Posted in on December 10, 2015
$100,000.00 Settlement For Woman Who Slipped and Fell on Wet Grass
Attorney Howard Alan Kitay obtained a $100,000.00 settlement for a 48 year-old woman who slipped and fell on wet grass while visiting a friend’s house. The owner of the San Diego home invited plaintiff to come into her backyard, which required walking down a ramp with a six-inch-wide “well-worn path.” While navigating the path, the plaintiff slipped and fell, fracturing her right ankle.
Plaintiff was taken to Sharp Cabrillo Hospital, where a complete examination was performed. X-rays revealed a fracture dislocation of the right ankle. Plaintiff was given intravenous Morphine for severe pain. The dislocation was then reduced and the ankle was placed in a splint. Immediately prior to release, plaintiff was given Percocet for increasing pain.
One week later, an open reduction internal fixation surgery of plaintiff’s right ankle was performed at Mercy Hospital. After surgery, plaintiff’s right ankle was placed in a splint. After healing, plaintiff underwent physical therapy to strengthen her ankle. Her medical bills totaled approximately $18.000.00.
Attorney Howard Alan Kitay filed a claim with the homeowner’s insurance company, alleging the well-worn path was dangerous and defendant knew it was dangerous. The insurance company denied the claim, saying the accident was plaintiff’s fault and that the ‘well-worn-path’ was not dangerous. The insurance company refused to offer any money to settle the claim.
Attorney Howard Alan Kitay filed a lawsuit in San Diego Superior Court, East County Division, and demanded the homeowner’s policy limit of $100,000.00 to settle the claim. The insurance company again stated the accident was plaintiff’s fault and refused to offer any money to settle the claim.
Mr. Kitay prepared for trial. He retained an engineering expert who inspected the “well-worn path” and reported: “The ramp where [plaintiff] experienced a slip and fall accident was an excessively sloped ramp, without a slip-resistant surface or handrail. This is a violation of the Building Code … The slope of the ramp measures 36% which far exceeds the maximum permissible 12-1/2% slope of ramps.”
Mr. Kitay forwarded the engineering report to the insurance carrier, noting the violation of the building code and citing Jury Instruction BAJI 3.45: “If you find that a party to this action violated the Building Code just read to you and that such violation was a cause of injury to another, you will find that such violation was negligence.”
Notwithstanding the engineering report, the insurance company refused to settle the case, and hired their own expert to testify the well-worn path was not dangerous.
Mr. Kitay then deposed the homeowner, who testified she had warned the plaintiff to “be careful” on the well-worn path. In response to questions by Mr. Kitay, the homeowner admitted warning plaintiff to “be careful” because she knew the well-worn path was dangerous. One week later, the insurance company paid the $100,000.00 policy limit to plaintiff.