Facts

Builders Fence Company Inc. supplies products to licensed fencing contractors and is also a manufacturer of fences and gates and entire fence and gate systems, which are available for purchase, including gate stops, should their customers choose to purchase an entire system. Plaintiff's mother contracted with co-defendant Rebel Fence Inc., a licensed fencing contractor, for Rebel Fence to do whatever it took to build/install an ornamental iron fence and gate system at her home, including three 20-feet-long and 6-feet-tall rolling ornamental iron gates. Rebel Fence, in turn, ordered gate frames, fence panels, posts, and tracks for gates to roll on from Builders Fence Company. However, Rebel did not order any gate stops for the fence and gate system at Plaintiffs' home.

Several years after Rebel had completed its work, Plaintiff, who was 11 years old a the time, was in the process of attempting to close one of the manually operated ornamental iron gates after the gate had rolled over its track-mounted gate stop (which was admittedly designed, manufactured, and installed by Co-Defendant Rebel). It fell on top of Plaintiff.

Plaintiff brought suit against Rebel Fence and Builders Fence Company for general negligence and products liability. Rebel had no insurance and settled with Plaintiffs for a nominal amount prior to trial.

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
At trial, Plaintiffs argued that Builders Fence Company was liable under both negligence and strict liability theories for design defects based on Plaintiffs' contention that Builders Fence Company sold Rebel a fence and gate system and failed to include a gate stop in that system or, alternatively, at least provide an adequate warning to its customer (Rebel) that an adequate gate stop had to be properly installed on the fence and gate system.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
Defendant argued that the accident was caused by Rebel's inadequately designed, manufactured, and installed gate stop, which Defendant argued was a separate product from the component parts that Rebel ordered from Builders Fence Company. Defendants also argued for Rebel's negligence in its capacity as a licensed fencing contractor because the installation of the gate stop was obviously inadequate. Defendant finally argued that Rebel was negligent in failing to test the gate system after installing it.

Settlement Discussions

Plaintiffs settled with Defendant Rebel Fence for $25,000 one month prior to trial. Defendant Builders Fence served a CCP 998 offer of $4,000 to Samuel Shirk and $1,000 to Adam Shirk. Plaintiff Samuel Shirk served a CCP 998 offer of $210,000 to defendant Builders. Plaintiff Adam Shirk served a CCP 998 offer of $15,000 to defendant Builders.

Specials in Evidence

$13,000 in past-medicals for Samuel Shirk

Damages

Plaintiff asked the jury to award $300,000.

Injuries

Plaintiff alleged he sustained a left humeral shaft fracture, a concussion, and a temporary partial hearing loss. Plaintiff additionally alleged some residual weakness in his arm. Plaintiff Samuel Shirk allegedly sustained emotional distress.

Result

Defense verdict.

Other Information

INSURER: Self-insured Retention Zurich North America.

Deliberation

one hour.

Poll

Unanimous

Length

four days