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
Premises Liability
Dangerous Condition

Joshua Donnell, a minor, by and through his Guardian Ad Litem Marlene Dixon-Donnell v. Stockton Phoenix Limited, et al.

Published: May 10, 2014 | Result Date: Mar. 12, 2014 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: 39-2010-00248443-CU-PO-STK Verdict –  Defense

Court

San Joaquin Superior


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Kenneth N. Meleyco
(Law Offices of Kenneth N. Meleyco)


Defendant

Charles S. Custer
(Gordon & Rees LLP)

Jewel Kolling Basse

John C. Ellis


Experts

Plaintiff

Dale H. Fietz
(technical)

Defendant

John Sacco
(technical)

Kerry L. Knapp
(technical)

Facts

Two-year-old Joshua Donnell was visiting the Hampton Square Apartments in Stockton, when he was injured after falling from a second-story staircase. Defendant Stockton Phoenix Ltd., owns, operates and controls the Hampton Square Apartments.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Plaintiff Marlene Dixon-Donnell, Joshua's mother and guardian ad litem, claimed the stair treads were loose at the apartment complex causing the toddler to stumble and fall through railings that were nine-inch wide, to the ground and rocks below. Plaintiff claimed that Joshua hit his head on a rock suffering a brain injury. Plaintiff claimed the railings violated various contracts the owners had signed to receive funds to rehabilitate the property as well as the Uniform Building Code.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS:
Defendants claimed plaintiff's witnesses' versions of the accident were not credible and that plaintiff did not meet the burden of establishing that any alleged negligence was a substantial factor in the alleged harm.

Settlement Discussions

Plaintiff demanded $7 million.

Result

Defense verdict. The jury determined that while the nine-inch wide stairway railings may have arose to a level of negligence, the evidence was not sufficient to prove that any negligence was a substantial factor in causing the harm claimed by plaintiff.

Other Information

The case was bifurcated, at plaintiff's request, and liability was tried first. EXPERT TESTIMONY: Plaintiff's expert, Dale Howard Fietz, testified that the stairway was unsafe and not in compliance with defendant's contractual obligations. He also stated that the Uniform Building Code did not require defendants to modify the stairway railing. Defense expert, Kerry Knapp, Ph.D., testified that, among other things, the injuries did not support the claim plaintiff fell six to seven feet and struck his head on a rock. John Sacco, defendants' building code expert, testified that the stairway was in compliance with the Uniform Building Code. FILING DATE: Aug. 27, 2010.

Deliberation

six hours

Length

four weeks


#97795

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

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