Skip to main content

Motel should have had security patrol due to prior incidents.

 

The Case

  • Case Name: Murphy v. Desert Inn Motel, et al.
  • Court and Case Number: San Bernardino Superior Court / CIVSB2314282
  • Date of Verdict or Judgment: Thursday, February 26, 2026
  • Date Action was Filed: Tuesday, August 08, 2023
  • Type of Case: Assault and BatteryDangerous Condition Private PropertyNegligence
  • Judge or Arbitrator(s): Hon. Winston Keh
  • Plaintiffs:
    Malcom Gerald Murphy aka Abdul Malik Mahmoud, 56
  • Defendants:
    Sueh Li Chen
    Desert Inn Motel
  • Type of Result: Jury Verdict

The Result

  • Gross Verdict or Award: $1,734,944.58
  • Net Verdict or Award: $1,734,944.58

The Attorneys

  • Attorney for the Plaintiff:

    Drake Law Firm by Tomas Ross, Woodland Hills.

  • Attorney for the Defendant:

    Madruga Law by Paul Madruga, Irvine.

The Experts

  • Plaintiff’s Medical Expert(s):

    Ryan Mattie, M.D., pain management. (Treating physician for shoulders.) 

    Edna Martikian, DC, chiropractic. (Treating physician.)

    Narinder Grewal, M.D., pain management. (Treating physician for neck and back.)

  • Defendant's Medical Expert(s):

    ER physician (non-retained expert).

  • Plaintiff's Technical Expert(s):

    Scott DeFoe, security and safety.

Facts and Background

  • Facts and Background:

    On October 26, 2021 plaintiff checked into the Desert Inn Motel in Barstow. He was in Barstow for a work project. On his way to his assigned room plaintiff passed a group of 5-6 older teens/young adults congregating in the stairway and hallway. Plaintiff described them as "thugs." Plaintiff passed them without issue, got into his room, showered and decided to go down to his work van to get his laptop.

    When he opened his room door the group was blocking the path directly in front of his door, wrestling and hanging out. Plaintiff waited a few seconds for them to move so he could pass and when they didn't move, he stepped through their circle and went downstairs to his van. After getting his things, he turned around and the group was approaching him and encircled him.

    Plaintiff was confronted and struck from behind, knocked to the ground unconscious and beaten. The assailants ran off. The motel owner, defendant Sueh Li Chen, was outside of the motel office and allegedly told plaintiff that the group of individuals had been hanging around the motel and she'd been unable to remove them. Police came two hours later and didn't make a written report since plaintiff declined EMS. One week later plaintiff went to the ER and was diagnosed with concussion, deviated septum and maxilla fracture. Plaintiff also had neck, shoulder and back pain. 

  • Plaintiff's Contentions:

    That prior similar instances warranted on-site security patrol and other reasonable safety measures.

    Testimony was given by Barstow PD captain that at least three prior instances of similar conduct had occurred, with one including defendant Sue Li Chen when she was forcefully robbed of jewelry from her person. 

  • Defendant's Contentions:

    That defendant had no notice of dangerous condition, and no duty to provide security.

Injuries and Other Damages

  • Physical Injuries claimed by Plaintiff:

    Fractured nose, fractured maxilla, black eyes, head contusion, headaches, neck, shoulder and back pain.

  • Pain and suffering.

Special Damages

  • Special Damages Claimed - Past Medical: $65,344.58
  • Special Damages Claimed - Future Medical: $213,600

Demands and Offers

  • Plaintiff §998 Demand: $500,000
  • Defendant Final Offer before Trial: $50,000

Additional Notes

The judge excluded evidence of over 100 prior calls for police services and crime reports related to violent crimes at the motel. 

Subscribe Today
Access All the Case Details Behind Every Verdict

JuryVerdictAlert.com provides limited case details for public viewing so you can see the scope of our coverage. However, access to complete case summaries, full fact patterns, damages breakdowns, attorney and expert information, and advanced search features is reserved for subscribers.

To review the full version of each verdict in our database you’ll need an active subscription to JuryVerdictAlert.com.