Top Plaintiffs' Verdicts by Impact - Sheth v. Schneider National Carriers Inc.

When a Riverside County jury awarded $37.8 million to plaintiffs from India on June 29, two of whom were injured while driving through the county on their way to an airport, plaintiffs' attorneys said the judgment not only set a record as the county's largest verdict - it also was a decision "felt worldwide."

"The plaintiffs were from India. That was a big deal," said their attorney, Brian J. Panish, a partner with Panish Shea & Boyle LLP. "The defendants believed a Riverside jury - believed to be conservative - would not award a verdict in favor of Indians."

En route to an airport in Orange County, Jaishree and Prakash Sheth were passengers in a vehicle driven by a relative when it collided with a truck owned by Schneider National Carriers Inc. Jaishree was hospitalized with spinal cord injuries and broken vertebrae. She required two emergency surgeries and a two-month hospitalization. She is now confined to a wheelchair, Panish said. Her husband and the relative also sustained injuries, though less serious.

In a suit against Schneider, Panish contended the driver of the truck improperly attempted to pass the vehicle the Sheths were in. Sheth v. Schneider National Carriers Inc., RIC10020226 (Riverside County Sup. Ct., filed Oct. 15, 2010).

"Generally, it was a very hard-fought case," said defense attorney Barry C. Snyder of Snyder Law LLP. "There were excellent attorneys on both sides ... It was a complex case, and the determination of liability could have easily gone the other way.

"And I think that Brian Panish did an excellent job of convincing the jury to look at the case more emotionally than rationally," he added.

He said he felt the judge ruled improperly on a number of evidentiary issues in the case. Those will be the basis of an appeal his client is seeking.Before trial, Schneider offered the Sheths $250,000 and the relative $60,000 to settle the case. Jurors ended up awarding the Sheths $36.5 million and the relative $1.4 million.

The language barrier posed a difficulty at trial - an obstacle the defendants were counting on, Panish said.

"They didn't believe - because [the plaintiffs] were speaking ... a different language - they didn't think they could communicate their losses to an interpreter before a jury," Panish said.

He hopes the case will empower foreign plaintiffs to try cases in spite of potential jury bias.

"This case shows that if a jury is presented with facts and evidence justifying a large verdict, they can set aside any perceived biases and do the right thing," Panish said.

- KATIE LUCIA

<!-- Top Plaintiffs' Verdicts by Impact - Sheth v. Schneider National Carriers Inc. -->