Richard Anthony Huver's Legal Cases (17)

Personal injury

Carol Simkin v. Pinkerton Security Services, et al.

Oct 13, 1999

OUTCOME: Jury verdict $681,136 gross

This accident occurred at the intersection of El Camino Real and High Bluff Drive in San Diego on January 4, 1998, at approximately 5:15 a.m. Plaintiff was on her way to the local AM/PM for her 20 yea ... r old grandson who was ill with the flu. On her way to the store, she stopped by a local medical complex to make sure her daughterâ€™s coffee cart, which had been installed the day before, was safe. Plaintiff left the medical complex and approached the intersection intending to turn left back down the hill to the AM/PM. Plaintiff alleged she waited for her light to turn green, then proceeded to make her left-hand turn. Defendant James Lee Smith, in the course and scope of his employment as a patrol officer for Pinkerton Security Services, was on his way to his next stop. He was heading north on El Camino Real. Defendant claimed the light changed from red to green when he was at least 150 feet away from the intersection. Defendant claimed plaintiff entered the intersection on the red light. Plaintiffâ€™s car was broadsided on the driverâ€™s side in the middle of the intersection. There were no eyewitnesses to the accident and scant documentation regarding the existence or location of physical evidence at the scene. Trial was bifurcated on liability and damages. Plaintiffâ€™s Contentions: Plaintiff contended she had the green light and defendant Smith ran the red light. Defendantsâ€™ Contentions: Defendants contended Smith had the green light and that plaintiff ran the red light. Injuries and/or Damages: Concussion with brain contusion (with no surgery), 5 fractured ribs, fractured spleen (with no surgery), soft tissue neck, back and knees. Plaintiff prevailed on liability 12-0; the jury apportioned liability 80% to defendants, 20% to plaintiff; verdict was 9-3 on comparative. In the damages phase, the jury awarded plaintiff $681,136.81 gross; $156,136.81 for medical expenses, $25,000 for past attendant care and $500,000 general damages. Damages verdict was 11-1.

Wrongful death

Lin and Xin Zhi v. Michael Zimmerman & Rand Smith

Apr 16, 1998

OUTCOME: Settled $633,333

On Sunday, February 16, 1997, Cindy Zhi, age 9, Nini Lowrey, age 7, and five other children, left a Chinese New Years celebration at an elementary school, intending to play at a public park across the ... street. Park Village Drive, a 4-lane road with posted speed limits of 45 mph, is divided by a raised center island covered with vegetation and trees. The seven children ran across two lanes of travel (not in a crosswalk) and waited on the center island for traffic to pass. Defendant Rand Smith, driving an Isuzu Rodeo, approached the children and decided to stop his vehicle in lane number 1 (closest to center island). Smith then waved for the children to continue across the street. Defendant Zimmerman had just turned left onto Park Village Drive approximately 1/4 mile away and entered lane number 2. At that moment, 5 of the children stepped off the center island and walked in front of Smithâ€™s vehicle, looking to see if there were any approaching cars. However, Nini and Cindy continued across the street, directly in front of defendant Zimmerman. Zimmerman was unable to stop and struck both girls. Cindy Zhi was placed on life support and died the following day. Plaintiffâ€™s Contentions: Plaintiff contended defendant Zimmerman failed to maintain proper control of his vehicle, failed to maintain a proper lookout, was speeding, and should have seen Smithâ€™s stopped vehicle and anticipated the vehicle was stopped for a reason. Plaintiff contended defendant Smith violated California Vehicle Code by stopping his vehicle in the middle of the road, created a visual obstruction between Zimmerman and the children, and negligently waved them across the street. Defendantsâ€™ Contentions: Defendant Zimmerman contended Cindy was comparatively negligent for crossing the street while not in a crosswalk (there was a crosswalk at the corner of the block), that Zimmerman never saw any children until the two girls ran in front of his car, and that it was an unavoidable accident. Defendant Smith contended his stopping of his vehicle was proper and that he never waved the children across the street. Smith also contended Zimmerman was speeding and the children were negligent for crossing the street outside a crosswalk. Injuries and/or Damages: Wrongful death of 9-year old child.

Class action

Judith Rubin v. Allstate Insurance Company, et al.

Jan 29, 1998

OUTCOME: Reported settlement of $120,000,000

Most of the facts of the case and the terms of the settlement are confidential. However, it involved claims regarding homeowners insurance for 1.2 million California policyholders.

