Loading...
sr-041481-6u-, y-. i SS:YB:PBP:DD ASR ~ ~ jy~ Council Meeting of April 14, 1981 Santa Monica, California CONFIDENTIAL STAFF REPORT TO: P4AYOR AiJD CITY COUNCIL FROD4: CITY ATTORNEY SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT JORGE ZAHLER V. CITY OF SAtQTA MONICA CASE NO. WEC 42342 INTRODUCTION Approval is requested for $35,000.00 in settlement of the above-referenced lawsuit. This agreement was negotiated at the Mandatory Settlement Conference on March 25, 1981, before Judge Robert Feinerman. FACTS- Plaintiff, Jorge Zahler, age 72, filed suit against the City of Santa Monica for injuries sustained as a result of his fall on October 10, 1975. After parking his car on Euclid Avenue north of California Avenue, plaintiff proceeded toward the side- walk where upon he caught his foot in a drain basin, fell and sustained serious injuries necessitating three surgeries. Plaintiff alleges that his fall and resulting injuries were caused by a dangerous condition of City property. Inspection of the subject :drain basin revealed an unusually deep depression with a number of pot holes and t~- substantially worn asphalt. There is no grill over the mouth of the basin to protect pedestrians. Th6 nearest street light is located approximately 70 feet away from the. basin and does not adequately illuminate the opening of the drain basin. Because the City makes Yearly inspections of the City's drain basins, we do not have the defense. of lack of notice in this lawsuit. Furthermore, plaintiff has an independent witness who sustained a fall similar to plaintiff's at this location, DAD4AGES As a result of this accident, plaintiff sustained a severe fracture to his right leg, Plaintiff was treated at St. John's Hospital and UCLA Medical Center immediately after the accident. His leg was placed in a long cast, and a metal walker was prescribed, Five (5) days after the accideht, plaintiff sustained a fractured hip when he fell while using his walker, Plaintiff suffered complications following his hip surgery which necessitated two (2) subsequent surgeries at UCLA Medical Center. Since plaintiff is a diabetic, he developed diabetic ulcers on his legs as a result of this incident. Treatment of these alcers lasted approximately two (2) years and required hospitalization. Plaintiff's medical expenses totalled $27,574,.83. There is no indication in plaintiff's previous medical history of a pre-existing condition which may have contributed to plaintiff's original fall. -2- LIABILITY There is a strong probability a jury would find the City to be liable. If the City had properly inspected the drain basin, it would have been-aware of :its deteroratirig condition. The basin is one of the oldest in the City, and nothing had been done to upgrade it or make it safer. A jury might well conclude that the basin was a dangerous condition, particularly in view of the fact that it was located on a dark street where it could not easily be seen. California law provides that if a defendant is liable for the original injury to plaintiff, defendant is also liable for any injuries sustained in subsequent accidents which are a normal consequence of the impaired physical condition caused by the original injury and cahich would not have occurred had the. plaintiff's physical condition not been impaired, There is same indication that plaintiff was contributorily negligent, because he could,' have observed where he was walking. However, depositions reveal plaintiff to be a sympathetic, credible witness. PRE-TRIAL SETTLEMETdT NEGOTIATIONS Prior to the Mandatory Settlement Conference of March 25, 1981, plaintiff's attorney demanded $150,000. In light of what we felt to be a high. demand, the City did not respond with a counter offer. At the P-laudatory Settlement Conference, plaintiff reduced his demand to $100,0.00. We advised plaintiff's attorney that this figure was unacceptable and we would not -3- recommend the amount for Council approval. Additional negotiations with Judge Robert Feinerman, plaintiff's attorney, and Deputy City Attorneys Yvonne Binstock and Paula Palmor continued for approx- imately three (3) hours. Judge Feinerman advised that a jury verdict in this case could range between $75,000 and $150,000, that plaintiff's attorney probably would not accept less than $40,000, and that a $40,000 settlement would be an excellent one for the City. After further negotiations, plaintiff agreed to accept $35,000 in settlement.. This offer to settle by plaintiff, however, will be withdrawn on April 15, 1981, if Council fails to approve it at the April 14, 1981 meeting. The alternative to settlement would be to proceed to trial now set for May 18, 1931. RECOMI~2ENDATION °tQe recommend the approval of the $35,000 settlement, In view of the City"s liability and the documented medical bills in excess of $27,000, there is a potential jury verdict in excess of $100,000, Prepared By: STEPHEN S, STARK Acting City Attorney YVONNE BINSTOCK Deputy City Attorney PAULA B. PALMOR Deputy City Attorney -4-