 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Belcher v. City of Long Beach11/21/2002
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
Officer Galen L. Carroll (Carroll), who is employed by the City of Long Beach (City), arrested plaintiff and appellant Rhonda Belcher (Belcher). Belcher sued Carroll and the City based on her claim that Carroll assaulted and battered her. Carroll cross-complained against Belcher for defamation. A jury found that Carroll did not assault and batter Belcher, and that Belcher defamed Carroll. The jury awarded Carroll general and punitive damages. Belcher contends on appeal that the judgment on her complaint must be reversed because the trial court improperly excluded her expert witnesses and dismissed her negligence causes of action. She also contends that the judgment in Carroll's favor on his cross-complaint must be reversed because it is based on an unconstitutional statute (Civ. Code, ยง 47.5), there was insufficient evidence to support the judgment on the cross-complaint, there was insufficient evidence to support $250,000 in punitive damages, and the trial court improperly awarded expert witness fees as costs.
We hold that the trial court did not err in excluding expert witnesses and dismissing the negligence causes of action. We conclude that we need not reach the constitutional issue, and that there was sufficient evidence to support the jury's verdict that Belcher maliciously defamed Carroll. We also hold that there was insufficient evidence to support the punitive damages award, and that the expert witness fees were not recoverable costs. We therefore reverse the judgment as to the awards of punitive damages and expert witness fees. The judgment is otherwise affirmed.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
Belcher's Arrest
On June 6, 1997, Belcher and her friend, Peter Musey (Musey), went to a bar where Belcher had alcoholic drinks, and was involved in an altercation with several women. The bartender told Belcher to leave, and witnesses said Belcher threw a glass of beer at the bartender. Witnesses also said that bouncers removed Belcher, who resisted and struggled, from the bar. Musey and Belcher denied that any struggle occurred.
Carroll then arrested Belcher for being drunk in public, and he took her to the police station. According to police records, Carroll arrived at the station approximately seven minutes after leaving the bar. Carroll said he drove directly to the police station and did not stop. On the way to the station, Belcher told Carroll that she worked for the Los Angeles Times and was going to tell them that Carroll raped her on the way to the station. Carroll turned on the tape recorder in his car, and Belcher can be heard saying she was going to lie and accuse Carroll of raping her.
Belcher testified that on the way to the station Carroll stopped the car and hit her in the face. She said he drove her to a warehouse where his friend was waiting, and they removed her from the car, took off her jeans, and hit her face. She could not recall if any sexual intercourse occurred, but she believes both men raped her at a warehouse. At her deposition, Belcher did not mention that she had been taken to a warehouse. She admitted at trial that she lied to her boss when she told him her injuries resulted from a bicycle accident. She also responded "Yes" when asked if it was "true . . . that you'll lie whenever it suits your purpose?"
Witnesses did not see any in
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 California Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|