Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani Westchester Partner Allyson Avila successfully convinced a jury to apportion 80% comparative fault against a plaintiff in a hotly contested liability claim against the firm's client.
The plaintiff was a young student who alleged that the client's premises were defective, causing her to fall. The insured's client, who testified in the case (before Gordon & Rees took over the defense), admitted that the photographs of where the plaintiff fell looked like a dangerous condition.
At trial, the firm's team was able to argue that the plaintiff had a pre-existing injury to her knee. The judge ruled in the firm's favor that the issue of the plaintiff's prior knee condition could be mentioned during the liability phase as a proximate cause of her accident.
Ultimately, the jury found that the plaintiff was 80% at fault and the insured 20% at fault. The trial on damages has yet to be held because the plaintiff's counsel is avoiding taking the damages portion to trial.
The lesson to be learned here is that preparing witnesses for depositions and at trial is imperative. The client was stuck with the witness's testimony while another firm was handling the case. That witness admitted a dangerous condition, which was not easy to overcome.
The Gordon & Rees team prevailed despite the challenges above.