. The security officer allegedly did not lower his weapon until Plaintiff backed off as fast and as far as he could. Plaintiff sought $75,000 in loss of income and medical costs.

RESULT: MSJ granted, finding of no duty.

Security Defense – Excessive Force:

FACTS: This is a security guard excessive force case where Plaintiff alleged that he was battered by security guards employed by the defendant while being escorted from an assisted living center. Plaintiff also alleges that Defendant took property from his room after his ejection from the facility. Plaintiff claims that some items of his personal property were never returned to him. He sought medical damages of $11,563.50 and general damages of $48,436.50.

RESULT: Dismissed by Court following motions for discovery abuses.

Negligent Security – Premises Liability:

FACTS: As a result of a spill, the Plaintiff slipped and fell on her neck, back, and bottom. At the scene of the accident, Plaintiff experienced right leg, right arm, back of the neck, and pain in the tailbone area. Plaintiff sought $40,000 in damages.

RESULT: Voluntary Dismissal in exchange for a waiver of costs.

Products Liability

Products Liability – Third Party Distributor:

FACTS: The plaintiff purchased a set of aftermarket wheels for his luxury car from the defendant through a third-party retail store. Plaintiff’s purchase contract was with the third-party retail store and not with the defendant. The third-party retail store installed the wheels but failed to use the proper sized lug nuts. As a result, the luxury car sustained extensive property damage. Initial demand was over $23,000.

RESULT: Case settled for $500.

Products Liability – Negligent Installation:

FACTS: Plaintiff, age 4, was at the residence of defendants for a play date with defendants’ son. While outside the presence of adults, the two children were playing on a treadmill. The plaintiff fell onto the moving belt of the treadmill and was thrown against the wall directly behind the treadmill with her face wedged into the rotating belt as she was pinned against the wall. Plaintiff argued that defendant distributor was negligent in improperly installing the treadmill too close to the wall so that a dangerous condition existed. The initial demand was $3 million in damages.

RESULT: Plaintiff settled with co-defendant for $1 million. Defendant distributor offered to settle for $350,000, but the offer was rejected by Plaintiff. The case went to trial and the jury found no liability on the part of defendant distributor. A defense verdict was successfully obtained.

Products Liability – Manufacturing Defect:

FACTS: The plaintiff was operating an overhead crane manufactured by the defendant and lifted a 500-pound metal tube. Plaintiff claims that the crane jerked up and down which caused the metal tube to disengage from the chain and fell onto Plaintiff’s hand severing Plaintiff’s right index and middle finger. Plaintiff alleged that the crane was defective and was claiming damages in excess of six figures for his stress, pain and suffering and loss of earnings.

RESULT: Case was dismissed.

 

Products Liability – Manufacturing Defect:

FACTS: Plaintiff sustained flash burns when a valve manufactured by co-defendant, an international company, malfunctioned as Plaintiff was refilling propane tanks during the course and scope of his employment. The propane tanks were manufactured by our client and incorporated the co-defendant’s valve. The initial demand was approximately $400,000.

RESULT: Case settled for $10,000, paid on behalf of our client; co-defendant paid an additional $85,000.

Personal Injury

Personal Injury – Negligence/Premises Liability:

Facts: Plaintiff was shopping at a large retail store. She pushed her shopping cart into an alcove at the back of the store where she believed the restroom was located. After determining that the restroom was not inside the alcove, she backed out of the alcove and across the aisle. Plaintiff filed suit against the large, nationwide retail store, claiming that she struck her head when she backed into a shelf on an endcap on the other side of the aisle. Plaintiff claimed $900,000 for past pain and suffering, and $4.4 million for future pain and suffering. Plaintiff’s evidence claimed $500,000 for loss of consortium.

SPECIALS IN EVIDENCE: MEDS: $33,957 Future MEDS: $500,000 LOE: $121,000 Future LOE: $1.7 million

Result: After a seven-day trial and a one-hour deliberation, the jury found for the defendant and plaintiff was awarded nothing.

Employer Defense

Employer Defense – Negligence/Vicarious Liability:

FACTS: Plaintiffs and their children went to a restaurant chain for dinner. Plaintiff ate a dish that consists of crab meat, shrimp, chicken meat, and diced avocado. Wholesale food supplier provides the restaurant chain with fresh fish and frozen seafood. Within five hours of eating, Plaintiff became very ill. He arrived at the hospital in respiratory failure, was intubated, and placed in a medically induced coma. He was diagnosed as having aspiration pneumonia that caused his respiratory failure and sepsis. While in the hospital, he suffered from encephalopathy and contracted Acinetobacter Baumannii. Initial demand was $1,000,000 made to restaurant chain.

