Sandra L. Ladd v. David Sparks, et al.
Published: Jan. 24, 1998 | Result Date: Aug. 25, 1997 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |Case number: 131133 Verdict – $0
Judge
Court
Santa Cruz Superior
Attorneys
Plaintiff
Defendant
David S. Spini
(Scruggs, Spini & Fulton)
Experts
Plaintiff
Frank O. May
(technical)
Jo K. Crosby
(technical)
Jeff Gower
(technical)
Defendant
Peter Atkinson
(technical)
Steven Raas
(technical)
Facts
Plaintiff in this case owned a rental property in Scotts Valley. Defendants owned the property on the hillside behind plaintiff's property. On Jan. 9, 1995, during a severe storm, the hillside slid into the rear of plaintiff's home. The city determined the home was unsafe to occupy and it was later determined that the hill was unstable and required a large wall which would exceed the value of the property. The plaintiff hired geotechnical engineers to investigate and they all determined the slide was caused by two different stratigraphic formations in the hillside and the heavy rain. One engineer, Steve Raas, noticed water between the stratigraphic formations but could not find evidence of water coming from defendant's property above plaintiff's. The plaintiff brought this action against the defendants based on negligence and negligent infliction of emotional distress theories of recovery.
Settlement Discussions
The plaintiff made a C.C.P. º998 settlement demand for $299,999. The defendant made a C.C.P. º998 offer of compromise for $7,500.
Damages
The plaintiff asked for the value of the property $210,000 plus an unspecified sum for general damages and emotional distress.
Other Information
At trial, plaintiff reported that the trial court gave a special instruction to the jury that to establish negligene, plaintiff had to prove that the Sparks hd knowledge as of the time of the slide that plaintiff's property was being flooded because of the clogged pipe inlet, that the Sparks' knowledge existed a sufficient amount of time before the slide to have allowed them to clear the inlet and prevent the slide and that the Sparks chose to leave the inlet in a clogged condition and allow the flooding to continue. Per defendant, no settlement conference or alternative dispute resolution took place. Per plaintiff, most jurors agreed with plaintiff's expert's theory of how the slide happened but that plaintiff failed to establish defendants' knowledge as required by the court's special instruction on negligence and thus failed to meet the proof requirement. Per defendant, plaintiff's geotechnical expert, Jo Crosby, testified at trial that he had no evidence to support his conclusions about slide causation and that the conclusions were based on assumptions only. EXPERT TEST: Plaintiff's expert, Crosby, also testified that the drainage inlet above defendants' property was blocked and excess water flowed over it onto plaintiff's property, causing the slide. The defendant's geotechnical expert, Steven Raas, testified that he found no evidence of overland water two days after the slide and that the contact point between the two different rock formations had previously failed. Further, that the slide was caused by the rainfall which saturated the soil beneath the contact point. POST TRIAL MOTIONS: Defendants filed a memorandum of costs for $20,991. Plaintiff filed a motion to tax all but $4,000 of defendant's costs. Defendant obtained a judgment in the amount of $20,493.95. Plaintiff has appealed. The verdict was reached approximately one year and nine months after the case was filed.
Deliberation
1½ hours (per plaintiff); less than 10 minutes (per defendant)
Poll
12-0
Length
five days
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390