Plaintiff Marla suffered injuries as a result of a collision between her car (a green Plymouth Voyager) and the one operated by Defendant Mark (a white turbo-charged, Ford Bronco). The acc
How would this information provided be articulated into a trial brief submission?
Plaintiff Marla suffered injuries as a result of a collision between her car (a
green Plymouth Voyager) and the one operated by Defendant Mark (a white
turbo-charged, Ford Bronco). The accident occurred on January 10, 2020, at
approximately 1:35 a.m., as Marla was exiting the southbound I-405 freeway at
the Brookhurst Street off-ramp in Fountain Valley, California.
The police report indicates (and the investigating officer will accordingly
testify) that Marla, driving at 35 m.p.h., was decelerating on the offramp when
she saw a blue minivan, directly ahead of her, suddenly swerve wildly to the left.
In an instant, she understood why the minivan had swerved?a large cardboard
box was in the middle of her lane. Marla stepped on the brakes and brought the
Voyager to a screeching halt in front of the box.
The police report also states that the box, though Marla did not know it at
the time of the incident, contained a large desktop computer. Eyewitnesses
reported that it fell off the bed of a red pick-up truck which was driving on the off-
ramp in front of the minivan. While the pick-up truck’s owner has not yet been
identified, the police know that it carried Rhode Island license plates partially
marked “147 MC”.
The car directly behind Marla was Defendant Mark’s Bronco. Mark was
driving at approximately 40 m.p.h. when Marla applied the brakes. Although Mark had left 10-15 feet of room between his car and Marla’s, he could not step
on his brake soon enough to avoid striking Marla. The Bronco hit Marla’s car
from behind. The posted speed limit on the off-ramp was 40 m.p.h.
Mark is an out-of-work diesel mechanic who had spent the evening with
the local chapter of the Hell’s Angels motorcycle group playing cards at one of
the member’s houses in a crime-ridden part of town. Marla spent the evening at
Mario’s Bar and Grill, a local restaurant, participating in a charity auction to raise
funds for underprivileged children. Upon interrogation by the police, some of
Marla’s friends testified that Marla had been drinking before leaving and “kind of
staggered” to her car.
Marla suffered back injuries and was treated by various medical
practitioners for over a year, with total medical expenses of $10,759.00. She
was treated by a chiropractor and a physical therapist for two years, with medical
expenses of $7,000.00. She incurred the rest of her medical expenses
($3,759.00.00) obtaining an evaluation from an orthopedic surgeon. Although
the pain has largely subsided, Marla still experiences daily back discomfort and
headaches.
Marla is suing Mark for her medical costs ($10,759.00) plus her pain and
suffering–continued back pain, headaches, insomnia, loss of concentration,
dizziness ($50,000.00). She, therefore, seeks a total of $60,759.00. Marla has
also sued, as a “DOE” Defendant, the unidentified driver of the pick-up truck.
Marla’s suit against Mark and the Doe Defendant is based on common law negligence and civil code 1708.
Mark claims that he should not be responsible for the accident because it
resulted from Marla’s actions. He also claims that other parties are either fully or
partly responsible for the accident.
In terms of Marla’s negligence claim against him, Mark argues that Marla
has not established all of the necessary elements of such a claim: 1) that he had
a duty of care toward Marla; 2) that his conduct breached that duty (that a
reasonably prudent person would have acted differently); 3) that his conduct was
the cause of Marla’s injuries; and 4) that, as a result of this conduct, Marla
suffered injuries.
In terms of Marla’s claimed damages, Mark points out that California law
provides that non-economic damages (e.g., pain and suffering) must be
apportioned between all defendants in accordance with their proportion of fault.
However, no such provision is made for economic damages (e.g., medical
expenses, lost earnings, etc.)—each defendant found at fault is liable for the
entire amount of damages. To back up his arguments relating to damages, Mark
cites California Civil Code ?? 1430, 1431.1, 1431.2, and 1432 as well as the case
of Evangelatos v. Superior Court, 44 Cal.3d 1188 (1988) (particularly footnote 4
of the dissenting opinion). Mark also argues that plaintiff was treated excessively:
that the normal treatment time to recover from an accident such as that suffered
by Marla is six to eight weeks. Mark will present expert testimony at trial to
support that claim. In response to Mark’s arguments regarding her damages, she cites the
case of DaFonte v. Up-Right, Inc., 2 Cal.4th 593 (1992)?which she claims
refutes Mark’s reliance on Evangelatos.
Collepals.com Plagiarism Free Papers
Are you looking for custom essay writing service or even dissertation writing services? Just request for our write my paper service, and we'll match you with the best essay writer in your subject! With an exceptional team of professional academic experts in a wide range of subjects, we can guarantee you an unrivaled quality of custom-written papers.
Get ZERO PLAGIARISM, HUMAN WRITTEN ESSAYS
Why Hire Collepals.com writers to do your paper?
Quality- We are experienced and have access to ample research materials.
We write plagiarism Free Content
Confidential- We never share or sell your personal information to third parties.
Support-Chat with us today! We are always waiting to answer all your questions.
