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.

Personal Injury
Public Entity Liability
Common Carrier Liability / Slip and Fall

Renee Parnell v. San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District

Published: Jul. 22, 2006 | Result Date: Jan. 19, 2006 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: CGC04435877 Verdict –  $18,900

Court

San Francisco Superior


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Derek B. Jacobson


Defendant

Donald P. Eichhorn
(Wilson, Elser, Moskowitz, Edelman & Dicker LLP)


Experts

Plaintiff

Stephen J. Greene Jr.
(Greene & Roberts LLP) (technical)

David A. Dodgin
(medical)

Defendant

Michael Rodriguez
(technical)

Facts

In December 2003, plaintiff Renee Parnell was on an escalator at defendant San Francisco Embarcadero BART Station. The escalator suddenly stopped without warning. As a result, plaintiff lost her balance and fell. The incident caused her to injure her ankle and leg. The plaintiff filed suit, claiming common carrier liability and negligent maintenance and repair.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
The plaintiff claimed that the escalator stopped in an abrupt manner because it had not been maintained. The defendant did not meet its duty of maintaining the escalator with the utmost care. Further, the escalator's brakes were not properly calibrated when they were installed. The plaintiff opined that according to defendant's records, the brakes had not been inspected or maintained since they were installed six months prior to the incident. According to plaintiff's discovery, in the previous year, there were three accidents due to at least 160 unscheduled stops.

The plaintiff's escalator expert testified that in a high-traffic mass transit environment, an escalator that has been properly maintained should not have more than two to four unscheduled stops per month. However, defendant's own records indicated that the escalator stopped at least 12 to 15 times a month. The cause of a significant number of the stops could not be identified. The plaintiff further asserted that if defendant was not able to reduce the escalator's unscheduled stops, it should have eliminated its service, or at least posted a warning sign.

The plaintiff argued that even if a loose screw made the escalator stop, the screw likely came from the escalator itself. If the escalator had been properly maintained, loose screws would not be coming off of it. Further, the bottom comb impact was faulty, as it was later learned that the bottom comb impact plate needed recalibration.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
The defendant asserted that plaintiff was comparatively negligent, as she walked on the descending escalator in high heels. This increased her risk of falling.

The defendant blamed the stop on a bottom comb impact switch, a safety device designed to shut down the escalator if something is stuck in between the escalator treads and the comb plate. The escalator stopped because the device was activated. According to the mechanic's report, part of a metal screw had been removed from the escalator tread. The defendant determined that the screw caused the escalator to stop without warning. The escalator was thus functioning properly, as it did what it was designed to do.

Settlement Discussions

Offer on day of trial: $5,000.

Specials in Evidence

$6,604 $5,000 $4,400

Damages

The plaintiff asserted that she suffered from tendonitis and a loss of strength in her leg and ankle. As such, she claimed an unspecified figure to cover pain and suffering.

Injuries

The plaintiff injured her ankle and sustained a displaced right fibular fracture, which required open reduction and corrective surgery.

Result

The jury found defendant to be 90 percent liable and plaintiff to be 10 percent liable. It awarded plaintiff $18,900, which was reduced to $17,010. Plaintiff was awarded costs of suit of $16,345.99. Total judgment of $34,024.35, including interest satisfied.

Other Information

Pre-trial judicial arbitration had resulted in a defense verdict.

Deliberation

one day

Poll

10-2

Length

seven days


#118973

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

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