 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Harris v. Colvin3/28/2003
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
In this personal injury action arising out of a minor automobile accident, a jury rendered its verdict for the defendant. The plaintiff appeals, contending the trial court should have granted her motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict. We disagree and affirm the judgment and the order denying the motion.
FACTS
Beverly Ann Colvin was backing her Nissan out of a residential driveway at the same time Carolyn Harris's son (with Harris in the front passenger seat) was backing Harris's Mercedes out of a driveway on the other side of the street. Colvin's rear bumper struck Harris's right rear panel. Harris sued Colvin for negligence, and the following evidence was presented at trial.
Before backing out, Colvin looked around carefully to make sure the street was clear, then proceeded slowly. As she was about midway into the street, she saw Harris's car backing out of the opposite driveway. Colvin saw Harris and her son "motioning, talking to one another," and Colvin thought they saw her backing up. Colvin stopped, looked to the front of her car to check for children, then "went back wee bit more, and that's when the impact" (so light that Colvin did not feel it) occurred.
Harris's son pulled back into the driveway. Colvin parked, got out of her car, and crossed the street. Harris's son approached Colvin in a manner that intimidated her ("He just gave me these looks like I was -- it's your fault. I was scared; intimidated"). Harris said they should exchange numbers, and Colvin "just said 'Yes, it's my fault.' . . . I was already frightened by the way her son had came out towards me. It was like I was scared so I just immediately write down the number; just want to just, you know, take care of whatever I had to take care of even though I was scared. It wasn't my fault, but I was afraid."
Colvin went to her nearby apartment to get her husband, and the two of them then met Harris and her son at Downtown L.A. Motors, where the cost to repair the Mercedes was estimated to be $1,377.85 (the cost to repair Colvin's car was $65). While still at the repair shop, Colvin wrote on the back of the estimate:
"I Beverly, since the price is $1,377
"I admit to damage ... will let Insurance Compa handle it!
"Paying all cash!
"Beverly Colvin."
Still "afraid of what might happen," Colvin gave Harris a check for $500 and promised to pay the balance the following Monday.
Lloyd Martin, an accident reconstruction specialist and engineer, testified that (as described by the parties and illustrated in photographs admitted into evidence) Colvin's car could not have backed into Harris's driveway when the impact occurred, and that the force of the impact was too minor to cause the injuries claimed by Harris. Martin characterized the damage to the Mercedes as "superficial."
The jury found that Colvin was not negligent and rendered a defense verdict. Harris moved for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, insisting that Colvin's note on the back of the estimate established her negligence as a matter of law. The trial court denied the motion and entered judgment in favor of Colvin. Harris appeals.
DISCUSSION
In a series of related arguments, Harris contends her motion for judgment notwith
Page 1 2 California Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|