Jeffrey F. Byrd v. Worldwide Educational Services, Contra Costa County, and Contra Costa County Private Industry Council
Published: Aug. 2, 1997 | Result Date: Jun. 25, 1997 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |Case number: V27987 Verdict – $277,782
Judge
Court
Solano Superior
Attorneys
Plaintiff
Michael B. Bassi
(Michael B. Bassi ALC)
Defendant
Experts
Plaintiff
Kimberly C. Page
(technical)
Eric E. Bugna
(medical)
Gary E. Daniel
(technical)
Patrick F. Mason Ph.D.
(technical)
Defendant
Orval Telford Ellsworth
(technical)
Richard Barry
(medical)
Eric Brethauer
(technical)
Lawrence J. Deneen J.D.
(technical)
Facts
On April 22, 1991, plaintiff Jeffrey Byrd, a 21-year-old man, was studying to become a cable television installer in the defendant's job training program when he was injured during a training exercise. Defendant Contra Costa County contracted with the state of California to operate the program in accordance with the "Job Training Partnership Act" (JTPA), an approved job training plan funded by the United States Government. Defendant Contra Costa County then subcontracted with defendant Worldwide, the end provider and private-for-profit contractor, to perform the actual job training and provide job placement. Defendant Worldwide was to provide classroom training for 12 participants in CATV installation. Contra Costa County through the defendant Private Industry Council, was to provide contract oversight and ensure that the training was done in a safe manner. At the time the plaintiff entered the program he was unemployed. The CATV installation class lasted approximately six weeks. It consisted of classroom training in basic skills and the fundamentals of CATV installation, and practical training in climbing poles and installing cable TV at Worldwide's pole yard. The CATV class was normally taught by Mike Darris, but Darris was uanble to teach the class and was replaced by Ivan Shaffer, who had no previous experience as a CATV installer. He had previously worked as a sign installer. His only experience with climbing poles was when he was a student at Worldwide. Shaffer had just graduated from Worldwide CATV training class which preceded the plaintiff's class. Worldwide hired Shaffer to replace Darris despite his lack of background, training and experience. Shaffer's only preparation to instruct the plaintiff's CATV class was following Darris around for a few weeks. The injury to the plaintiff occurred on the last day of the class. The plaintiff was on his final examination of a check-out climb. The check-out climb consisted of climbing two check-out poles, pole #1 and #6, both of which were slightly angled off-center and approximately 25-feet tall. The plaintiff first climbed pole #1. After climbing up and down pole #1, he rested. Shaffer then asked him to climb pole #6. The plaintiff said that he was tired and wanted to rest. Shaffer gave him a few minutes to rest and then came over and insisted that he climb the pole. The plaintiff climbed pole #6 to the top. While at the top, he was to belt off and simulate a cable TV repair. The plaintiff climbed to the top of pole #6 with his gaffs. He climbed freestyle and did not put his safety belt around the pole as he climbed. He was supposed to belt off at the top. When the plaintiff reached the top of the pole, he began to have a problem. He was unable to belt off. When he took one hand off the pole to attempt to belt off, he felt as if he was going to fall off the pole due to a combination of several factors, including the poor condition of the pole from many previous climbs by others, the condition and fit of his gaffs, and his own fatigue. The plaintiff yelled at Shaffer that he could not belt off, but he was instructed to try again. The plaintiff then moved around the pole to get to a different location where he might feel more secure. He tried again to belt off, but his arm was tired or numb and he could not. Shaffer again told him to belt off. The plaintiff then moved to two different locations on the pole and made two more attempts to belt off. He was unable to do so. After the plaintiff and Shaffer yelled back and forth between each other (the sequence lasted about four minutes), Byrd yelled to Shaffer that he was coming down the pole. He stepped down with one gaff and took a second step down with his other gaff. At that point his gaffs came loose. He began to fall. He pushed away from the pole as he had been taught. He fell to the ground. ***PLS. SEE THE VERDICT FOR CONTINUATION OF FACTS.
Settlement Discussions
The plaintiff made an initial settlement demand of $225,000 at mediation increased to a C.C.P. º998 settlement demand for $250,000 to defendant Worldwide, and again increased to $450,000 at a settlement conference. The defendant made a C.C.P. º998 offer of compromise for $20,000, increased to $27,000 at mediation and another C.C.P. º998 offer of $40,000 after mediation.
Specials in Evidence
$5,944 $91,158 $539,136
Injuries
The plaintiff sustained a fracture of his left fibula-tibia above the ankle.
Result
***CONTINUATION OF FACTS: He tried to roll when he hit the ground, as he had also been taught, but the force of the fall onto the ground caused him to break his left fibula-tibia just above the ankle. The plaintiff brought this action against the defendants based on premises liability and negligence theories of recovery.
Other Information
The verdict was reached approximately five years and four months after the case was filed. A mediation was held on Nov. 18, 1996 before Justice M.O. Sabraw, retired. It did not resolve the matter. The five-year dismissal statute was waived by the court when the defendants were granted a continuance of the trial pursuant to their motion to continue the original trial date. EXPERT TESTIMONY: The testimony of defense expert Orville Ellsworth, Ph.D., was severely limited by the court and was not able to testify as to his accident reconstruction. POST TRIAL MOTIONS: Defense motions for new trial and JNOV are pending.
Deliberation
2 days
Poll
10-2 (premises liability and negligence against Worldwide); 9-3 (negligence of Contra Costa County and Private Industry Council); 9-3 (causation); 11-1 (damages); 10-1 with 1 undecided (no comparative negligence against the plaintiff); 10-2 (apportionment of fault among defendants) apportionment of fault among defendants
Length
7 days
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390