Print

Dangerous condition on public property claimed, causing serious injuries to 13-year-old. $28.1M. Tulare County.

Summary

Teenager is struck as he crosses a highway in an uncontrolled crosswalk.

 

The Case

  • Case Name: Quiroz v. State of California, Department of Transportation (Caltrans), et al.
  • Court and Case Number: Tulare County Superior Court / VCU297860
  • Date of Verdict or Judgment: Wednesday, May 28, 2025
  • Date Action was Filed: Thursday, April 27, 2023
  • Type of Case: Dangerous Condition of Public Roads, Highways, Negligence
  • Judge or Arbitrator(s): Hon. Gary M. Johnson
  • Plaintiffs:
    Minor plaintiff
  • Defendants:
    State of California
    Department of Transportation
    City of Tulare
    Elizabeth Perez (defendant driver)
  • Type of Result: Jury Verdict

The Result

  • Gross Verdict or Award: $28,163,528
  • Award as to each Defendant:

    As to Caltrans - $25,347,175.20. The jury found that Caltrans had control of the intersection and that the property was in a dangerous condition at the time of the incident. They also found that Caltrans had notice for a long enough period of time to have protected against it and that the dangerous condition was a substantial factor in causing harm to the plaintiff. The jury found that the City of Tulare did not control the property at the time of the incident. The jury found the driver not at fault due to the dangerous intersection.  

  • Contributory/Comparative Negligence: 10% to plaintiff
  • Economic Damages:

    Past medical: $2,663,528 

    Future medical: $10,000,000 

    Lost earning capacity: $3,000,000

  • Non-Economic Damages:

    $12,500,000

  • Trial or Arbitration Time: 3 1/2 weeks

The Attorneys

  • Attorney for the Plaintiff:

    The McClellan Law Firm by Craig R. McClellan, Conor J. Hulburt, and David W. Gouzoules, San Diego.

  • Attorney for the Defendant:

    California Department of Transportation by Francis Goldsberry, Sacramento. (For Caltrans.)

    Dana A. Fox and Laurie N. Stayton, Los Angeles. (For City of Tulare.)

    Petrie Leath Larrivee & O’Rourke, LLP by Sean T. O’Rourke, Fresno. (For Perez.)

     

The Experts

  • Plaintiff's Medical Expert(s):

    Karen Aznavoorian, life care planning.

    Carina Grandison, Ph.D., pediatric neuropsychology.

    David Patterson, M.D., physiatry.

     

  • Defendant's Medical Expert(s):

    Robert Asarnow, Ph.D., pediatric neuropsychology. (For City and Caltrans.)

    Miranda Van Horn, life care planning. (For City and Caltrans.)

    Craig McDonald, M.D., physiatry. (For City and Caltrans.)

  • Plaintiff's Technical Expert(s):

    Christian Engelmann, traffic engineering, highway design.

    Michael Braun, accident reconstruction.

    Bong Walsh, human factors.

    Rick Sarkisian, vocational rehabilitation.

    Patrick Kennedy, Ph.D., economics.

  • Defendant's Technical Expert(s):

    Amy Koellner,  vocational rehabilitation. (For City.)

    Beau LeBlanc, accident reconstruction. (For City.)

    Karen Smith, Ph.D., economics. (For City.)

    William Kunzman, traffic engineering. (For City.)

    Eric Rossetter, Ph.D., accident reconstruction. (For Caltrans.)

    David Whitney, Ph.D., human factors (For driver.)

    Alfredo Verduzco, accident reconstruction.  (For driver.)

    Grant Johnson, traffic engineering. (For driver.)

Facts and Background

  • Facts and Background:

    The 13-year-old plaintiff was seriously injured on August 16, 2022, while attempting to cross Highway 63 in the City of Tulare, in an uncontrolled, marked crosswalk. He was on his way home from school.  The crosswalk at Hwy 63/N. Mooney Blvd and E. Cross Ave crossed five lanes of traffic with a posted speed limit of 60 mph. There were no traffic signals or pedestrian beacons and there was not a pedestrian island or median for pedestrians to take refuge during the 90-foot crossing. The Annual Average Daily Traffic was greater than 20,000 cars. 

    Plaintiff filed suit against Caltrans, City of Tulare and the driver who hit plaintiff on April 27, 2023.

    Defendant City of Tulare filed a motion for summary judgment based on "trail immunity" on August 14, 2024, which was denied on October 28, 2024.

    Between March 26, 2025 and May 1, 2025, 21 expert depositions were taken. The case went to trial in Dept. 7 of the Superior Court of California, County of Tulare on May 5, 2025. At the end of the trial, plaintiff’s counsel moved for a directed verdict on trail immunity, in that a highway cannot be a trail, which was granted by Judge Johnson.

  • Plaintiff's Contentions:

    That the uncontrolled 90-foot crossing posed a danger to pedestrians and resulted in the collision that caused severe injuries to plaintiff.

  • Defendant's Contentions:

    The City of Tulare claimed lack of control and Caltrans claimed no prior pedestrian incidents at that location/crosswalk since it was put in 20 years before this incident. In addition, City of Tulare claimed trail immunity because trail users were directed to the crosswalk to cross the highway to continue the trail. 

Injuries and Other Damages

  • Physical Injuries claimed by Plaintiff:

    TBI and femur fracture. Life-time care.

Demands and Offers

  • Defendant §998 Offer: Caltrans: $8,500,000
  • Defendant Final Offer before Trial: City: $250,000; driver: $100,000

Additional Notes

Plaintiff made a demand of $52,000,000 global in mediation, but none of the defendants accepted.

 

Print

Disclaimer

This is not an official court document. While the publisher believes the information to be accurate, the publisher does not guarantee it and the reader is advised not to rely upon it without consulting the official court documents or the attorneys of record in this matter who are listed above.

© Copyright 2025 by Neubauer & Associates, Inc. All rights reserved. juryverdictalert.com