California Partner Obtains Summary Judgment on Behalf of Truck Driver and Trucking Company
Our client’s driver was making a delivery to Plaintiff’s place of employment when he pulled over to ask the Plaintiff, who was standing the sidewalk, about the drop-off location. Plaintiff stepped off the sidewalk into the road to speak to our client and was struck by Co-Defendant/Cross-Complainant’s truck that he was driving in the other lane. Plaintiff subsequently sustained life changing traumatic brain injury and was in a comatose state for months. The Plaintiff later filed suit against our clients.
Daniel Ip represented the defense and refuted Plaintiff’s allegations against our driver by presenting the statutory provisions and applicable case law. The Court ruled that no special relationship between the Plaintiff and our client existed and that there was no duty to warn as a matter of law.
In opposing summary judgment, Plaintiff retained a trucking expert. Our attorney objected to the Plaintiff’s expert’s opinions stating it invaded the province of the court to legal issues such as the existence of duty. In September 2022 the Court sustained the summary judgment ruling that there was no special relationship between our client and Plaintiff and accordingly no duty to warn of the oncoming truck.
Daniel focuses on civil litigation including personal injury and wrongful death claims. He has experience handling general business litigation, contract disputes, and defending municipalities, cities and school districts, and consistently obtains favorable results for clients in both jury and bench trials.