Keen v. Board of Regents
Published: Apr. 5, 2001 | Result Date: May 16, 2000 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |Case number: SC042782 Verdict – $150,000
Judge
Court
L.A. Superior Central
Attorneys
Plaintiff
Defendant
Joe W. Hilberman
(ADR Services, Inc. )
Experts
Plaintiff
Michael E. Gold M.D., F.A.A.N.
(medical)
Richard H. Anderson
(technical)
Jeffrey A. Schaeffer Ph.D.
(medical)
Dave Wilbur
(technical)
Stephen C. Wexler
(technical)
Defendant
Jeffrey Urdahl
(technical)
Charles Imbus
(medical)
Robert Craig
(technical)
Jerald H. Udinsky
(technical)
Karen Schlitz
(medical)
Facts
The defendant designed a loft for use in its dormitories so students could create more space in their rooms. The
plaintiff and his roommate installed such a loft in their dormitory room. As designed by the defendant, the
dormitory bed was placed on top of the loft at a height of eight feet from the floor. One side of the bed was
placed against the wall, but the other side was open to the floor below.
The defendant did not design or install guard rails or other barriers to prevent sleeping students from falling out
of their beds and purportedly fined students for making changes to the loft design.
The plaintiff, a 22-year-old student of the defendant, was injured when he rolled out of his bed while sleeping
and fell to the floor below.
Settlement Discussions
Pursuant to C.C.P. Section 998, the plaintiff demanded $249,999. Prior to trial, the defendant made no offers.
Damages
The plaintiff claimed $51,000 past medical and $25,000 to $48,000 future medical and damages for future loss of earning capacity due to an estimated 22 percent decrease in probability of employment over his lifetime because of his injuries.
Injuries
The plaintiff sustained a fractured skull. The skull fracture allegedly caused permanent loss of hearing in one ear, loss of smell and some equilibrium problems. The plaintiff also developed spinal meningitis as an alleged result of the skull fracture, which required two weeks of hospitalization.
Result
Bifurcated trial, liability tried first resulted in hung jury.
Other Information
After a hung jury, the case was reset for trial in January 2001, but it was settled in December 2000.
Poll
9-3 (dangerous condition for plaintiff), 9-3 (causation for plaintiff), 6-6 (affirmative defense of wheather creation of condition reasonable under circumstances)
Length
five days
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390