- In a car v. bicycle accident where plaintiff claimed he was riding his bicycle in the pedestrian cross walk and defendant attempting to make a right turn on a red light struck his bicycle. Defendant claimed that plaintiff was traveling west bound in the east bound lane of traffic and that defendant was not liable for the accident or injuries.
- In an auto v. pedestrian accident in the middle of the block, plaintiff claimed that defendant was inattentive in that she was driving in a school zone and should have used extra care. Defendant claimed a “dart out” from behind other cars parked on the street.
- In a reverse rear end accident where there was only minor damage to plaintiff’s vehicle, she claimed over $26,000 medical expense and another $25000 future medical care. Defendant claimed the force of impact could not have caused such severe injuries and that plaintiff over treated.
- In an intersection collision plaintiff claimed that defendant ran the red light and struck her car. Defendant claimed that his light was yellow when he entered the intersection and therefore plaintiff ran the red light. Defendant also claimed that based on the Howell case plaintiff’s damages should be reduced.
- In a rear end auto accident, the issues of the case involved the severity of impact and the reasonableness of the medical expenses.
- In a rear end auto accident and injury to a young 12-year-old girl, the issue was the value of pain and suffering and general damages when there is a possibility that she will not be able to participate in sports when she was very actively involved in sports prior to the accident.
- In an accident between a small sedan and a tanker trailer plaintiff claimed that defendant struck her car when he was attempting to change lanes. The accident caused injuries including a tear of the rotator cuff, impingement syndrome of the toe and disc protrusion in the cervical and lumbar spine. Defendant did not deny liability and the issue was the amount of special and general damages.
- In an accident involving a tractor trailer of defendant that struck the unoccupied parked asphalt paving vehicle of plaintiff causing total loss of the equipment and loss of income as a result of loss of use. Plaintiff claimed the defendant went over the fog line and struck the paver and defendant claimed that the paver protruded into the lanes of travel and there was no warning to alert the traffic.
- In a rear end accident case plaintiff claimed that defendant caused in excess of $10,000 damage to plaintiff’s car and that defendant admitted to being drunk and signed a paper to that effect. Defendant claimed that the accident was a minor impact and could not have caused the injuries to plaintiffs.
- In an automobile accident involving a left turning vehicle, plaintiff’s car was considered a total loss with a value of in excess of $13,000. Plaintiff claimed injuries and loss of use in the amount of $9650 due to defendant carrier’s delay in the settling of the property damage. Defendant admitted liability but argued the reasonableness of the loss of use and medical expenses.
- In an auto v. bicycle accident plaintiff claimed that defendant was negligent in exiting parking driveway and striking plaintiff causing injuries. Defendant claims that Defendant was traveling on the sidewalk in violation of the Vehicle Code and City Ordinance and therefore was negligent per se.
- In a red light/green light dispute plaintiff claimed soft tissue injuries to various parts of her body. Defendant admitted liability and argued excessive treatment.
- Dispute involving a two-car collision where the plaintiff claimed defendant drove backwards into the plaintiff’s car. Plaintiff claimed defendant was working in the course and scope of his employment and therefore, his employer was liable for the damages. Defendant claimed that defendant’s driver was not an employee of the defendant.
- In a wrongful death of an elderly Armenian man caused by a car vs. pedestrian, action was brought by his wife. Aside from the issues relating to the value of the case when an elderly retired man is involved, there was an issue of who would be the decision maker or the decision makers.
