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. Truck
Rear-End Collision

Efren Perez v. Laura Mulevicz

Published: Apr. 12, 2005 | Result Date: Oct. 18, 2004 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: 03WL06226 Verdict –  $750

Judge

Richard E. Pacheco

Court

Orange Superior


Attorneys

Plaintiff

David M. Moeck
(Quinlan, Kershaw & Fanucchi LLP)


Defendant

Tsarina Branyan


Experts

Plaintiff

John Arakelian
(medical)

Defendant

Eron J. Martin
(medical)

Facts

Efren Perez, a 45-year-old farmer, was driving his 1989 Ford Ranger pickup truck on SR-22 at about 8 a.m. on Dec. 18, 2002. While stopped for traffic, his truck was struck from behind by a 2002 BMW driven by Laura Mulevicz. The force of the impact caused the truck to strike the back of the vehicle stopped in front of it. Perez's truck sustained about $4,000 in damage, while the BMW sustained about $7,000 of front-end damage. Perez sued Mulevicz, alleging vehicular negligence. Mulevicz stipulated to liability but argued damages.

Settlement Discussions

Perez demanded $10,000, reduced to $7,500. Mulevicz offered $6,000 C.C.P. Section 998, with indication $8,000, but withdrew the offer before trial. She offered $3,000 the day of trial.

Injuries

The plaintiff initially complained of irritability, tension, neck pain, thoracic pain and lower back pain. The plaintiff's doctor diagnosed post-traumatic acceleration/deceleration injuries of the cervicothoracic and lumbrosacral spine.

Other Information

Perez filed a motion for additur or in the alternative, a motion for new trial, based on insufficiency of the verdict, as well as an irregularity in the proceeding. Judge Pacheco declined to grant the additur request although he had indicated an inclination to. Instead, he granted the motion for new trial, which is set for June 2005.

Deliberation

three hours

Poll

12-0

Length

two days


#85500

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

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