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
Product Liability

Entessari Gnolamreza v. Santa Clara Cab Company

Published: Feb. 3, 2007 | Result Date: Nov. 8, 2006 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Verdict –  Defense

Court

Santa Clara Superior


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Albie B. Jachimowicz


Defendant

Todd L. Peterson


Experts

Plaintiff

Wilson C. Hayes
(technical)

Defendant

Brandford J. Coburn
(technical)

Elaine Serina Ph.D.
(technical)

Facts

Entessari Gnolamreza was employed as a cab driver for Santa Clara Cab Co. In 2004, he was driving a cab on Highway 880 in San Jose when he was allegedly forced off the road by another vehicle. The cab eventually stopped when it struck a sign post. Gnolamreza, 60, filed a products liability lawsuit against the Santa Clara Cab Co. claiming the cab's seat belt was defective. He also claimed negligence.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
The plaintiff claimed that the seat belt malfunctioned. However, he claimed that he took it off prior to the arrival of paramedics in order to lay down.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
The defendant claimed that soon after the accident, the cab, which was totaled, was destroyed. As a result, it was not possible for the plaintiff to prove his theory that the seat belt failed to work. The defense therefore denied liability. In support of its claim, the defense claimed that while still at the scene of the accident, the plaintiff informed a paramedic that the seat belt was in working order. The paramedic claimed that he did not see the plaintiff wearing a seat belt when he came up to the car after the accident.

Settlement Discussions

The plaintiff demanded $85,000 and the defendant offered $50,000.

Damages

The plaintiff sought a total of $495,000 in damages for pain and suffering as well as two years of lost earnings. When the accident occurred, the plaintiff had been employed by the defendant for a few days. For approximately five years prior to that, the plaintiff was unemployed. $250,000 of the total amount sought in damages went toward the plaintiff's medical bills.

Injuries

The plaintiff suffered neck and back injuries as well as a broken ankle.

Result

Defense verdict.

Deliberation

five hours

Poll

11-1

Length

five days


#88668

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

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