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
Dangerous Condition of Public Property
Negligent Maintenance of a Railroad Track

Leonard Huddleston v. Union Pacific Railroad Company, City of Oakland, Oakland Coliseum Housing Partners L.P.

Published: Sep. 12, 2009 | Result Date: Nov. 3, 2008 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: RG06295413 Settlement –  $133,000

Court

Alameda Superior


Attorneys

Plaintiff

John M. Anton
(Boxer & Gerson LLP)


Defendant

Charles S. Custer
(Gordon & Rees LLP)

C. Donald McBride

Rachel Z. Wagner

Jon C. Yonemitsu
(Littler Mendelson PC)

Jennifer N. Logue

John D. Feeney
(Union Pacific Railroad Co.)


Facts

On Jan. 19, 2006, at approximately 6:00 a.m., plaintiff Leonard Huddleston was riding his Harley-Davidson motorcycle near a railroad track in Oakland when he lost control of his vehicle and crashed. He claimed that he crashed when the front wheel of his motorcycle got caught in deteriorated payment immediately adjacent to the railroad track. He sued defendants city of Oakland, Union Pacific Railroad Company, and Oakland Coliseum Housing Partners L.P. alleging negligent maintenance and repair of the roadway.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Plaintiffs contended that as between the railroad, the city, and the developer, one was, or all was responsible for the deteriorated condition of the pavement, which caused plaintiff's injury.

As against the city of Oakland, plaintiff contended that Section 825 of the Government Code provides for liability for dangerous conditions of public property, and that the condition of the subject roadway created a substantial risk of injury, to which the city had notice of as early as May 2002.

As against Union Pacific, plaintiff argued that the general orders of the Public Utility Commission of the state of California obligated Union Pacific to maintain and repair the pavement in the crossing area between lines two feet outside the rails of the said track.

As against Oakland Coliseum Housing Partners L.P., the city entered into a subdivision improvement agreement with the developer to construct improvements in the area in which the accident occurred. These improvements included the streets, highways, and public ways of the area, and the developer had assumed responsibility for resurfacing the street in which the accident occurred.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
Union Pacific claimed that the city revoked its at-will franchise, which had obligated the railroad to maintain the subject road. Oakland Coliseum Housing Partners contended that it had requested, and been granted a delay by the city to make improvements in the area.

Result

Before mediator Chris Lavdiotis, the case settled with Union Pacific agreeing to pay $85,000, the city agreeing to pay $40,000, and Oakland Coliseum Housing Partners agreeing to pay $8,000.

Other Information

The court denied summary judgment motions by both Union Pacific and Oakland Coliseum Housing Partners. FILING DATE: Oct. 26, 2006.


#95415

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

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