Advanced Search

  On January 24, 2006, 46-year-old ironworker James Jaworowski was riding his motorcycle on Bosworth Street in San Francisco, California when he was struck by a Mitchell Engineering truck driven by Finbar James Brody. As Jaworowski was riding his motorcycle in the right lane, Brody changed intersections, resulting in the collision between the vehicles. In the accident, Jawarowski suffered several ligament tears, requiring him to undergo physical therapy resulting in one year of missed work. He claimed to have ongoing pain following the accident. Jawarowski decided to sue Brody and his employer. He and his lawyers argued that Brody failed to yield the right of way to Jawarowski. To these ends, Brody testified that he did not look in two of his three mirrors while changing lanes. Brody and his attorneys contended, however, that Jawarowski was speeding the time of the accident. In the end, the jury ruled in favor of Jawarowski, awarding him $705,297.32. He was found 15% liable, however. After reducing the award due to his liability and adjusting for the amount actually paid to his health care provider, he was awarded $530,874.57.

At 12:44 p.m. on August 4, 2005, plaintiff Mercy Zamora, a San Francisco meter maid in her 40s, was driving a three-wheeled vehicle on Harrison Street, toward First Street, when her brakes failed while driving downhill. She was traveling at 22 mph and hit a van that was stopped at the red light on First Street. The force of the impact caused the bottom of the front of the vehicle to be crushed upward while the roof collapsed downward. The steering wheel became lodged into Zamora’s lower abdomen and she was trapped in the vehicle. Emergency workers used the Jaws of Life to free Zamora. She was sent to a hospital with multiple injuries.  Zamora sustained a fractured hand, a fractured knee, a lacerated liver, a lacerated vagina, a pelvic fracture, and a variety of other lacerations. She was in the hospital for six weeks after the accident, and spent another three months in a rehabilitation facility treating the injuries. Zamora sued the manufacturers and distributors of the vehicle, Textron Inc., Providence, R.I.; Ransomes America Corp., Augusta, Ga.; and Cushman Inc., Augusta, Ga.; to recover personal-injury damages. Zamora also filed a negligent manufacturing action against the companies that made and distributed the wheel cylinder on the vehicle, Affinia Group Inc., Ann Arbor, Mich., and Brake Parts Inc., McHenry, Ill. Zamora's attorneys argued that Cushman was negligent for not equipping the vehicle with a roll cage, a shoulder harness, or a viable secondary brake, per the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. Cushman should have equipped it with a dual­master cylinder brake system instead of the singe master cylinder system it had installed. Zamora's attorneys also argued that Affinia/BPI was liable for a manufacturing defect in the wheel cylinder it provided for the vehicle because its failure had caused the entire braking system to fail. They asserted that when the vehicle was inspected after the collision, the Affinia/BPI wheel cylinder was broken. They claimed that since there was a 300-­foot line of brake fluid tracing up the hill from the point of impact, it proved the wheel cylinder had broken and caused the entire brake line to fail. Counsel for Cushman contended that the company wasn’t required to install a dual braking system or a shoulder harness when it built the vehicle in 1992, because it was defined as a motorcycle and therefore satisfied the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. The company also claimed that the vehicle was so old when it was in the collision that all of the parts had been replaced by the city, and the Cushman defendants couldn’t be held liable for the failure of parts it didn’t design, manufacture or distribute. Counsel for Affinia/BPI contended that there was no evidence that its wheel cylinder had failed before the collision. Counsel asserted that the damage to the wheel cylinder was consistent with a part that had been damaged in the collision. Counsel for Affinia/BPI argued that the master cylinder had failed and that was why there was a stream of brake fluid leading down to the area where the collision occurred. The defense contended that the city was liable, and it was added to the verdict form. The defense argued that the city’s negligent repair caused the master cylinder to fail and disable the entire brake line before the accident. Counsel referenced a June 2005 repair report that demonstrated that there had been complaints about the brakes, but the mechanic didn’t take any action other than changing a tire on the vehicle, despite its being out of use for about six weeks. Counsel argued that the city had also over­torqued the master cylinder, and that caused the master cylinder to weaken and eventually crack. Zamora's attorneys stated that two feet of Zamora’s intestine had to be removed, and she also sustained a mild brain injury, and developed PTSD and depression. They claimed $295,000 for Zamora’s past medical damages and sought an additional $150,000 for future medical damages because Zamora would require physical therapy once per month as well as ongoing emotional and psychological treatment. Zamora's attorneys also claimed that she was unable to work for the remainder of her life because her IQ was in the low 80s after the collision and she couldn’t perform the tasks of a meter maid. Zamora claimed it took her more than six months to return to walking and one year to walk without crutches. The parties stipulated to $150,000 in past lost earnings and Zamora’s counsel requested more than $1 million for future lost earnings. Noting the damage to Zamora’s ovary, and the limitations on Zamora’s ability to perform physical activities she had previously enjoyed such as running, her attorneys requested unspecified damages for past and future pain and suffering. Regarding the allegation that Zamora had suffered a brain injury in the accident, defense counsel argued that Zamora’s IQ had never been tested before the accident so there wasn’t any proof she had become cognitively impaired. The defense claimed that Zamora had performed 90 days of light duty work for the city since the accident and was able to continue working in a sedentary capacity despite some physical limitations. The defense also argued that Zamora wasn’t entitled to recover any future pain and suffering damages because she had been both walking and running for some time before the trial, as evidenced by her completion of a half-­marathon just two weeks before trial. The jury ultimately ruled a mixed verdict. They found the city of San Francisco to be 57.5% negligent, the Cushman company 37.5% negligent, and Zamora 5% negligent. Affinia/Brake Parts Inc. was found 0% negligent. They ultimately awarded Zamora $1,595,000.

  This accident was occured when a 17-year-old motorcyclist collided with a commercial vehicle at a busy intersection, resulting in the youth's death. The incident occurred at 7 p.m. on May 8, 1987 in clear weather, at an intersection with two lanes and a left­ hand turn lane running south to north and two lanes north to south, in the City of Lafayette, California. Michael Richardson, 45-years-old and Audrey Richardson are the parents of a 17-year-old boy who was killed in a motorcycle accident. They argued that an employee of the defending copmany, Style Master Exteriors, who was driving a car, took an illegal left turn which blocked the boy’s right of way. The boy’s motorcycle crashed into the car, and he died at the site of the accident. The parents claimed the illegal left turn was the cause of the accident and that the driver, and therefore his comapany as well, were the negligent party. The case was settled against the driver himself before trial for his insurance policy limits of $15,000. The driver's employer, Style Master Exteriors, argued the crash was caused by the negligence of the motorcycle rider. They alleged that the motorcyclist was racing with another boy. They claimed he therefore was driving too fast and following the other boy too closely, and that this caused him to be inattentive to vehicles in the intersection. The employer further claimed that, because the boy died of a head injury and was not wearing a helmet, his injuries were caused by his own negligence. The vehicle driver's employer also claimed the boy’s mother negligently entrusted her son with the motorcycle. Ultimately, the Richardsons won their suit against the employer of the vehicle's driver, Style Master Exteriors. The total amount awarded to the deceased motorcyclist's parents totaled $907,751. Their son, however, was found to be 37.5% at fault, and therefore the total amount they recieved totaled $567,345.