Facts

On Oct. 12, 2009, plaintiff Timothy Cameron Dewitt and defendant Edmond Mushegyan became involved in an altercation after plaintiff saw defendant allegedly breaking into his truck. Plaintiff returned to his car and drove away, at which time defendant shot at plaintiff's vehicle. One of the bullets struck plaintiff in the head. The incident occurred near the Las Palmas Gardens apartment building in Hollywood. At the time, defendant worked as an armed security guard for General Security Service Inc., which had been contracted to guard the apartment building. Plaintiff sued Mushegyan, General Security Service, New Vision Assets Inc. (owner of the apartment building), and John Stewart Co. (the apartment building's property manager).

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Plaintiff contended that Mushegyan committed assault and battery and other intentional torts against him, and that the other defendants were vicariously liable.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
Mushegyan was not in the course and scope of his employment when Mushegyan abandoned his post and went to purportedly investigate plaintiff's vehicle down the street, and that defendants were not negligent in their hiring, training or supervision of Mushegyan. Mushegyan contended that he shot at plaintiff's vehicle in self-defense because plaintiff claimed that he was going to run Mushegyan down with his vehicle.

Settlement Discussions

Plaintiff maintained a $10,000,000 demand during private mediation, and reduced the demand to $2,000,000 at a pre-trial Mandatory Settlement Conference. Defense made an offer for $565,000.

Injuries

Plaintiff sustained traumatic brain injury from the gunshot wound, and suffered loss of vision to the left field of vision in both eyes.

Result

The jury returned a verdict for plaintiff, awarding him $3,499,000. The jury determined that Mushegyan was 35 percent liable for his intentional conduct and 10 percent liable for his negligence. The jury also found General Security Service and John Steward each 15 percent liable, New Vision Assets 5 percent liable, and plaintiff 20 percent liable. After an offset for comparative liability, plaintiff's recovery was $1,944,200.

Other Information

The case is being appealed by defendants, and cross-appealed by plaintiff. FILING DATE: Oct. 7, 2011.