RESULT: Case was successfully dismissed.

Employer Defense – Negligence/Premises Liability/Vicarious Liability:

FACTS: Plaintiff was a security guard at an annual fashion event staged by a large, nationwide retail store chain. Our client was hired to provide the tents, tables, chairs, stem ware, flatware, tablecloths and kitchen equipment for the event. Plaintiff tripped and fell over a raised forklift located at the event’s premises during the set-up for the event. As a result of tripping and falling over the raised forklift, Plaintiff sustained annular disc tearing, disc protrusion and a facet arthropathy. Plaintiff underwent epidural injections and back surgery as a result of the incident. The initial demand was $887,500.

RESULT: Motion for Summary Judgment Granted.

Employer Defense – Negligence/Negligent Supervision/Vicarious Liability:

FACTS: This lawsuit arises from an incident wherein the grinding wheel of an electric grinder became dislodged during a demonstration, and struck Plaintiff in the face. The incident occurred at a large, local event. The initial demand was $150,000.

RESULT: Case settled for $10,000.

Employer Defense – Negligence/Vicarious Liability:

FACTS: Plaintiffs were shopping at a mall. While inside a retail chain store, a verbal dispute arose between one of the Plaintiffs and several individuals. As one of the Plaintiffs exited the store, she was allegedly jumped by the four individuals. The other Plaintiff announced her position as an off-duty police officer, ordered the individuals to cease and intervened in the altercation. The altercation continued. At the same time, employees of the retail store and other retailers contacted security at the mall, which ran to the location. Although arriving quickly, by the time security arrived, the altercation had ceased. The initial demand for both plaintiffs was $1,000,000.

RESULT: Motion for Summary Judgment granted as to Plaintiff, off-duty police officer (Firefighter’s rule)-Upheld on Appeal. Settled with Plaintiff victim for $7,500.00.

Employer Defense – Premises Liability:

FACTS: This case stems from a trip-and-fall accident that occurred in front of a commercial building. Plaintiff, who is a resident of an apartment complex, immediately south of the building, was walking in front of the building. Plaintiff rented a monthly parking space at the subject building and was seen at or around the building on a daily basis by the building’s security guards. However, Plaintiff alleges he has never walked over the portion of sidewalk on which he fell prior to the date of the subject incident. Plaintiff claims that while walking on the sidewalk just past the driveway to the parking garage (where he rents a parking space), he caught his toe on an area where tile was broken and fell forward onto his hands and knees. There were no witnesses to the incident. The initial demand was $25,000.

RESULT: Motion for Summary Judgment was granted.

Employer Defense – Independent Contractor:

FACTS: The incident occurred when the Defendant was delivering asphalt to the job site in his truck, where Plaintiff was working. Defendant’s truck rolled over Plaintiff’s foot while he was working in the parking lot. Defendant was an independent truck owner/operator hired to deliver asphalt from a plant to a jobsite. The initial demand was $1,000,000.

RESULT: The matter was settled as to our client. We tried the independent contractor issue on behalf of the trucking company and obtained a defense verdict.

Employer Defense – Independent Contractor:

FACTS: While attempting to back into a drive-way of a business located near a double set of railroad tracks, a 60 foot -long tractor-trailer became stuck on the tracks and was struck by an on-coming train. The force of the collision pushed the trailer portion of the truck into the traffic stopped at the crossing gate on the opposite side of street, striking the vehicles operated by both plaintiffs. The truck driver claimed that the eastbound crossing gate arm descended too quickly into the space between the tractor and trailer; as such, he was unable to get out of harm’s way. Initial demands were $500,000-600,000 by the first plaintiff and $4,000,000 by the second plaintiff.

RESULT: Case was dismissed for waiver of costs at mediation by both plaintiffs following filing of MSJ by construction company.

Employer Defense – Premises Liability:

FACTS: Plaintiff alleges she tripped over a raised brick paver and struck her face on a concrete bollard which separated the pedestrian walkway and the visitor parking area in front of a commercial building. Plaintiff did not personally observe what was the object that her right toe hit and was not looking down before she fell. Initial demand was $75,000.

RESULT: All parties settled outside of court for $32,500.