Class action

Mark West v. Prudential Property and Casualty Insurance Company

Aug 20, 1997

OUTCOME: $5,800,000 settlement fund

Prudential issued homeowners insurance policies in California that protect homeowners against losses due to certain covered perils (e.g., fire), subject to the terms and conditions of the policy. The ... base amount of insurance on the policyholder's home is stated on the "declarations page" of the insurance policy as the "Coverage A Dwelling limit." Dwellings and certain other structures (collectively, the policyholder's "home") are insured at a dollar figure representing estimated "replacement cost." In 1995, Prudential utilized a third-party computer program known as System 81 to estimate the replacement cost of policyholders' homes in California. System 81 estimated the replacement cost on the basis of a selected number of the physical characteristics of the home, including, among others, the style of the home, the type of construction of exterior and interior walls, the number and size of stories, floor area, bathrooms, type of flooring, type of roof covering, porches and garages. Plaintiffsâ€™ Contentions Regarding Liability: Plaintiff alleged that defendant systematically inflated homeownersâ€™ replacement cost calculations for homes located in California by, inter alia, attributing characteristics to homes which did not exist. These additional characteristics increased the replacement cost for the home, and thus increased the amount of premium paid by the homeowner. In addition, plaintiff alleged that Prudential concealed the System 81 printout from policyholders, denying them the opportunity to verify the accuracy of the information. Defendantsâ€™ Contentions Regarding Liability: Defendant denied there were any characteristic errors on policyholdersâ€™ System 81 printouts, and that if any errors were present, they did not necessarily increase the replacement cost calculation. Defendant also denied that it concealed any documentation from policyholders but rather left it to the Prudential insurance agents' discretion whether or not to provide a copy of the System 81 print-out to policyholders. Prudential further contended that agents should not be affirmatively required to furnish the System 81 print-outs to policyholders. Finally, Prudential alleged that the California Department of Insurance had primary jurisdiction of the dispute. The matter was referred to the DOI by the Los Angeles County Superior Court. Damages: Over-insurance of approximately 100,000 policyholdersâ€™ dwelling coverage limits, resulting in excessive premiums wrongfully obtained by Prudential.

Defective and dangerous products

Lee Newhouse, et al., v. Maxwell Transport, et al.

Sep 20, 1996

OUTCOME: Settled $6,250,000

This case involved an action for personal injuries and loss of consortium based on theories of negligence, vicarious liability and failure to warn. On October 17, 1993, plaintiff Lee Newhouse was dr ... iving home from his office northbound on the 805 Freeway in San Diego, California. A 1990 Peterbilt 3-axle tractor and trailer rig owned by defendant Maxwell was driving southbound on the 805 Freeway. Two days before this accident, the 14-year old grandson of one of the owners of defendant Maxwell had completed a brake job on the Peterbilt tractor. In replacing the wheels, plaintiffs contended he failed to properly torque the lug nuts on the inner and outer wheels. The dual wheels (manufactured by Alcoa) on the left-third axle suddenly broke off the truck. The two wheels separated with one bouncing over the center divider and striking plaintiffs' vehicle head-on at the driver's side A-pillar. Plaintiffâ€™s Contentions: Plaintiffs contended defendant Maxwell had failed to properly maintain their truck, negligently entrusted the maintenance to an unqualified 14-year old, and failed to properly torque the lug nuts on the inner and outer wheels, thereby causing the wheel studs to fracture and allow the wheels to come free. Plaintiffs contended defendants Alcoa and Paccar had failed to properly warn users of the dangers and hazards of over-torquing the lug nuts on semi tractor-trailer wheels. Plaintiffs contended the warnings in the manual were insufficient and that defendants should have placed a warning label somewhere on the tractor near the wheels, or should have placed a warning somewhere on the rim of the aluminum wheel. Plaintiffs contended that without such a warning, the wheels were defective. Plaintiffs contended defendant Coast was vicariously liable for the negligence of Maxwell. Plaintiffs contended that under applicable California case law, including Eli v. Murphy (1952) 39 Cal.2d 598, a trucking company which held either an I.C.C. common carrier certificate or a P.U.C. permit could not escape liability by subcontracting the work to an independent contractor. Defendantsâ€™ Contentions: Defendant Maxwell denied liability and denied the lug nuts had been improperly torqued. Maxwell contended the air impact wrench that had been used to tighten the lug nuts was set to "maximum" torque. Maxwell contended the brake job had been supervised and checked by a qualified maintenance employee. Defendants Alcoa and Paccar denied the aluminum wheels were defective without a warning, contended sufficient instructions and warnings had been incorporated into the owners and maintenance manuals, denied an additional warning was necessary or appropriate, and contended that even if a warning label had been in place, it would not have prevented this accident. Defendants contended the lug nuts had been under-torqued, rather than over-torqued as plaintiffs contended. Thus, defendants contended that a warning regarding over-torquing would have been ineffective and unnecessary. Defendants' Contentions Regarding Damages: Defendants agreed plaintiff Lee Newhouse had suffered brain damage. Defendants claimed plaintiff did not need 24-hour custodial care. Defendants all disputed that plaintiff was entitled to any compensation for loss of earnings, claiming he had not worked for compensation for over 10 years before the accident. Defendants also discovered evidence that plaintiff had been flying a small plane after the accident, which they contended cast some doubt on the severity of plaintiff's claimed permanent injuries. Injuries and/or Damages: Lee Newhouse: Skull and facial fractures on left side of head, brain damage resulting in global aphasia (more expressive than comprehension) and seizures. Plaintiff was unemployable and required supervision, although he was able to care for himself, feed himself, walk and communicate through a few words, gestures and some writing.

