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
Automobile Accident
Bicyclist Riding on Sidewalk v. Car Exiting Parking Lot

Michael Spriesterbach v. Janice Holland, Charles Holland

Published: Mar. 3, 2012 | Result Date: Jan. 10, 2012 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: SC109298 Verdict –  Defense

Court

L.A. Superior Santa Monica


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Thomas S. Feher
(Feher Law APC)


Defendant

Perry M. Forrester
(Bretoi, Lutz & Stele)


Experts

Plaintiff

Rajan M. Patel M.D.
(medical)

David M. King
(technical)

Defendant

Henricus P. Jansen M.S.
(technical)

Stephen Kay
(medical)

Facts

Michael Spriesterbach was riding his bicycle on the sidewalk when he was struck by a vehicle operated by Janice Holland, exiting a parking lot.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Spriesterbach claimed that Holland failed to yield as she exited the parking lot. She was looking left and did not notice his bike as she accelerated. The front of Holland's car hit his bicycle, causing him to land on the street.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
Holland argued she was not at fault and Spriesterbach was the sole proximate cause of the accident. She claimed he was riding his bicycle on the sidewalk in the wrong direction in violation of California Law (rel. Code Sect. 21650.1), and failed to ascertain that Holland had seen him before riding in front of the car.

Damages

Plaintiff sought $94,562.07 in past medical costs and an unspecified amount for pain and suffering.

Injuries

Spriesterbach felt shoulder pain that required an arthroscopic surgery on his left shoulder to repair. He claimed to still experience residual pain and a reduced range of motion.

Result

The jury ruled for the defense.

Other Information

There is a motion for new trial pending as well as an appeal regarding the jury instructions administered by the Judge.

Deliberation

one hour

Poll

9-3

Length

five days


#84557

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

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