Jurimatic: Verdicts and Settlements

In Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority v. Aiguo Wu, a Santa Clara County jury returned a significant verdict in favor of a property owner facing condemnation for a public infrastructure project. The case centered on the VTA's use of eminent domain to acquire fee simple ownership, utility easements, and temporary construction easements from the defendant. While the government entity had established a right to take the property as of August 7, 2023, the parties disputed the "just compensation" owed. The jury ultimately rejected the Authority's initial valuations, awarding the landowner $551,600 for the land acquisition and a combined $57,087 for the easements. Crucially, the verdict included $668,440 in "severance damages" for the reduction in value to the remaining property and an additional $170,076 for well replacement costs, determining that the Authority's previous payment of $177,650 for the well was insufficient. The total award exceeded $1.4 million.

John Stripling filed a negligence lawsuit against the City of Orlando following a bicycle accident on Pasadena Place in August 2022. Stripling alleged that he sustained permanent injuries after hitting a pothole and loose gravel that the City had failed to repair or warn against. The City denied liability, arguing that Stripling was comparatively negligent and that the City was protected by sovereign immunity caps. The dispute proceeded to a jury trial in the Ninth Judicial Circuit Court in October 2025 to determine liability and damages.

A Duval County, Florida jury found Defendant Shelby Nicole Howell negligent for a 2022 motor vehicle collision, determining her actions were a legal cause of the plaintiff’s injuries. However, the plaintiff's recovery was strictly limited after the jury determined that Janet McCaskey had not sustained a permanent injury from the crash. Because of this finding, the final verdict awarded McCaskey only $13,000, which was compensation solely for past medical expenses, denying all claims for future medical costs and non-economic damages like pain and suffering.

Rebecca Newman, representing the estate of Margaret Derderian, sued Dr. Matthew Brown, Dr. Anne Lally, and Starling Physicians, P.C. for medical malpractice and wrongful death. The complaint alleged that Dr. Brown failed to meet the standard of care during a fistulogram procedure on the elderly patient, specifically by failing to recognize the high risk of hemorrhage from a fragile vein and discharging her without proper observation. The patient died days later from exsanguination. The defense argued that the treatment met professional standards. A New Britain jury returned a verdict in favor of the defendants, finding no negligence.

Dwight Broadnax sued AAA Club Alliance, Inc. after tripping over a tow cable while walking in a pedestrian crosswalk on Farmington Avenue in West Hartford on Christmas Eve 2022. Broadnax alleged the AAA tow operator negligently extended the cable across the walkway without warning signs, causing him to fall and suffer injuries to his neck, back, and knee. AAA denied negligence and argued Broadnax failed to keep a proper lookout. The jury returned a verdict for the defendant, awarding no damages.

Gerardo Gutierrez filed a class action lawsuit against Fraiche Catering, Inc. in San Francisco Superior Court, alleging widespread violations of California labor laws. The complaint, filed on behalf of approximately 100 similarly situated employees, claimed the catering company misclassified workers as exempt to avoid paying overtime and minimum wages. Further allegations included the failure to provide mandated meal and rest periods, failure to reimburse employees for business expenses such as personal cell phone use, and the issuance of inaccurate wage statements. Fraiche Catering denied all allegations, asserting that employees were properly classified under California's Professional, Administrative, and Executive exemptions. The case concluded with a $175,000 settlement to resolve the claims.

In a decisive intellectual property ruling, a federal jury awarded Sonate Corporation (d/b/a Vegadelphia) approximately $39 million after finding Beyond Meat willfully infringed on its registered trademark. The dispute centered on Beyond Meat's "Great Taste Plant-Based" national advertising campaign, which the jury found to be confusingly similar to Vegadelphia's long-standing slogan "Where Great Taste is Plant-Based." The verdict included significant awards for both actual damages and the disgorgement of profits.

Eric Harrold sued Spartan Education Group, an aeronautics and technology college in Riverside, California, for widespread wage and hour violations. The class action alleged the company failed to pay minimum and overtime wages, denied meal and rest breaks, issued inaccurate pay statements, and refused to reimburse workers for using personal cell phones. The case settled for $400,000.

Daniel Matthews filed a class action lawsuit against Lusk Quality Machine Products alleging the California manufacturer violated state labor laws by failing to pay minimum wages, denying meal and rest breaks, requiring off-the-clock work, and providing inaccurate wage statements. The case settled for $365,000, compensating affected non-exempt employees for wage theft and labor code violations during their employment at the CNC machining facility.

Vernon Barnett filed a class action lawsuit against QW Insurance Solutions, LLC, LendingTree, Inc., and LendingTree, LLC in San Diego Superior Court, alleging systematic wage and hour violations affecting non-exempt employees. The complaint claimed the defendants failed to pay proper overtime by excluding commissions from rate calculations, denied compliant meal and rest breaks, issued inaccurate wage statements, and failed to reimburse work-from-home expenses. After intensive negotiations, the parties reached a $450,000 settlement that received preliminary court approval on March 22, 2024.

The Orange County Superior Court resolved the medical malpractice lawsuit of Tanisha R. Jackett and Kelvin Jackett v. The Regents of the University of California with a final, negotiated settlement of $550,000. The suit centered on the negligent care Mrs. Jackett received during a complex, nearly twenty-hour Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator (DIEP) flap procedure at the University of California Irvine Medical Center in October 2020. The Plaintiffs alleged that the medical staff failed to meet the proper standard of care, arguing that improper positioning during the lengthy surgery caused serious, lasting injury. This negligence resulted in Mrs. Jackett suffering from severe headaches, eventually diagnosed as occipital neuralgia, along with hair loss and persistent swelling, injuries she continued to suffer from. Her husband, Kelvin Jackett, sought damages for loss of consortium, as his wife's injuries had severely disrupted their marital relationship. The Regents of the University of California denied the claims, raising defenses that invoked California's MICRA laws, which cap non-economic damages at $250,000 for medical negligence. Despite the strong defense, the parties ultimately negotiated the six-figure settlement, which the Court approved, bringing the high-stakes personal injury case to a conclusion before a jury trial.

The Sacramento County Superior Court finalized a significant labor and employment case, Naveen Prasad v. RCG Logistics LLC, with a total settlement of $552,795. The lawsuit, brought as a class action, centered on RCG Logistics' systematic failure to comply with California’s strict labor laws, specifically regarding pay calculation and workplace accommodation. The primary financial claims revolved around the company’s practice of paying employees incentive commission payments (ICPs) without incorporating them into the "regular rate of pay." This failure resulted in the underpayment of overtime, sick leave, and meal and rest period premiums for the entire class. The plaintiff further asserted the company denied workers proper meal and rest breaks, and failed to reimburse them for business-related cell phone expenses. Beyond the class claims, Mr. Prasad included individual claims of disability discrimination and retaliation under the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA). He alleged that after he requested a reasonable accommodation for his Autism Spectrum Disorder (auditory sensitivity), a manager refused to maintain the necessary accommodation and the company terminated him shortly thereafter. Although RCG Logistics denied all wrongdoing, the parties ultimately negotiated the six-figure settlement, which the court approved, bringing the high-stakes litigation to a close.