Defective and dangerous products

Richard Antunez v. Coastal Conveyor Systems, Inc., et al.

Dec 16, 1994

OUTCOME: Settled $6,000,000

Richard Antunez was a filter-press operator at the Leathers Geothermal power plant. The power plant was developed by Magma Power Company. Dow Engineering had been hired to provide technical assistanc ... e in the overall design and manufacture of the plant. Gulf States, Inc. was the general contractor. Dow Engineering hired Coastal Conveyors (bankrupt and without insurance coverage) to design and build the conveyor belt. Richard Denney, the mechanical engineer at Coastal, had designed and manufactured over 2,000 conveyor belts, including conveyors for 2 other similar geothermal power plants in which Magma and Dow had been involved. Plaintiff's job included maintaining a conveyor belt that transported material to storage bins. On December 16, 1991, plaintiff was attempting to dry the head pulley on this conveyor belt when he put his hand into the nip point (area between the head pulley and belt). He was pulled in up to his shoulder. Plaintiffâ€™s Contentions: Plaintiff contended the head pulley was not adequately guarded, failed to comply with industry guarding standards, that defendants Dow, Magma and Gulf were negligent in the design, manufacture and installation of the conveyor belt system, and that defendants had failed to verify the head pulley had been properly manufactured by Coastal. Plaintiff contended the defendants should have been responsible for checking Coastal's work. Defendantsâ€™ Contentions: Defendants contended the head pulley guard complied with all applicable industry guarding standards, including ANSI. Defendants and their experts claimed these guarding standards were designed to protect a worker from inadvertent or accidental contact with a hazard. They claimed plaintiff was deliberately and intentionally acting to contact the head pulley, thereby defeating the guard in place. Defendants contended if anything was defective with the conveyor belt, it was the sole responsibility of the company which designed and manufactured the conveyor belt, Coastal Conveyor Systems (not a party to the case because bankrupt and without any insurance.) Defendants contended plaintiff was comparatively negligent (50% to 75%) for failing to turn off the conveyor before attempting to clean the head pulley as he had been trained to do by his employer, including during a safety training course just 2 months before the accident. Defendants also contended plaintiff's employer Redhill was comparatively negligent (25% to 50%) for failing to adequately train plaintiff and for creating an unsafe work environment by virtue of a bonus plan which rewarded employees for competitive productivity with other geothermal plants. Defendants contended this bonus plan encouraged employees to act dangerously and not shut down the system in instances where they should. Defendants also contended plaintiff's employer Redhill was responsible for inadequate guarding of the head pulley under Cal-OSHA regulations. Injuries and/or Damages: 3rd and 4th degree burns to 30% of his body, including head, face and chest. Right (major) arm surgically amputated at mid-humerus level. During medical care, plaintiff's dura was torn, resulting in subdural hematoma causing right-sided hemiparesis and mild aphasia.

Wrongful death

David Thomas, et al., v. Eric Rueckert

Apr 14, 1994

OUTCOME: Verdict $1,260,000

On November 30, 1990, defendant driver, age 17, was southbound on Valley Vista Drive in Ventura County. Decedent Melanie Thomas, age 14, sat in the left rear seat. Plaintiff Stephanie Thomas, age 17, ... sat in the right rear seat next to her boyfriend, Jason Wallace, who was seated in the middle. Defendant was taking Melanie and her friend Alyssia, who was seated in the front, to a friendâ€™s surprise birthday party. After getting lost in a residential neighborhood, defendant began speeding down a winding dark street. He lost control of his car as he sped around a curve and slid off the right side of the road, flipping over. The left rear passenger side of the car crashed into a cement/brick pillar, crushing Melanie. She was later pronounced dead at the hospital from massive internal injuries. Stephanie suffered various physical injuries and saw her sister, Melanie, hanging upside down in the overturned car after the accident. Plaintiffsâ€™ Contentions Regarding Liability: Plaintiffs alleged that defendant was negligent for speeding and failing to control his car. Plaintiffs argued negligence per se for various vehicle code violations. Defendantâ€™s Contentions Regarding Liability: Defendant contended that he was not speeding, was maintaining proper control and was on a â€œmission impossibleâ€ to get the two girls to the birthday party on time. Defendant could not offer an explanation for why the accident happened and claimed amnesia regarding his actions immediately before impact. Defendantâ€™s expert contended there was a super elevation (slope) of the road surface which contributed to the accident. Damages: Wrongful death of Melanie; broken jaw, cuts/bruises, emotional distress (Dillon v. Legg) to Stephanie. Verdict: $450,000 to David Thomas and $450,000 to Ruth Thomas for death of daughter; $85,000 for Stephanieâ€™s personal injury claim and $275,000 for her emotional distress claim.

Transform legal challenges into solutions.

Connect now to review your situation.

The Avvo Rating explained

The Avvo Rating explained