Jump to Navigation

Results 2008

MICHAEL J. BRIGGS vs. L.A. FITNESS INTERNATIONAL, LLC, ET AL.
Jury Trial January 22, 2008
Christopher E. Faenza; Kelly M. Douglas

Christopher Faenza and Kelly Douglas obtained a defense verdict on behalf of L.A. Fitness International, LLC, in this negligence/premises liability action involving a physical altercation between two sets of brothers — Michael and Jason Briggs, and Ricky and Juan Cavazos — on a basketball court at the L.A. Fitness facility located in Chino Hills.

The incident occurred on October 12, 2005, toward the tail end of a closely scored basketball game where the Cavazos brothers and the Briggs brothers were playing on opposing teams. The players had played basketball together on prior occasions without incident. On the date of the incident, Jason Briggs and Ricky Cavazos collided in an attempt to keep a rebounding ball in play. According to plaintiff, Jason Briggs was pushed up against the glass wall of the basketball court during the collision and was quickly surrounded by members of the opposing team. Witness testimony established that Jason Briggs put up his fists in an aggressive manner and an altercation ensued. Several L.A. Fitness employees entered the court within seconds and helped diffuse the situation. At trial, plaintiff claimed that L.A. Fitness staff members escorted the Cavazos brothers off the basketball court, while several members of the staff remained in the basketball court with plaintiff. The defense presented evidence that plaintiff and his brother were asked to leave the gym, but refused. Thereafter, the Cavazos brothers volunteered to leave.

By all accounts, there were no injuries during this phase of the altercation. Plaintiff admitted that there was no need to call the police at that time. In fact, plaintiff and his brother began to pick up where they left off with the basketball game. According to plaintiff, Juan Cavazos returned to the court a couple of minutes later and approached plaintiff with an outstretched hand, but plaintiff refused to shake hands. Thereafter, Ricky Cavazos came from behind and struck the side of plaintiff's head. At trial, Ricky Cavazos admitted that he struck plaintiff, but testified that he did so in defense of his brother.

Plaintiff sustained a right orbital fracture as a result of the punch thrown by Ricky Cavazos, requiring multiple surgeries. Plaintiff sought damages in excess of $80,000 for past economic and noneconomic damages, as well as $500,000 for future noneconomic damages.

Ricky Cavazos, Juan Cavazos, and L.A. Fitness were named defendants in the case. Prior to trial, plaintiff limited his claims against Ricky and Juan Cavazos to negligence in a tactical move to defeat a pending declaratory relief action. Plaintiff argued that L.A. Fitness was liable for his damages because his security expert opined that the nonsecurity personnel should have somehow anticipated the assault and physically restrained Ricky Cavazos to prevent his return to the basketball court. In turn, L.A. Fitness filed cross-actions against Michael and Jason Briggs and against Ricky and Juan Cavazos.

In defense, Mr. Faenza and Ms. Douglas contested liability by presenting expert testimony that the actions of the nonsecurity personnel were reasonable under the circumstances, especially given the absence of prior similar incidents. Testimony from several employees and witnesses was presented to dispute plaintiff's claims of negligence on the part of L.A. Fitness. In addition, plaintiff was effectively impeached with his own deposition testimony regarding the absence of prior similar incidents.

After a four-day trial, the jury deliberated for two hours and returned a verdict in favor of L.A. Fitness. The jury also determined that plaintiff's damages totaled $80,346 and attributed 25 percent of fault to plaintiff. The jury assigned responsibility for plaintiff's damages as follows: Ricky Cavazos — 60 percent; Juan Cavazos — 5 percent; and Jason Briggs — 10 percent.

Prior to trial, defendant, L.A. Fitness International, LLC's served a statutory offer to compromise for a waiver of costs upon plaintiff. Because the offer was rejected by plaintiff, L.A. Fitness was awarded its costs and expert fees in the amount of $19,166.

Post-Trial

Plaintiff moved for a new trial, claiming that the court erred in granting the defense's motion limiting the amount of plaintiff's medical damages to the amount paid versus the amount charged. Plaintiff's motion was denied as to L.A. Fitness, but granted as to the Cavazos brothers. The Cavazos brothers have appealed the court's order on the motion for new trial. In addition, plaintiff has filed an appeal as to the entire verdict. Both appeals are currently pending.

BARBARA DUNNE vs. MAGGIANO'S INC., ET AL.
Jury Trial June 2, 2008
Christopher E. Faenza

Christopher E. Faenza obtained a defense verdict on June 2, 2008, for Maggiano's, Inc. Plaintiff, Barbara Dunne, claimed that she fractured her left wrist when she slipped and fell in the bar area as a result of a prior wine spill. There was no dispute that the restaurant employees were on notice of the spill. However, the employees were in the process of cleaning the spill at the time of plaintiff's fall, in accordance with the restaurant's policies and procedures. Because Mr. Faenza established that the employees were in the process of reasonably responding to the spill, the jury found that Maggiano's was not liable for plaintiff's damages.

During trial, plaintiff's credibility was destroyed by her claim that she lost her job as a result of the incident. Mr. Faenza presented copious evidence to prove that plaintiff lost her job for other reasons, including evidence that she was a whistleblower and that she had purchased an interior decorating franchise business before she was terminated.

Over the strong opposition of Yoka & Smith, plaintiff's motion for new trial was granted. Maggiano's, Inc., is currently considering an appeal.

GOULET vs. BROWN JORDAN
Summary Judgment July, 2008
Stephen Smith; Kelly M. Douglas

Stephen Smith & Kelly Douglas obtained summary judgment on behalf of an outdoor furniture manufacturer in this personal injury lawsuit in which a partial-paraplegic sustained third-degree burns from contact with the metal surface of the insureds lawn furniture. The lawn furniture, located at the pool area of co-defendant's residential complex had been heated by sunlight. Plaintiff contended that the chair was defective by reason of a lack of any warning on the product that it would become dangerously hot when in sunlight.

In our motion, we argued that any claimed danger in the chair's metal surfaces becoming hot was an was open and obvious condition such that the plaintiff should have been aware of that claimed hazard without the necessity of any warning by the manufacturer. The court agreed and, on that basis, judgment was entered on behalf of the insured.

  • Best Lawyers - Best Law Firms - US News 2016
  • American Board of Trial Advocates
  • AV- Lexis Nexis - Martindale Hubbell- Peer review rated - For Ethical Standards and legal ability
  • 10 Years selected to superLawyers - Southern California 2013 - Walter M Yoka
  • Yoka & Smith LLP Top Listed in Best Lawyers - Linking Lawyers and clients worldwide
  • SuperLawyers - Risong Stars
  • Walter M Yoka - Best Lawyer Of the Year 2014 - Personal Injury Litigation - Defendants - Los Angeles,CA
  • Walter M Yoka - Best Lawyer Of the Year 2012 - Product Liability Litigation - Defendants - Los Angeles,CA
  • SuperLawyers
  • Southern California Best Lawyers
  • ISB - Coin

Privacy Policy | Business Development Solutions by FindLaw, a Thomson Reuters business.