Kalina Angelova v. City of Los Angeles
Published: Aug. 27, 2011 | Result Date: Nov. 22, 2010 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |Case number: LC082541 Verdict – Defense
Court
L.A. Superior Van Nuys
Attorneys
Plaintiff
Andrew C. Bryman
(Bryman & Apelian)
Defendant
John A. Wright
(Office of the Los Angeles City Attorney)
Experts
Plaintiff
Harvey Cohen
(technical)
Ross Nathan
(medical)
Defendant
Taryn Johnson
(technical)
Robert D. Shlens
(medical)
Facts
Kalina Angelova was walking along on a sidewalk with her husband at night when the front of her foot allegedly struck a two-inch elevated seam in the concrete sidewalk, causing her to pitch forward. As she fell forward, she extended her hands in an attempt to break her fall. She landed on her right wrist. Although the incident occurred a block away from her residence, she claimed it was the first time that she had walked on the subject sidewalk.
Angelova sued the city of Los Angeles for premises liability, alleging that the city had notice of the elevation caused by a tree root expanding beneath the sidewalk. She argued that the city should have had notice of the dangerous condition given that it had performed numerous sidewalk repairs in the neighborhood in recent years.
A safety expert concluded that any elevation more than a quarter-inch was a dangerous condition because it interfered with the average stride of a person's gait, and thereby created a tripping hazard. The defect was augmented due to the low visibility of the nighttime condition.
The city denied the allegations and argued that the subject sidewalk did not constitute a dangerous condition, and that it had no notice of it.
Damages
Angelova sought $500,000 for past and future medical expenses as well as pain and suffering.
Injuries
Angelova was driven to the hospital by her husband where she was admitted and diagnosed with a compound fracture to the distal radius in her right, dominant arm. A plate and screws were inserted in her arm and she underwent months of rehabilitation and follow-up examinations. A non-treating expert opined that she might require a future surgery or two to remove the hardware and replace it. She claimed she was in chronic pain and depended on her husband for her daily necessities as a result of her injuries.
Result
The jury rendered a defense verdict. Even though it found that there was a dangerous condition, it determined that the city had no notice of it.
Deliberation
three hours
Poll
11-1
Length
six days
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390