Panish, Shea & Boyle Strength By Your Side

Injured Teen to Get $9 Million in Guardrail Crash

The Daily Journal
By Cortney Fielding - Staff Writer

March 17, 2008

LOS ANGELES - The state has agreed to pay $9 million to a teenage girl who lost both legs after crashing her car into a broken guardrail along Interstate 10 in 2006.

Priscilla Contreras was 16 when a jagged metal railing ripped through the driver's-side door and rendered the high school senior a double amputee.

The protective barrier had been damaged in an accident the previous day and was awaiting repair.

The settlement, finalized last week, ends a two-year legal tug-of-war with the state over buried accident reports. That battle continued until the day the trial was set to begin. Contreras v. State of California, BC 365948 (L.A. Super. Ct., decided March 6, 2008).

Contreras was driving home on Interstate 10 in Los Angeles, just east of the junction with Interstate 710, when she lost control of her car and hit the railing. The cause of the accident was never established.

Contreras' lawyer, Kevin Boyle of Panish, Shea and Boyle in Los Angeles, said that if the railing had been intact and smooth-sided, it would have stopped her car from propelling forward, as it was designed to do.

"Everything would have been fine," he said. "Instead, it speared her."

In February 2006, the Contreras family filed a lawsuit against the state and Caltrans, blaming the agency for creating a dangerous condition of public property and failing to repair it. The family also alleged the state failed to warn unsuspecting drivers of the dangerous situation. They sought unspecified damages.

Boyle said an ignored work order proved to be a key piece of evidence. The order was from a Caltrans manager who called for the immediate repair of the guardrail after the initial accident the day before. The lawyer said Caltrans' lack of response to the order amounted to negligence.

Caltrans lawyer Ruth Yeager could not be reached for comment.

Boyle said another key piece of evidence was a batch of reports on 20 injury accidents that had occurred over two years at the location where Conreras was injured.

During the discovery process, Boyle said, the family sought reports but the state declined to cooperate.

Ultimately, the trial court ordered the state to produce the accident reports. The state appealed, but the motion was denied.

When Caltrans eventually turned over the reports, the case proceeded to trial.

A settlement was reached on the morning the trial was to begin. It is one of the largest payouts in an amputee case in the state.

Contreras, now 19, was recovering from surgery this week and declined comment.

Boyle said the settlement will allow her to purchase top-of-the-line prosthetic limbs.

"Now she'll be able to get nice ones," he said. "Before, she had the cheapest of the cheap."

Latest Firm News

Tilton v. Sempra - $15 million verdict for brain injury to minor resulting from a power company truck hitting a family vehicle.

Dominguez v. San Francisco - $21 million settlement while case was on appeal. Wrongful death of 4 year-old girl. Largest settlement ever paid by San Francisco.

Contreras v. State of California - $9 million settlment for amputation caused by a damaged freeway guardrail.

Don Gino Dominguez v. South Central Los Angeles Regional Care Center - $2 million verdict for wrongful death of a mentally and physically disabled 39 year-old man. Health care center left man unsupervised and he choked to death.

Doe v. Driver - $5.5 million settlement for death of pedestrian in an auto accident.

Doe v. Oil Refinery - $6.2 Million settlement for wrongful death and personal injury caused by the collapse of tank floating roof.

Avila v. Dresick Farms - $5.64 million dollar jury verdict for girl injured in truck v. van collision. Believed to be the largest verdict in the history of Imperial County, California.

Konrad, et al. v. Hewlett-Packard - Lawsuit filed against Hewlett-Packard for pretexting journalists and their families

Chief Warrant Officers v. Boeing, et al. - $13.55 million settlement for Army maintenance officers severely injured in the crash of Apache Longbow helicopter on a maintenance test flight during Operation Iraqi Freedom in Iraq.

Roes v. Doe Auto Manufacturer: confidential multimillion dollar settlement on behalf of a family involved in on-road rollover of sport utility vehicle.

Does v. Van Manufacturer and Rental Company - Confidential multi-million dollar settlement on behalf of the survivors and family members of 14 church group members involved in a fifteen passenger van rollover.

Hill v. Titan Tire - Confidential multi-million dollar settlement for a 42 year old man who sustained brain injuries following a tire failure on his vehicle.

Dominguez v. San Francisco - $27.4 Million Verdict - Mother and 6 others witnessed a city truck driver run over her daughter on a sidewalk. City completely denied responsibility. Largest verdict ever against the City of San Francisco.

Sherman v. Courrege - $25.5 Million Verdict - Wrongful death of mother, father, and son hit by a drunk driver.

Sorenson v. Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway - $2.8 Million Verdict - Plaintiffs were parents of a 48 year-old man killed when a freight train crashed into a commuter train.

Doe v. Auto Manufacturer - Major Confidential Settlement Fuel fed fire caused by defectively designed 15 passenger van rollover. Many occupants killed or severely burned.

Flores v. Continental Tire - Major Confidential Settlement - Woman sustained paraplegia when the right rear tire on the family's Ford Windstar van experienced a tread belt separation, causing the vehicle to roll over.

11111 Santa Monica Blvd. Suite 700 Los Angeles CA 90025 • P:310-477-1700 • F: 310-477-1699 • Toll Free: 1-866-992-1700

Copyright © 2008 Panish, Shea & Boyle - Los Angeles Personal Injury Lawyers - Los Angeles Trial Attorneys - All rights reserved.

Plaintiff's Attorney Disclaimer: The personal injury, wrongful death, catastrophic injury, or other legal information presented at this site should not be considered formal legal advice, nor the formation of a lawyer or attorney client relationship. Prior results do not guarantee or predict a similar outcome with respect to any future matter. Please note that you are not considered a client until you have signed a retainer agreement and your case has been accepted by us.

Sitemap