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
Auto v. Pedestrian
Wrongful Death

Visitacion Perdido, Ferdinand Perdido, Imelda Guerrero, Leonida Quidilla, Marciano Lagundino, Ester Baclig, Paeito Perdido v. Huber Ramirez, Cruz Plumbing

Published: Apr. 24, 2010 | Result Date: Jan. 14, 2010 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: HG05-219147 Verdict –  Defense

Court

Alameda Superior


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Patrick Fitzsimons

Martin L. Jaspovice


Defendant

David L. Crowe

Kevin K. Cholakian
(Cholakian & Associates)


Experts

Plaintiff

Generoso Porciuncula
(medical)

Sharon H. Van Meter
(medical)

Gary T. Moran
(technical)

Halle L. Weingarten
(technical)

David M. Yoshida M.D.
(technical)

Defendant

Thomas J. Ayres Ph.D.
(technical)

David Schumb
(medical)

Rajeev Kelkar Ph.D.
(technical)

Facts

On April 6, 2005, defendant Huber Ramirez parked a truck in front of Ruben Cruz's Castro Valley home. Cruz was a plumber. Ramirez and Cruz's stepson loaded toilets into the back of the truck. Ramirez got in the truck, began to drive away, and ran over Marcelino Perdido, a next-door neighbor who was working on his yard. Perdido died. His widow, Visitacion Perdido, and six grown children, Ferdinand Perdido, Imelda Guerrero, Leonida Quidilla, Marciano Lagundino, Ester Baclig, and Paeito Perdido brought suit against Ramirez and Cruz Plumbing.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Perdido's widow and children argued that Ramirez and Cruz were liable for motor vehicle negligence, wrongful death, and vicarious liability. They claimed that Ramirez failed to see Perdido before driving his truck, partially because he was under the influence of methamphetamines. Cruz was liable because Ramirez was acting in the course and scope of his employment. They also argued that Perdido did not get up after being run over, so Ramirez left the scene of a crime where he should have known he may have killed Perdido.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS:
Ramirez and Cruz argued that they did not see Perdido, although they exercised care. Ramirez argued that after he ran over Perdido, he approached Perdido and asked if he was okay. Not responding, Perdido got up and walked toward his house, so Ramirez thought he was fine. It was not until later did Ramirez return and discover Perdido dead. Ramirez testified that he had taken some cocaine after the accident, but no methamphetamines before. Cruz denied that Ramirez was a company employee of his plumbing business, and that he was merely helping a friend deliver materials to a job site with his truck. This, Cruz said, was done without payment.

Settlement Discussions

The widow and children demanded $1,000,000. Cruz offered $250,000.

Injuries

The widow and children claimed Perdido's death from blunt chest trauma. They also claimed wrongful-death damages for loss of care, comfort, and society.

Result

Although the jurors found that Ramirez was Cruz's employee and working in the course and scope of his employment, the jury determined that Ramirez's negligence was not a substantial cause of Perdido's death.

Length

four weeks


#124210

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

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