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
Premises Liability
Dangerous Condition of Public Property

Naomi Miranda, a minor, by and through her Guardian Ad Litem, Lorrena Gallegos v. County of Orange, Social Services Agency, CalWorks, Orange County Social Services, and Does 1 through 100, inclusive

Published: Dec. 31, 2016 | Result Date: Oct. 18, 2016 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: 30-2015-00797736-CU-PO-CJC Verdict –  Defense

Court

Orange Superior


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Alan K. Nicolette
(Nordstrom Steele Nicolette and Blythe)


Defendant

Thomas G. Wianecki
(Wesierski & Zurek LLP)


Experts

Plaintiff

Mark E. Krugman
(medical)

Facts

On Nov. 19, 2014, plaintiff Naomi Miranda, 4, filed suit against the County of Orange Social Services Agency, CalWorks, and Orange County Social Services. Plaintiff was injured when a table fell on her in the public area where people fill-out paper work in the lobby.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Plaintiff claimed that table was not secured, wobbly and unstable, plaintiff only touched the table lightly when it overturned and injured her. Plaintiff claimed there was no documentation that the table was secured with screws and brackets to other tables in the Social Services Agency lobby.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
Defendants claimed the table was one of four grouped together and secured in June 2012, the table never separated thereafter. Defendant claimed plaintiff was playing, swinging, and hanging from the table edge, when the small screws and brackets popped off, and the table tipped and overturned. Defendant claimed the table was not a dangerous condition of public property, there was no notice that the table was unsafe or unfit for its purpose with the general public, and the table had been in use for 2.5 years without any complaint or incident.

Settlement Discussions

According to defense, plaintiff demanded $185,000. Defendants offered $0. According to plaintiff, plaintiff's demand was $75,000 not $185,000.

Specials in Evidence

in excess of $1,100 $3,000 to $6,000 (scar revision)

Injuries

Plaintiff suffered a scar on the right temporal area of head, left foot laceration, and a bruise for a couple of weeks. Scar revision and laser treatments would reduce the scar to a thin line.

Result

The jury rendered a verdict for the defense.

Other Information

FILING DATE: July 10, 2015.

Deliberation

20 minutes

Poll

10-2

Length

three days


#84976

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

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