Judge: Gregory W. Alarcon, Case: 20STCV11476, Date: 2025-04-28 Tentative Ruling



Case Number: 20STCV11476    Hearing Date: April 28, 2025    Dept: 96

Motion for New Trial/Additur

Plaintiff’s motion moves for an additur and/or new trial. Plaintiff recovered a jury verdict of $30,000 in past and suffering, $37,500 in past medical expenses, $3,125 in future medical expenses, and $0 in future pain and suffering. The plaintiff seeks the court to provide an additur regarding future pain and suffering.  Defendant disagrees.

 

The court, having presided over the trial, finds no grounds for a new trial or an additur.  The jury was presented with disputed evidence as to whether any future care was necessary or was degenerative or had any causal relationship to the accident.  The jury heard these witnesses and decided that no future pain and suffering damage were caused by the accident, after weighing the evidence.  The future economic damages appears consistent with the Defendant’s expert who testified that Plaintiff, at most, needed some office visits and some physical therapy. It is entirely consistent that the jury would not, after weighing the disputed evidence including the experts, that Plaintiff was not entitled to any future non-economic damages, notwithstanding Plaintiff’s argument to the jury.  CACI 107, 200, 219, 220, 221, 3905A,3927. (Deposition of Dr. Neil Chafetz.)   The motion for a new trial is denied as well as the motion for additur.

Plaintiff’s Motion to Tax Defendant’s Memorandum of Costs (David Lacayo)

The plaintiff also moves to tax Defendant’s Memorandum of Costs. Defendant’s seeking costs is based on Defendants’ rejection of the 998 offer to compromise of 75,000 and a jury verdict totaling $70,675.00.

Having reviewed the papers submitted by both sides, the Court finds that Defendant’s 998 to David Lacayo is valid and sufficiently certain.  Defendant is entitled to his post-offer costs. 

Plaintiff’s Motion to Tax Defendant’s Memorandum of Costs (Mireya Lacayo)

Defendant agrees that the court has discretion to award Mireya reasonable post-998 offer expert costs but believes that they should be divided between what Defendant is entitled from David Lacayo re costs and what Plaintiff is entitled to from Mireya Lacayo.  The court would encourage counsel to meet and confer on these issues to see if a resolution can be achieved.

The court will invite argument about the Plaintiff’s pre-998 costs are nonetheless less than January 26, 2024, CCP Section 998 offer of $75,000.00.  Code of Civil Procedure Section 998(c) (1).  This entitles the Defendant to recover his post-offer costs as well as post offer expert costs pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 998(c).  The court finds that the de-designated accident reconstructionist/biomechanical engineering expert Christopher Furbish expert costs are recoverable in preparing to challenge Plaintiff’s accident reconstruction/biomechanical expert Arthur Croft, Ph.D.

 

Plaintiff’s motion to stay enforcement is denied.





Website by Triangulus