$3.57M Settlement in Pizarro Crash Case

Case Background

Plaintiffs Angelo Pizarro and Arcelio Garcia lived in San Diego County. On August 23, 2018, San Diego Police received a “mental case” call regarding Trevor James Heitmann. A psychiatrist reported danger to self and others. Officers spoke with his parents but did not evaluate Trevor. Later, Trevor drove a McLaren owned or controlled by him and TJH Holdings, LLC. He entered I-805 northbound while driving southbound. He collided head-on with Aileen Lydia Pizarro’s Hyundai. Her daughter, Aryana Lamore Pizarro, rode as passenger. Both died. Plaintiffs filed government claims. The City and County issued denials. The Probate Court processed estate claims and rejections. Plaintiffs then filed this action in the Court.

Cause

Police responded to a Welfare and Institutions Code §5150 report. The psychiatrist urged a mental-health hold. Parents described threats and manic behavior. Officers left without speaking to or assessing Trevor. No PERT clinician assisted. Trevor then rammed a car at home, drove erratically, entered a school ground, and sped onto I-805 the wrong way. He struck Aileen’s vehicle in the HOV lane near Carroll Canyon. Plaintiffs alleged negligent public-entity response and negligent operation and entrustment by Trevor and TJH Holdings. These events triggered the dispute.

Injury

The crash killed Aileen Lydia Pizarro, age 43. It also killed Aryana Lamore Pizarro, age 12. Plaintiff Angelo lost his mother’s companionship, guidance, and support. Plaintiff Arcelio lost his daughter’s love, comfort, and society. Their family lives changed. Grief and the loss of relationship persisted.

Damages

Plaintiffs sought funeral and burial expenses. They claimed loss of services and financial support. They requested general damages for loss of companionship and moral support. They also sought costs of suit and interest. They targeted estate insurance proceeds and, if insufficient, estate assets through the Administrator.

Key Arguments and Proceedings

Legal Representation

• Plaintiff(s): Cynthia R. Chihak | Arcelio Garcia | Angelo Pizarro

• Counsel for Plaintiff(s): Cynthia R. Chihak | Amy R. Martel

• Defendant(s): Bita Maryann Heitmann (Administrator, Estate of Trevor James Heitmann) | Cynthia Chihak (Administrator, Estate of Trevor James Heitmann) | Trevor James Heitmann | Kurt Frederick Heitmann (Administrator, Estate of Trevor James Heitmann) | City of San Diego | County of San Diego | Estate of Trevor James Heitmann, Deceased | TJH Holdings LLC

• Counsel for Defendant(s): Stacy J. Plotkin-Wolff | Kimberly S. Oberrecht

Claims

Count 1 – Negligence; Public Entity Liability (City of San Diego).

Plaintiffs alleged breach of mandatory duties under §§5150 and 5150.05. Officers failed to reasonably investigate, consider available information, or detain Trevor. The omission foreseeably enabled the fatal crash.

Count 2 – Negligence; Public Entity Liability (County of San Diego).

Plaintiffs alleged PERT-related failures in training, staffing, supervision, and response. County responsibilities and collaborations supported a duty to ensure proper §5150 handling.

Count 3 – Negligence; Wrongful Death.

Against Trevor James Heitmann (Deceased), the Estate through its Administrators, TJH Holdings, LLC, and Does 1–10. Plaintiffs alleged negligent driving and entrustment. They claimed these acts substantially caused Aileen’s and Aryana’s deaths.

Defense

Defendants Estate of Trevor James Heitmann, TJH Holdings, and the Estate Administrators filed a general denial. They argued Plaintiffs’ decedents acted negligently and caused or contributed to the harm. They also alleged comparative fault by co-Defendants and unnamed third parties. They sought apportionment so each party paid only its share. They invoked statutes of limitation under C.C.P. §§ 335.1, 337, 338, and 339. They claimed assumption of risk both express and implied and a failure to mitigate damages.

Defendants further raised employer negligence under Witt v. Jackson to reduce any judgment. They asserted the workers’ compensation exclusive-remedy bar under Labor Code §§ 3601 and 3602. They invoked Proposition 213 to limit noneconomic damages absent proof of insurance. They reserved the right to add defenses as discovery progressed. They requested judgment for Defendants, plus fees and costs.

Settlement

The lawsuit concluded with a settlement of $3,573,286, providing Plaintiffs with compensation for their losses while avoiding the uncertainty of trial. The resolution addressed claims of negligence and wrongful death arising from the fatal crash, ensuring recovery for medical, economic, and emotional damages. By reaching this agreement, all parties closed the dispute without further litigation.

Court Documents

Court documents are available for purchase upon request at jurimatic@exlitem.com