Vehicles - Auto vs. Auto

Defendant Caltrans is blamed for drop off from roadway to shoulder that caused loss of control by defendant driver.

On March 3, 2020 the court granted defendant State of California, acting through the Department of Transportation ("Caltrans"),  the request for a new trial as to the amount of damages awarded to plaintiff James Collins pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 657(7). (See more detailed information from order in Additional Notes section.)

Eggshell plaintiff's car is struck at intersection at low impact.

$100K policy is opened up when defendant argues extent of injury after rear-ender.

Liability is contested at controlled intersection after T-bone accident; insurer initially refuses $15K policy limits demand.

Liability conceded but extent of injuries disputed.

To counter the defense argument as to extent of injury, plaintiff called the treating physician from Kaiser to testify that plaintiff was an active patient with no prior spine injuries/conditions. 

Car is totaled in heavy-impact collission, but defendant disputes injury extent and causation.

"Eggshell" plaintiff with congenital “Chiari malformation” suffers ongoing pain after rear-ender, and will require C-section to deliver a child.

Liability in question after collision at controlled intersection. Red light case.

Defendant admitted liability but disputed the claims of neck injury.  Refused $100K policy limits demand.

Plaintiff applies the vehicle-use exception to "coming and going" rule in course-and-scope-of-employment claim. Beats 998.

Causation and extent of injury disputed when surgery takes place three years after collision.

Plaintiffs seek diminished value claim on leased vehicle after sideswipe damage to Audi.

Plaintiff handily beats CCP 998 demand.