Advanced Search

  On March 19, 1983 the Plaintiff, Timothy Aston, a 17-year-old motorcyclist was riding a 1982 Yamaha Seca 400 motorcycle. He was hit on the side of his motorcycle by a motorist who ran a red light. Aston received a traumatic crushing injury to his leg. Doctors attempted to save it, however the leg was totally crushed and had to be amputated below the knee. Aston argued that the design of the motorcycle was defective, in that it lacked side protection safeguards, and that he was unaware of the dangerous design of motorcycles when his mother bought him his Yamaha. Aston also argued that the Department of Transportation studies, in which Aston's expert, Dr. Peterson, was involved, ended in 1975, with recommendations that side protections be designed into motorcycles, or for consumers to be warned of their dangers in use. Aston contended that Yamaha has deliberately neglected, for ten years, for financial reasons, to even crash-­test motorcycles, fearing the tests would confirm the Department of Transportation studies. The Defendant, the Yamaha Motor Corporation, argued that the design was not at all defective, and that Aston was comparatively at fault for accelerating into the intersection on the green light without looking to see the vehicle running the red light. Ultimately the jury sided with the Aston, awarding him $1,652,000 for his injuries.

  Henry Washington, 51, was driving his motorcyle west on Folsom Street at 10:00 a.m. on June 28, 1982, in San Francisco. At the intersection of 13th Street, a car made a left turn and Washington ran into the vehicle, killing him. Washinton's surviving family decided to sue the city of San Francisco for negligent road design. They argued that dangerous conditions existed at this intersection due to 13th Street being directly under a freeway. It was claimed that the freeway support pillars, located on the center median strip, blocked the view of oncoming traffic to left turning vehicles. Their lawyers brought expert witnesses to testify. An accident reconstructionist testified that the configuration of the intersection, and its restricted sight lines, did not allow sufficient reaction times to allow a left turning vehicle to perceive and avoid a collision in these circumstances. In addition, they also brought a traffic engineer who testified that the intersection was dangerous, and that a protected left turn arrow phase was feasible at the intersection, and would have alleviated the danger. The City of San Francisco's lawyers argued that there was sufficient sight distance to allow left turning vehicles to see oncoming traffic. It was further claimed that the accident history did not show a dangerous condition. Their lawyers also brought expert witnesses to the stand. An engineering photographer testified that his photographs showed a good sight line between the vehicles, for at least three and a half seconds before the collision point. Ultimately the case was won by Washington's family. Their award was valued at $792,500, however it was reduced as 60% of liability was with the left-turning driver, 25% to the city, and 15% to Washington himself.

  Robert Graves, 17, was riding his motorcycle down Garfield Avenue in Sacramento County, California on a Saturday night on September 19, 1981 and was trying to find a party accompanied by his friend Ron Strem and his girlfriend, who were riding in a car. Due to Graves's amnesia that resulted from the incident, Strem and others had to reconstruct what happened that night. According to Strem, the two had attended a party at a local park on the afternoon of the accident, gone to a sandwich shop to see a friend, where they had dinner, and met Strem’s girlfriend, who accompanied them as they stopped in at more parties they had heard were to be held that evening. Strem recalls that neither of the young men had consumed any alcoholic beverages during the day or the evening. Ron Strem, and his girlfriend, in his car, and Plaintiff, on his motorcycle, last stopped at a home on Silverstrand Way, and finding no one there that they knew, they decided to split up. Strem ;drove about one­half block, to the dead­end on Silverstrand, turned around, and proceeded westbound on Silverstrand. In the meantime, Graves had gotten on his motorcycle, started it and drove east on Silverstrand toward the dead­-end. According to an eyewitness, Graves accelerated his motorcycle, to at least 40 m.p.h., in the a ­half block distance, and backed off his accelerator just before striking the dead­end divider, but did not hit his brakes. At the end of Silverstrand Way there is a concrete and asphalt divider, six feet wide, which separates the end of Silverstrand Way from Garfield Avenue, which runs perpendicular to Silverstrand. Graves struck the divider, became airborne, and collided with a vehicle which was being driven south on Garfield Avenue. When Graves was found he was not breathing, and had to be revived at the scene through the use of closed heart massage and mouth-to-mouth resuscitation. He later had a tracheostomy in the Emergency Room. He suffered brain damage, which manifested itself in loss of short term memory, and has deficits in expression through speech or writing, with a slim chance of improvement. Plaintiff suffered multiple fractures of the hip, pelvis, ribs, clavicle and foot. He was in a coma for eighteen days, lost his spleen, had a flail chest, and is unable to walk without a cane. He was not wearing a helmet, however the defendant's attorney's were not able to use this to prove comparative fault due to the judge's order. Graves argued that there was a dangerous condition of public property, in that the signing on Silverstrand was improper. There was a yellow reflectorized, diamond­-shaped Type N sign at the end of Silverstrand, facing east-bound traffic, and mounted on the divider at the centerpoint of Silverstrand. Graves argued that this sign was improper because it did not clearly notify the driver that the street was coming to an end. It was alleged that, either the the word "END" should have been written on the yellow sign, or it should have been a red reflectorized Type N sign, and that both of the latter signs are more in conformity with the recommendations of the State Traffic Manual than the sign that was used. Graves also argued that, at the last entrance onto Silverstrand, there was no Not a Through Street sign, as recommended by the State Traffic Manual, although its absence was not made known until one and a ­half years after the accident in question, by County investigators. County records show that such a sign was erected some time prior to the accident, and the testimony of the residents of the area do not agree whether or not the sign was missing as of the date of the accident. The County of Sacramento and their lawyers contended that the intersection was well lit, and that the yellow Type N sign was clearly visible for at least three hundred feet prior to the end of the roadway. They also argued that Graves was driving far in excess of the 25 m.p.h. speed limit, that Plaintiff’s driving was impaired by alcohol, and that the road was not dangerous when used with due care. In the end, the jury sided with Graves, who was awarded $854,000. He was found to be 52% at fault, however, and therefore this award had to be reduced to $405,650.