 

Employer Defense – Negligence/Vicarious Liability:

FACTS: A fire erupted in the hot water heater closet on the top floor of a building where a real estate agency was the sole tenant. The maintenance company had a contract with the real estate agency to provide janitorial services for the building. Initial demand was $1,154,000.

RESULT: Following a 9-day trial, the jury returned a defense verdict, finding that the maintenance company was not negligent.

Employer Defense – Premises Liability/Negligence:

FACTS: Plaintiff was shopping in a large retail store. Plaintiff alleged that suddenly, without warning a steel fireplace accessory dropped on plaintiff’s left side and toes. There was a dispute as to what fell on plaintiff. She claimed it was a large, metal object weighing approximately 30 pounds, while the store manager said it was a small picture frame weighing no more than 5 pounds. Plaintiff’s deposition revealed that plaintiff actually picked up the object after it fell, placed it back on the shelf, and it fell a second time, striking plaintiff in exactly the same spot as the original injury. The initial demand was $100,000.00.

RESULT: Case settled for $4,000.00 two weeks before trial.

Employment Class Action

Employment Class Action Unfair Business Practices and Violation of Wage and Hour Laws:

FACTS: Plaintiffs allege that a private security employer, failed to compensate hourly-paid employees for overtime, failed to provide meal and rest breaks, failed to comply with final pay requirements with respect to employees who were terminated or resigned, failed to provide accurate and complete itemized wage statements, failed to pay all compensation and took unlawful deductions, and engaged in unfair business practices on account of such actions.

DAMAGES: $81,567,342.00 (not including interest and attorney fees)

RESULT: $1,000,000.00

Employment Class Action Unfair Business Practices and Violation of Wage and Hour Laws:

FACTS: Plaintiffs allege that a private security employer failed to compensate hourly paid employees for overtime, failed to provide meal and rest breaks, failed to comply with final pay requirements with respect to employees who were terminated or resigned, failed to provide accurate and complete itemized wage statements, failed to pay all compensation, and engaged in unfair business practices on account of such actions.

DAMAGES: $5,136,048.00 (not including interest and attorney fees)

RESULT: $170,000.00

Employment Class Action Unfair Business Practices and Violation of Wage and Hour Laws:

FACTS: Plaintiff alleges that a private security employer failed to compensate hourly paid employees for overtime, failed to provide meal and rest breaks, failed to comply with final pay requirements with respect to employees who were terminated or resigned, failed to maintain accurate records, and engaged in unfair business practices on account of such actions.

DAMAGES: $5,150,920.00 (not including interest and attorney fees)

RESULT: $500,000.00

Public Entities Tort

Public Entities Tort – Negligent Maintenance by Municipality:

FACTS: This was a trip and fall case. Minor plaintiff was walking along a grassy, park like area owned by the public entity. He claimed to have stepped into an uncovered irrigation drain, cutting his left leg on the exposed edge of the PVC pipe. Plaintiff sought general damages and medical bills in the amount of $3,724.18.

RESULT: Plaintiff’s case was dismissed after he refused to comply with discovery orders.

Public Entities Tort – Subrogation:

FACTS: This was a property damage subrogation claim brought by an Insurance Company. Their insured’s vehicle allegedly ran over an open ditch in the street, causing $4,595.13 in property damage. There were no injuries.

RESULT: The case was settled with Plaintiff for a nuisance settlement of $500. The other parties to the litigation included a construction company and contractor. The municipality and the other defendants filed mutual dismissals of the Cross-Complaints against each other for a waiver of costs.

Public Entities Tort – Dangerous Conditions of Public Property:

FACTS: While on his way to work, the Plaintiff was struck head-on by another vehicle – traveling in the opposite direction – which had spun out of control after driving over “black ice” on the roadway following heavy rains. Plaintiff sued the public entity, alleging a claim for negligence and a claim that the design of the subject roadway constituted a “dangerous condition” under Government Code §835. Plaintiff alleged $335,000 in medical damages, $19,720.00 in loss of earnings, and $3,200 for property damage to his vehicle. Plaintiff’s wife was claiming loss of consortium ($150,000), but did not receive any treatment for her claim for loss of consortium.

RESULT: Motion for Summary Judgment granted and plaintiff appealed. Following reversal, the case was settled by all parties.

Public Entities Tort – Dangerous Conditions of Public Property:

FACTS: This was a vehicle versus vehicle rear-end collision that occurred on a freeway on-ramp. Plaintiff, acting in the course and scope of his employment as a traffic counter, was conducting a pedestrian traffic survey near the on-ramp when the rear of his vehicle was struck by another vehicle which was traveling up the on-ramp. Plaintiff suffered a severe brain injury and required 24 -hour care in a licensed care facility. The initial demand was $9.5 million.

