Failure to Yield

VERDICT: $133,891gross; $120,501 net (the jury found plaintiff 10 percent at fault and the defendant 90 percent at fault)

CASE/NUMBER: Esperanza Ayon Mendoza v. Ramona Miller / SC062978
COURT/DATE: L.A. Superior Santa Monica / March 20, 2002

JUDGE: Robert M. Letteau
ATTORNEYS: Plaintiff- Maro Burunsuzyan (Law Offices of Maro Burunsuzyan)

Defendant- Jack M. Liebhaber (Robinson, Di Lando & Whitaker, L.A.)

INSURANCE COMPANY: State Farm Insurance

MEDICAL EXPERTS: Plaintiff- John B. Dorsey, M.D., orthopedist, Mission Viejo

Defendant- William W. Brien, M.D., orthopedist, L.A.

FACTS & CONTENTIONS: According to plaintiff: Plaintiff, Esperanza Ayon Mendoza, 41 years old domestic worker by occupation suffered soft tissue injuries following an automobile accident on Sept. 17, 1999 when the defendant failed to yield the right-of-way to the plaintiff, who was in the crosswalk at the intersection of Beverly Glen and Wilshire Blvd. in the city of Beverly Hills. Liability was disputed at trial. The defendants argued that the plaintiff walked into the defendant’s vehicle and that her injuries were not caused by the accident, showing several photograph blow-ups of the defendants 1991 Previa Van and emphasizing that there’s no damage to the van. The plaintiff testified that she continued to suffer from pain and discomfort due to the accident. This was consistent with testimonies of four of plaintiff’s employers. According to the defendant: The police did not investigate this accident. The paramedics did not come to the accident scene. The plaintiff went to the emergency room the day after the accident, on advice of counsel. The plaintiff testified inconsistently as to whether or not she was actually in the crosswalk or actually on the sidewalk/curb when the incident occurred. The plaintiff’s expert claimed that the plaintiff suffered chronic pain syndrome.

SPECIALS IN EVIDENCE: MEDS $6,465; LOE $2,426.

JURY TRIAL: Length2.5 days; Poll 12-0 (liability), 12-0 (causation), 11-1 (economic), 12-0 (non-economic); Deliberation 1.5 hours.

SETTLEMENT DISCUSSIONS: Plaintiff’s first demand dated May 12, 2000 was for $30,615, which was then increased to $40,000 pursuant to CCP 998 demand dated Jan. 28, 2002. Plaintiff’s last demand was $20,000. Defendant’s offer to settle the case after the lawsuit was filed was for $5,000, which was then raised to $6,000 after the IME. Two days prior to the trial, defendant raised its offer to $12,000.

COMMENTS BY PLAINTIFF: Judgment for $126,902.16 with costs per CCP §998 was entered on April 3, 2002. The court granted a new trial on May 15, 2002. The motion was based on “excessive damages” unsubstantiated by evidence. Defendant argued that the verdict was driven by sympathy for plaintiff, because she was a domestic worker. Defense counsel further claimed that this was implied by the jurors. There were three attorneys in the jury. Two of the jurors, including the foreperson, both attorneys, gave declarations that the verdict was based on evidence. Plaintiff has filed an appeal.