Facts

The defendant Top Dog Pool Repair coated the bottom of a one-foot deep wading pool. The plaintiff, who was five months pregnant and carrying her one-year-old child, stepped in the pool and immediately slipped and fell.

PLAINTIFF CONTENTIONS:
The plaintiff contended that the defendant was negligent in creating a dangerous condition that caused the plaintiff's injury. The plaintiff contended that she suffered injuries to her L4-5 and L5-S1 discs. The plaintiff could not be medically treated until after the delivery of her child in September 2003.

DEFENDANT CONTENTIONS:
The defendant admitted negligence for the slippery condition but disputed causation of the injury. The defendants disputed the plaintiff's wage loss and future earning capacity.

Settlement Discussions

The defendant offered $250,000 at the mandatory settlement conference; a C.C.P. Section 998 for $450,000; $600,000 during trial; and, $750,000 while the jury was out. The plaintiff made a C.C.P. Section 998 demand for $950,000. The plaintiff offered to settle at a MSC for $750,000. On the first trial date of June 15, 2005, the plaintiff offered to settle for $750,000 if accepted within one week. Thereafter, the plaintiff stated that she would settle for the policy limits of $1 million. The defendant paid the verdict, interest and costs in full.

Specials in Evidence

$14,331 in excess of $125,000

Injuries

The plaintiff suffered an annular tear to her L5-S1 disc. She also suffered a bulging disc at L4-5.

Result

Verdict of $1,117,033 in addition to $143,856 in interest and costs pursuant to the plaintiff's C.C.P. Section 998 offer to compromise in the amount of $950,000 that was not accepted by the defendant. no comparative negligence was found.

Other Information

There was medical testimony regarding disc replacement surgery at level L5-S1. After the plaintiff heard of the risks involved in the surgery by medical experts, during the trial she determined that she would not have the surgery. The defendant's attorney argued that the plaintiff could still have the surgery and her future medical would be in the area of $125,000, and that she should not receive future lost wages and future household services because those damages would be speculative. The plaintiff's attorney argued to the jury that the plaintiff would not have the surgery, and therefore, the jury should not award future medical damages for the surgery. The jury did not award the plaintiff for future medical damages related to the disc replacement surgery.

Deliberation

one day

Poll

11-1 (in favor of plaintiff regarding liability),

Length

five days