Hugo Navarro, et al. v. General Motors, Inc.
Published: Sep. 7, 1996 | Result Date: Jul. 26, 1996 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |Case number: EC015454 – $1,189,660
Judge
Court
L.A. Superior Glendale
Attorneys
Plaintiff
Defendant
Experts
Plaintiff
Peter M.W. Dill
(technical)
Joyce Elaine Pickersgill
(technical)
Leon Robertson
(medical)
Paul C. Stimson
(technical)
Tadeusz Wellisz
(medical)
Daniel Spector
(medical)
Defendant
Paul Beauchamp
(technical)
William Dougherty
(medical)
Mark M. Noble
(technical)
David M. Blaisdell
(technical)
Facts
On July 25, 1993, at approximately 10:30 p.m. on the northbound Hollywood Freeway, a non-party was driving a Toyota pick-up which stalled in the number two lane . A second non-party was driving a 1979 Ford LTD in the number two lane and slowed his vehicle in order to avoid striking the Toyota pick-up. The settling defendant, driving a 1988 Acura Legend, rear-ended the Ford vehicle. The Ford (which did not strike the Toyota) pulled out of the lanes of traffic and parked on the right shoulder. The settling defendant's vehicle remained stopped in the number two lane of traffic. Thereafter, a 1979 Chevrolet Monte Carlo, driven by Hernan Velasquez, also in the number two lane, collided with the rear of the settling defendant's vehicle. The plaintiffs, Hugo Navarro, a 30-year-old upholsteror, Maritza Navarro, a 30-year-old homemaker and Esteban Celada, a 6-year-old boy, were passengers in defendant Velasquez's Monte Carlo. Carlos Perez, a 13-year old boy who was not a party (?), was also a passenger. Approximately 0 to 10 seconds after defendant Velasquez's vehicle struck the settling defendant's vehicle, Velasquez's vehicle was rear-ended by a 1971 Datsun pick-up driven by defendant Diomedes Gamiao. Seconds after the impact, the rear of defendant Velasquez's Monte Carlo burst into flames. Gasoline, which fueled the fire, came from the opening at the top of the tank where the sending unit (meeting unit) attaches to the tank. The plaintiffs argued that gasoline came from other openings on the fuel tank as well, such as the filler neck; the defendants disputed this argument. The sending unit was dislodged as a result of the impact. The plaintiff brought this action against the defendant based on strict product liability, negligence and breach of warranty against defendant General Motors Corporation (the manufacturer of the Monte Carlo), and negligence against the defendant drivers of the vehicles, Hernan Velasquez, Diomedes Gamiao and the settling defendant. Neither Velasquez nor Gamaio were served. (The settling defendant settled in 1995 for $70,000.)
Settlement Discussions
The plaintiffs made a C.C.P. º998 settlement demand for $1.95 million. The defendants made a settlement offer of $50,000 prior to trial. After the liability verdict, defendant General Motors increased its offer to $150,000. The plaintiffs' demand remained the same.
Specials in Evidence
$252,966 (plaintiff Hugo Navarro); $5,401 (plaintiff Maritza Navarro); $3,005 (plaintiff Esteban Celada) $2,815 (psychological counseling for plainitff Maritza Navarro)
Injuries
Plaintiff Hugo Navarro alleged that he recieved third-degree burns over 37-percent of his body, primarily in the upper torso and back region, a fractured right femur, a ruptured disc and trauma to his right knee. The defendants claimed that this plaintiff sustained third-degree burns over 29-percent of his body. Plaintiff Hugo Navarro had three skin grafts during the two and a half month stay in the burn ward/intensive care at LA County/USC and had three additional skin graft surgeries at Rancho Los Amigos. Plaintiff Maritza Navarro alleged that she received burn injuries to her neck, back, right knee and right shoulder. (The parties agreed that the non-burn injuries were not attributable to the alleged negligence of General Motors and design defect of the subject vehicle.)
Other Information
Defendant General Motors received credits totalling $34,712 by virtue of the plaintiffs' pre-trial settlements with the settling defendant. General Motors' motion for directed verdict was granted with respect to plaintiff Carlos Perez's claims. Per defendant General Motors, the jury specifically found that the subject vehicle did not have a design defect. The defendant indicated that the jury's finding of negligence in light of the design-defect finding would likely be the subject of an appeal.
Poll
varied
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390