Sacramento Personal Injury Lawyer Blog

The following blog entry is written to illustrate a common motion filed during civil litigation. Reviewing this kind of filing should help potential plaintiffs and clients better understand how parties in personal injury cases present such issues to the court.

(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this boating accident/brain injury lawsuit and its proceedings.)

THERE WILL BE A DAMAGES TRIAL REGARDING DEFENDANT WHITE

Irrespective of Mr. White's Insurance situation the fact is that Mr. White remains a defendant, and the jury will in all likelihood find him liable to some extent. This guarantees a damages trial no matter what happens with the product liability defendants.

There will therefore be two trials under any circumstances. Another factor to consider is that there will be additional time necessary to prepare for and begin a second trial on damages, even if it is only as to Defendant White. Plaintiffs obviously do not know in advance when the jury will complete deliberations, and therefore will not be able to schedule their physicians and other damages experts to appear at the drop of a hat. Most of the damages trial witnesses are physicians and other professionals whose calendars will need to be consulted in order to arrange the proper order of witnesses. This process will certainly increase the time needed to try this matter to conclusion, rather than saving any time.

THERE WILL VERY LIKELY BE A DAMAGES TRIAL AS TO THE PRODUCT LIABILITY DEFENDANTS

Plaintiffs allege defects in manufacture and design of the subject boat, including failure to warn, as to Defendants National. The subject boat was defectively designed, in that it specifically allowed users to carry 18 persons on board, which was clearly excessive.

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

Continue reading " Faulty Motorboat Causes Brain Injury To Sacramento Woman, Part 4 of 8 " »

The following blog entry is written to illustrate a common motion filed during civil litigation. Reviewing this kind of filing should help potential plaintiffs and clients better understand how parties in personal injury cases present such issues to the court.

(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this boating accident/brain injury lawsuit and its proceedings.)

5. Moving Defendant never explains what it Is about this Individual case and these individual plaintiffs that will create a substantial risk the jury will ignore its oath and Instructions by awarding damages in the absence of liability. This Court, not to mention civil trial courts across the State, has tried catastrophic injury cases without habitual bifurcation. Plaintiffs are not aware of a single appellate case mandating bifurcation due to the significance of the individual plaintiff's injuries.

6. As a practical matter, the jury will hear evidence in any liability phase regarding how Plaintiffs Hall and Black were injured as a result of the alleged design defects. At the very least, the jury will have to be told that both sustained injury as the result of a propeller impact, which will certainly create an image for the jury as to the injuries each Plaintiff likely sustained. This will also require testimony from retained biomechanical experts to explain the mechanism of injuries for each Plaintiff, and from other experts regarding the design and engineering defects that led to such injuries. Such testimony will necessarily depend to some extent on evidence of injuries sustained. Piquing the jury's curiosity about such a core matter without permitting evidence of such injuries can only restrict the ability of the injured parties to plead their case.

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

Continue reading " Boating Accident Leaves Two Sacramento Women Catastrophically Injured, Part 3 of 8 " »

The following blog entry is written to illustrate a common motion filed during civil litigation. Reviewing this kind of filing should help potential plaintiffs and clients better understand how parties in personal injury cases present such issues to the court.

(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this boating accident lawsuit and its proceedings.)

3. Bifurcation will save little Court time, because the liability phase will be far more extensive. Even the moving Defendant concedes that it "does not dispute that [Plaintiffs] sustained propeller injury as a result of the accident ..."

A. While extensive damages experts have been disclosed, Plaintiffs have been engaged in the process of winnowing the number of medical professionals who will be needed to provide testimony at trial. Expert disclosures are always over-inclusive, because of the need to cover all bases In the event that any of the physicians are on call or engaged in emergency procedures during the time they would otherwise have to testify.

B. Realistically, Plaintiffs' medical presentation for all plaintiffs will not last more than 3-5 days, especially since there is no apparent dispute about the nature and extent of the injuries. It appears there will be some dispute regarding future medical and care needs, but this testimony will not take more than 1 day of the 3-5 days needed for the damages presentation.

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

Continue reading " Sacramento Woman Suffers Brain Injury In Boating Accident, Part 2 of 8 " »

The following blog entry is written to illustrate a common motion filed during civil litigation. Reviewing this kind of filing should help potential plaintiffs and clients better understand how parties in personal injury cases present such issues to the court.

(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this boating accident lawsuit and its proceedings.)

Plaintiffs Betty Hall and Susan Black’s Opposition to Defendant National, Inc.'s, Motion to Bifurcate Liability From Damages at Trial

INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF PLAINTIFF’S POSITION

Plaintiffs respectfully oppose the motion to bifurcate liability and damages.

1. Irrespective of whether any of the product liability defendants avoid liability in this matter, bifurcation will not save Court time. There will be a damages trial as to Defendant David White under any set of circumstances. The interpleader complaint pertaining to the White insurance policy limits has been dismissed. At the very least the likelihood is very high that a reasonable jury will find Mr. White at fault to some degree in this matter. Absent a defense verdict as to White a damages phase of the trial is virtually guaranteed irrespective of anything that happens with the product liability defendants.

2. Through discovery, Plaintiffs have amassed significant evidence showing that the subject boat was defectively designed. This includes failures to warn of the exact type of occurrence involved herein.

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

Continue reading " Sacramento Boating Accident Causes Catastrophic Injuries, Part 1 of 8 " »