Attorney Garrett Mitchell Penney's Legal Cases

Wrongful death

Zmrzel v. Lyft, Inc.

Dec 06, 2021

OUTCOME: Jury Verdict of $6,000,000 for plaintiffs.

On Wednesday, December 27, 2017 at 10:05 PM 22-year-old Wyatt Zmrzel used his smartphone to contact Lyft for a ride home from a Sacramento tattoo shop. Wyatt had just received a ram tattoo in celebrati ... on of a recent hunting trip and to honor his sister, a Los Angeles Rams Cheerleader. The destination was Loomis California, due east of the pick-up point. Several family members, including Wyatt’s father were with him as he received his tattoo. Lyft’s driver, Rafiullah Amiri responded to the ride request within a matter of seconds and picked up Wyatt at 10:09 PM. Lyft’s driver received his California driver’s license 7 months earlier. When he picked up Wyatt Amiri had only been approved to drive for Lyft the preceding day. This was Amiri’s first trip as a Lyft driver. Lyft provided no training of any kind to Amiri, including any training related to the safe operation of motor vehicles. Amiri had no background as a professional driver. The most direct route to Wyatt’s home was Interstate 80, east of the tattoo parlor and less than 30 minutes away. Instead, for reasons unknown, Amiri took northbound Interstate 5, then further north on State Route 99 toward Yuba City, in the complete opposite direction of the destination. The Lyft driver, more than 20 miles off course, made a left-hand turn from northbound highway 99 to the median separating the North and Southbound lanes. Inexplicably, the Lyft driver, who disclaimed any memory of the incident, moved from the safety of the center median, accelerating from 3.7 mph to 16.2 mph into the southbound lanes of highway 99 where his vehicle was struck by Jennifer Alford’s Toyota 4 runner traveling in the number 2 southbound lane at 80.8 mph. The posted speed limit at the collision scene was 65 mph. The collision occurred at 10:30 PM; Wyatt succumbed to his injuries proximately half an hour later.

Wrongful death

Perkins v. Waterworks Industries, Incorporated

May 26, 2021

OUTCOME: Verdict for Plaintiff for $5,000,000

On March 1, 2017, decedent Paul Perkins, age 64, his wife, plaintiff Rosemary Perkins, age 64 , and their neighbor and friend, Maria Consuelo Rosas-Calderon, age 41, were traveling southbound on Termin ... al Avenue between Riverbank and Modesto at approximately 6:30 p.m. Terminal Avenue is a 2-lane road without any adjacent improvements, lights or fog lines identifying the edge of the roadway. The road was painted with yellow skip-stripes identifying the northbound and southbound lanes. Plaintiffs were traveling in a half-ton, 2002 GMC pick-up truck at an estimated speed of 55-56 miles per hour. The posted speed limit was 55 miles per hour. At the same time, Waterworks Industries, Incorporated's employee, William Anthony Borges, Jr., was traveling northbound in a 2011 Ford F-350 pick-up truck. Defendants admitted that Borges was operating a company owned vehicle within the course and scope of his employment at the time of the incident. The incident occurred when the left front of the Waterworks pick-up truck struck the left front of the plaintiffs' pick-up truck at a closing speed estimated at 125 miles per hour. Plaintiff Rosemary Perkins' decedent, Paul Perkins, was killed instantly. Defendant Waterworks' employee, William Anthony Borges, Jr., sustained a scratch to his finger while plaintiff Rosemary Perkins, in addition to losing her husband, suffered a broken jaw and a fracture of her left tibial plateau. Right rear passenger, Maria Ross-Calderon, suffered from a fractured sternum. Data retrieved from the EDR contained within defendant Waterworks' Ford pick-up truck revealed that defendant Borges' speed at the moment of impact was 70 miles per hour. The posted speed limit on the road was 55 miles per hour. The data also revealed that there were no steering movements to avoid the impact nor was there any braking during the 5 seconds before impact. Defendants contested liability and argued that plaintiff's decedent, Paul Perkins, contributed to the cause of the incident by traveling either on or over the skip-striped middle line of the roadway. Plaintiffs argued that defendants' vehicle crossed over the center line and into the southbound lane causing the incident. Plaintiffs' expert, Jeffrey Bonsall with Momentum Engineering, testified that based upon gouge marks in the roadway, the physical evidence to both vehicles, and the data from the EDR from defendants' truck, the impact occurred as much as 3 feet into plaintiffs' southbound lane. In sharp contrast, defendants' expert, Rajeev Kelkar, PhD, testified that the impact occurred either on the center line or as much as 20 inches inside the southbound lane. Both experts agreed that the impact occurred in the southbound lane. Defendants, through their experts, contended that plaintiffs created a condition of imminent peril which excused defendants' conduct. An independent witness who was traveling behind the Perkins vehicle testified that the Perkins vehicle was traveling southbound and either crossed the center line into the northbound lane or was near the center line during the moments before the impact. Based upon this testimony, defendants' expert Rajeev Kelkar, PhD, testified that defendant Borges was presented with a condition of imminent peril when he observed the headlights of plaintiffs' vehicle traveling in the northbound land and across the center line which caused Borges to move his vehicle to the east side of the road, causing him to leave the roadway surface. When he attempted to get back onto the roadway surface, he temporarily lost control of his vehicle causing him to travel across the northbound lane and into the southbound lane.

Garrett Mitchell Penney's Legal Cases (2)

Zmrzel v. Lyft, Inc.

Perkins v. Waterworks Industries, Incorporated