Randy Rutherford v. Luis Anthony Lucero, Michael John Adams
Published: Mar. 29, 2001 | Result Date: Jan. 23, 2001 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |Case number: CV000281 Verdict – $400,141
Judge
Court
San Luis Obispo Superior
Attorneys
Plaintiff
James McKiernan
(James McKiernan Lawyers)
Defendant
David R. Hunt
(Fitzgerald Yap Kreditor LLP)
Facts
On Jan. 13, 2000, at 8 p.m., the plaintiff, a 50-year-old laborer, was driving on Foothill Boulevard in San Luis
Obispo. Defendants Luis Lucero and Michael Adams, were also driving on Foothill Boulevard. The
defendants were traveling in separate vehicles. Adams was following Lucero home after a night of drinking at
a local bar. LuceroÆs vehicle crossed the centerline and collided head-on with the plaintiffÆs vehicle. Adams
vehicle was not involved in the collision.
Settlement Discussions
The plaintiff demanded $450,000, combined policy limits from both defendants. Both defendants made C.C.P. Section 998 offer of $100,000 by Lucero and $60,000 by Adams.
Specials in Evidence
$94,000 $20,800 $20,800 $160,675
Injuries
The plaintiff suffered fractured left metacarpals, fractured left clavicle, comminuted fractured right patella and facial scarring. The plaintiff underwent open reduction and internal fixation to patella, second surgery to remove hardware, cast to wrist and hand, possible future surgery to clavicle and physical therapy. The plaintiff suffered from pain and stiffness at all fractures sites residuals.
Other Information
The defendant reported that the plaintiff may appeal Michael AdamsÆ nonsuit. The plaintiff reported that they were not allowed to present evidence on LuceroÆs arrest and felony conviction for drunk driving, blood alcohol levels of both defendants at the time of the accident, misrepresentations made by Adams to the police, AdamsÆ and LuceroÆs alleged attempt to flee the scene, LuceroÆs two prior convictions for drunk driving and AdamsÆ prior representation of Lucero in the two earlier drunk driving incidents. A bifurcated trial for punitive damages against Lucero was set, but before this phase was heard, the parties agreed to a confidential settlement and entered it on record. The terms of the settlement are now disputed. Both sides have filed motions to enforce compliance with the settlement agreement or, alternatively, to proceed with trial on punitive damages. According to the plaintiff: The plaintiff contended that the terms of the settlement agreement, first, required LuceroÆs insurance company, MSI, to pay the plaintiffÆs recoverable costs, which in a felony DUI includes attorney fees (in this case $100,000) and then required the settlement drafts to be paid to James McKiernan, lawyer and his client, Randy Rutherford, exposing MSI to cover the $94,000 hospital lien. Judge David Allen was a visiting judge from Visalia assigned to this case.
Deliberation
two days
Poll
9-3 (malice)
Length
nine days
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390