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
Motorcycle Accident
Dangerous Condition of Public Property

Merle Reuser, Patrick Fairlee, Mark Zimmerschied and Ryan McAuley v. County of Humboldt

Published: May 17, 2014 | Result Date: Jan. 28, 2014 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: DR070176 Verdict –  Defense

Court

Humboldt Superior


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Thomas J. Brandi
(The Brandi Law Firm)

Brian J. Malloy
(The Brandi Law Firm)


Defendant

Paul A. Brisso


Experts

Plaintiff

Mark B. Shattuck
(technical)

Harry J. Krueper Jr.
(technical)

J. Michael Stephenson
(technical)

Defendant

Lester Klear
(technical)

Thomas K. Shelton
(technical)

Donald Rafaelli
(technical)

Facts

Merle Reuser, Patrick Fairlee, Mark Zimmerschied, and Ryan McAuley sued Humboldt County after an automobile accident.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
On June 24, 2006, plaintiffs were all riding their motorcycles in Humboldt County. However, while navigating a curve, they all ran off the road and crashed.

They each sued the county, arguing that the road was dangerous because it did not have adequate warnings regarding the sudden curve. An expert testified on their behalf that the curve was dangerous because it was far sharper than it initially seemed. Another expert testified that the plaintiffs did not have enough time to slow down, and were all driving at around 30 mph when they crashed.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
The county asserted that the curve was not dangerous, and did not require any signs. They argued that plaintiffs caused the accident themselves by driving at unsafe speeds. The county argued that plaintiffs' own experts testified that, had plaintiffs really been driving at 30 mph, they would not have had any trouble navigating the curve. A police officer also testified that one of the plaintiffs reported to him that he was driving at 50 mph at the time of the accident.

Injuries

Plaintiffs suffered from multiple injuries due to the accident.

Result

A jury ruled in favor of the county, finding that the road was not dangerous.

Length

15 days


#84607

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

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