Congratulations to Beth Obra-White, Arezoo Jamshidi, Jeff Schmid and Allison Harvey for their multiple summary judgment motion successes in a high-stakes premises liability case!
Plaintiffs, the wife and son of the decedent, filed two separate complaints against Haight’s clients (the developer and general contractor) for the death of their husband and father who was struck by a truck while riding his bicycle. Plaintiffs alleged that the width of the roadway where decedent was struck had been reduced by the placement of concrete barriers to accommodate construction, but that the barriers were placed incorrectly and without adequate warning. Plaintiffs sued for negligence and premises liability seeking $20 million in damages.
Defense counsel filed summary judgment motions against both complaints arguing that they did not owe a duty as the City controlled, possessed and owned the public roadway where the subject incident happened. Defense counsel also argued that they placed the concrete barriers exactly where they were required by the City. The trial court agreed. The court noted that Plaintiffs failed to adequately rebut Defendants’ legal arguments to create a triable issue of material fact that Defendants owed the decedent a duty. That is because it was undisputed that the accident occurred on the public roadway and that Plaintiffs failed to present evidence that Defendants exerted control over the roadway. In particular, Defendants had no duty or ability to place any warning signs on the public right-of-way. Further, the evidence established that Defendants placed the concrete barriers exactly pursuant to the plans submitted to the city and Plaintiffs, again, failed to submit evidence to the contrary.
In addition, defense counsel also filed a motion for summary adjudication against the subcontractor responsible for hiring the defendant driver who struck the decedent. Defense counsel argued that under the subcontract agreement, the subcontractor agreed to indemnify and hold Defendants harmless. The trial court agreed.
This provided a huge win for Haight’s clients as they were not liable to Plaintiffs and defense fees and costs were covered by the subcontractor.