Facts

One evening in June 2003, plaintiff Carol Anderson, a 45-year-old park ranger, was driving through Arroyo Grande in a sedan on her way to Lopez Lake. While on Lopez Drive, she saw flashing lights reflecting on a rock wall ahead so she began to slow down. On approaching the area, she saw a car stopped on the shoulder with its hazard lights on and saw a woman standing by her car. Plaintiff slowed down with the intention of asking the woman if she needed help. Upon slowing down to 10 to 15 mph, she was rear-ended by defendant Candy Babcock who was driving a Jeep.

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
The plaintiff sued defendant, alleging she was negligent. Plaintiff alleged defendant was speeding and must not have seen her because she was distracted by the flashing hazard lights. The plaintiff and her accident reconstructionist claimed that the curve was not blind and that if defendant had been paying attention, she would have had enough time to stop even at the excessive speed she was traveling. The plaintiff claimed defendant exceeded the 40 mph speed limit.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
The defendant argued that she wasn't distracted and that the accident was caused by plaintiff's own negligence in that she came to a near stop just past a blind curve at night.

Settlement Discussions

Plaintiff made a demand of $30,000 (CCP Section 998); defendant's offer was $6,500 (CCP Section 998).

Specials in Evidence

$8,763. $3,113.

Damages

Plaintiff sought medical costs, lost earnings and pain and suffering damages.

Injuries

Plaintiff alleged she sustained a cervical, thoracic and lumbar sprain-strain and suffered from left shoulder pain. She received chiropractic care for about three months and physical therapy for 11 sessions. Plaintiff claimed she had to discontinue treatment because she did not have the money to pay for more medical services. She alleged that she continues to suffer from neck, back and left shoulder problems. Plaintiff did not work from June 9 to June 18, and from June 19 through August 31, she was restricted to part-time hours. On September 1, she was laid off for being unable to perform her job duties. Plaintiff alleged that losing her job caused her to lose her apartment since employment was a condition of her housing.

Result

The jury found that both plaintiff and defendant were at fault, each 50 percent at fault. It determined plaintiff's gross damages to be $46,876 ($8,763 in past medical costs, $3,113 in lost earnings and $35,000 in pain and suffering). This amount was reduced to a net recovery of $23,436.

Deliberation

four hours

Poll

11-1 (defendant's negligence), 12-0 (plaintiff's negligence)

Length

five days