This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Breach of Contract
Insurance Negligence
Spoliation of Evidence

Nichole Garcia v. Financial Indemnity Company

Published: Dec. 4, 1993 | Result Date: Nov. 22, 1993 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: 634186 –  $16,291,700

Judge

Robert A. Green

Court

Orange Superior


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Christopher E. Angelo
( Angelo & DiMonda)

Scott A. Marks


Defendant

John William O'Donnell

William Schnaider


Experts

Plaintiff

Gerald Goldfisher
(technical)

Facts

On September 19, 1989, Plaintiff Nichole Garcia, a 22-year-old part time teacher's aide and returning college student, was severely and permanently disabled in a head-on collision which had resulted when a truck, driven by a man allegedly in the course and scope of employment, sustained a blow-out of the left front tire. That vehicle crossed over the double yellow line, entered Nichole Garcia's lane of travel, and struck the Plaintiff's auto in a head-on collision. At that time, Plaintiff submitted a personal injury claim against the employer, Defendant Ram Mar Painting, Inc. of the Defendant driver (in the underlying case) claiming imputation of negligence through the Doctrine of Respondeat Superior. Plaintiff also contended that the accident was due in part to the defective tire manufacture, resulting in a tire blow-out. The driver's employer's automobile liability insurance carrier was Defendant (in the present case) Financial Indemnity Company, and they undertook the adjustment of Nichole Garcia's personal injury claims. During the course of this undertaking, Defendant Financial Indemnity Company allegedly agreed to preserve the "negligent" driver's vehicle, as well as its contents and the blown-out left front tire. The contents of a vehicle are recognized as evidence in California in support of the proposition that a negligent driver was operating within the course and scope of his employment with his employer; the blow-out tire was needed to be maintained in order to determine whether it was defective in design or manufacture, thus allowing a future products liability lawsuit against a tire manufacturer. Approximately 1 1/2 months later, the vehicle was "lost," allegedly sold to another employee for $100.

Settlement Discussions

Plaintiff contends they demanded $10,000,000 and Defendant Financial Indemnity Company offered $100,000 before trial.

Specials in Evidence

$508,000 $1,000,000 present value $14,000,000

Damages

$15,508,000

Injuries

Left side hemiparesis and brain damage requiring full time attendant care.

Other Information

In the underlying case, the Defendant driver's employer Ram Mar Painting, Inc., had a general liability insurance carrier (American States Insurance Company and Atlantic Mutual Insurance Company, C.G.L. carriers) who paid $1,000,000 to Plaintiff to settle the spoliation claim against Ram Mar. Ram Mar Cross-complained against Defendant Financial Indemnity Company to recover this $1,000,000 from Financial Indemnity Company, the automobile liability insurer. The jury was informed by Ram Mar's counsel that the $1,000,000 would be returned to the two C.G.L. carriers if Ram Mar prevailed on its Cross-complaint.

Deliberation

4 days

Poll

9-3

Length

7 weeks


#112437

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390