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. Auto
General Negligence

Richard Warren Atkins, David Wells v. Treyvon Alexander Bookman, Moua Yang, The City of Fresno, and Does 1-10

Published: Feb. 5, 2021 | Result Date: Jan. 20, 2021 | Filing Date: May 28, 2019 |

Case number: 19CECG01789 Summary Judgment –  Defense

Judge

D. Tyler Tharpe

Court

Fresno County Superior Court


Attorneys

Plaintiff

David M. Hogue
(H & K, Inc., Attorneys at Law)


Defendant

Mandy L. Jeffcoach
(Whitney, Thompson & Jeffcoach LLP) for City of Fresno

Devon R. McTeer
(Whitney, Thompson & Jeffcoach LLP) for City of Fresno


Facts

The City of Fresno's police department was involved in a high speed automobile chase to apprehend Treyvon Bookman. The chase ensued on Palm Avenue and as officers reached the intersection of Palm Avenue and Belmont Avenue, Bookman's vehicle collided with a vehicle operated and occupied by Richard Warren Atkins and David Wells. The collision caused injuries to Wells and Atkins and the two sued the pursuing officers and the Fresno Police department for their alleged injuries and damages.

Contentions

PLAINTIFFS' CONTENTIONS: Plaintiffs contended that defendants failed to follow the applicable traffic safety laws while in pursuit of Bookman. Defendants' failure to use reasonable care in apprehending Bookman was the proximate cause of plaintiffs' injuries and damages. As a result, plaintiffs contended that defendants were liable to them for the collision that occurred between them and Bookman.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS: Defendants contended that they implemented their pursuit procedure in accordance with applicable vehicle codes and therefore did not act negligently in their pursuit of Bookman. Moreover, the claims asserted by plaintiffs were legally deficient because defendants were entitled to immunity for pursuing a criminal suspect after a crime was committed. Ultimately defendants also contended that they complied with all applicable vehicle codes while conducting the chase and therefore moved for summary judgment based on the facts and applicable law.

Result

Defendant's motion for summary judgment was granted.


#136569

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

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