Facts

On March 28, 2006, at approximately 8 p.m., plaintiff Emily Liou, 17, had crossed six of the seven lanes of El Camino Real (State Route 82) in Millbrae when a slow-moving Toyota sedan, driven by defendant Gada Hassany with her child in the back seat, hit and knocked Emily to the pavement.

At the time of the collision, plaintiff was wearing dark clothes and an iPod. Plaintiff was in a marked crosswalk at an uncontrolled intersection.

Hassany told the police that she did not see plaintiff until impact. The physical evidence confirmed that the car was traveling less than 35 mph speed limit at the time of the accident.

Plaintiff sued Hassany alleging negligence and the State of California alleging that the intersection was a dangerous condition of public property.

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Plaintiff argued that Caltrans followed an outdated accident monitoring system that focused on vehicles and did not properly address pedestrians. They introduced evidence of a 2001 Caltrans Deputy Directive, as well as Vehicle Code section 21949, instructing Caltrans to better address to pedestrian safety issues.

Plaintiff presented evidence that marked crosswalks at uncontrolled intersections on wide and busy roads are dangerous in general because they give pedestrians a false sense of safety. Plaintiff contended that studies have shown since the early 1970s that pedestrians are more likely to be injured in marked crosswalks at uncontrolled intersections than in unmarked crosswalks.

Plaintiff offered a 2001 Federal Highway Administration study recommending against marked crosswalks at busy uncontrolled intersections, unless substantial improvements were added, such as pedestrian-activated signals.

Plaintiff contended that, simultaneous with the FHWA study's release, Caltrans adopted a policy of protecting pedestrians so as to reduce the pedestrian death rate in this state. Plaintiff contended that, notwithstanding that policy, Caltrans never studied the pedestrian accident rate on El Camino Real. Plaintiff contended that El Camino Real was one of the busiest roads in the network with marked crosswalks.

Plaintiff also presented evidence that the pedestrian accident rate at this crosswalk exceeded, by a factor of almost 20, the rate identified as unacceptable to the 2001 FHWA study.

Plaintiff also presented evidence that, for a variety of reasons, this intersection was a particularly dangerous place for pedestrians to cross the street. Plaintiff alleged that, due to a rise in the road, the crosswalk lines do not become visible to motorists until a driver is about 150 feet away. Plaintiff contended that the rise, along with the proximity to a controlled intersection further ahead, made it difficult for drivers to notice this intersection until they were driving through it. Plaintiff presented a nighttime visibility study purporting to demonstrate that a pedestrian in this crosswalk is not visible to an approaching motorist until fewer than two seconds before impact.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
Caltrans claimed that there had been no complaints about this crosswalk in its 50-year history and that there had been only one pedestrian accident at this crosswalk in the same direction of travel over the past 10 years even though approximately 45 million cars had driven through the intersection. Caltrans further claimed that its accident data collection data system was state of the art.

Settlement Discussions

Plaintiff demanded $1.9 million. The defense offered $1 million.

Injuries

Plaintiff suffered a permanent vegetative state.

Result

Plaintiff's verdict for $12.2 million ($1.4 million past economic; $8.7 future economic; $700,000 past non-economic; $1.4 million future non-economic). The jury found the State of California 50 percent negligent, Hassany 30 percent negligent, and plaintiff 20 percent negligent.

Other Information

Defendant Department of Transportation is filing a motion for a new trial. FILING DATE: Feb. 2, 2007.

Deliberation

1.5 days

Length

18 days