RESULT: Following the filing a Motion for Summary Judgment, the case settled for $2,225,000.

Public Entities Tort – Liability for Public Employee:

FACTS: This case involved an incident at a security checkpoint located at the entrance to the courthouse. Plaintiff claimed that a security guard employed by a private security company hired by the public entity stepped into her, causing physical injuries and emotional distress. The plaintiff’s husband allegedly witnessed the incident and claimed damages based upon negligent infliction of emotional distress and loss of consortium.

RESULT: The Public Entity’s Motion for Non-Suit was granted. Following appeal, the remaining defendant settled with plaintiffs.

Public Entities Tort – Negligent Road Design and Maintenance:

FACTS: This was a wrongful death case in which Plaintiff’s decedent ran a stop sign and was struck by a truck on the cross street and killed. One-quarter of the intersection was owned and maintained by a City. One-quarter of the intersection was owned by another City, and one-half of the intersection was owned by a County. Plaintiff alleged negligent road design and maintenance against the firm’s client, a City.

RESULT: Despite plaintiff’s demand of $335,000 at mediation just against our firm’s client, plaintiff ultimately settled his case against the City for $47,500.00. Contribution by other defendants totaled over $300,000.

Public Entities Tort – Tender of Indemnification:

FACTS: This is a skateboard accident lawsuit in which Plaintiff alleged that he was injured when his skateboard rode over a vault in the sidewalk located in the City. The vault, which plaintiff alleges was partially open when he tripped, is owned and operated by the Water District. Plaintiff is claimed medical expenses in the amount of $3,610 and future medical expenses in the amount of $30,000. He also claimed a loss of earnings in the amount of $10,000 and general damages in the amount of $200,000.

RESULT: The City filed a Cross-Complaint for indemnity against the Water District. Plaintiff, under threat of summary judgment, voluntarily dismissed the City.

Public Entities Tort – Dangerous Conditions of Public Property:

FACTS: This is a trip and fall lawsuit in which Plaintiff alleged that she was injured when she tripped over a raised area in the sidewalk located in the City. The area in question was raised less than one inch. There is no evidence that the City had any notice of any problems with the sidewalk in the area in which Plaintiff fell. At the time of her fall, Plaintiff hit both of her front top teeth on the sidewalk and has required significant dental work to fix her teeth. Plaintiff claimed medical bills totaling $30,000.

RESULT: The City successfully settled for $2,500.

Public Entities Tort – Dangerous Conditions of Public Property:

FACTS: An extremely complex litigation stemming from a motor vehicle accident which occurred within the client’s City boundaries on a major highway. There were four plaintiffs. The driver was the only plaintiff to receive serious injuries, including quadriplegia. The collision between plaintiffs occurred while the intersection was undergoing construction by the Water Department. Plaintiff alleged one cause of action for dangerous condition of public property against the City. The City had made a claim for defense and indemnification to the Water District based on an Encroachment Permit awarded to the Water District for the construction at the intersection. A tender of defense and indemnification had also been made to the contractors performing the construction for the Water District. Plaintiff’s Life Care Plan was $12.3 Million dollars. Realistic exposure (joint and several) was over $21 Million dollars.

RESULT: In Phase I of the trial, the City won on its cross-complaint against the Water District, thus ensuring the Water District would be potentially responsible for an adverse verdict in favor of plaintiffs. During the Phase II jury trial (involving 3 defendant entities), plaintiffs dropped their demand and settled globally for $13.5 Million dollars. The City’s insurer paid $4.5 Million dollars, with the other codefendants paying the remainder. Furthermore, the City was successful in having all of its defense costs and attorney’s fees paid for by co-defendant’s insurer.

Public Entities Tort – Procedural Defects in Suit Against Municipality:

FACTS: This is a slip and fall lawsuit in which Plaintiff, a minor, alleged that he slipped on ice on the sidewalk, injuring his teeth. The neighboring property owner was responsible for the ice, as it occurred due to runoff from her sprinklers. She was cited by the City for the Code violation.

RESULT: The City’s demurrer to the complaint was sustained without leave to amend, with the Court agreeing with us that the plaintiff could not state a cause of action against the City due to his failure to comply with the technical requirements of the Government Tort Claims Act.