Ida Galo vs. Daljit Singh, et al

Case Background

On August 7, 2020, Plaintiff  Ida Galo filed a premises liability lawsuit in the Essex County Superior Court, New Jersey. Judge Jeffrey B. Beacham presided over this case.

Cause

On October 9, 2020, Galo walked past Save Smart, a large retail store in Newark, when a shoplifter ran onto the sidewalk. Five Save Smart employees chased the suspect. As the shoplifter fled, they collided with Galo, who was walking with a friend. The shoplifter bumped into her first, causing her to lose balance. A second person, a 210-pound untrained Save Smart employee, then forcefully struck her. The impact sent her violently to the ground, causing her head to hit the cement sidewalk.

Galo filed a lawsuit in December 2020 against Save Smart, its store manager Daljit Singh, and the property owner, Ironbound Plaza Urban Renewal. Her legal team claimed that Save Smart’s negligence and failure to ensure pedestrian safety led to the incident. The lawsuit also cited premises liability, arguing that the store failed to take reasonable steps to prevent harm caused by an employee’s reckless pursuit of a shoplifter.

Injuries

The collision caused Galo to suffer a subdural hematoma, a severe head injury. The impact led to a mild traumatic brain injury (TBI). Her attorney, Eichen, stated that the injuries drastically affected her health and well-being. The defense argued that her preexisting medical conditions, including prior strokes, contributed more to her current state than the incident itself. However, the plaintiff maintained that the head trauma resulted directly from Save Smart’s negligence.

Damages

Galo’s injuries resulted in substantial medical expenses, including hospitalization and ongoing treatment for her traumatic brain injury. The fall caused physical pain, cognitive difficulties, and persistent headaches. She also experienced emotional distress, which further diminished her quality of life. Her legal team sought compensation for medical costs, pain and suffering, emotional distress, and future healthcare expenses. The case emphasized Save Smart’s premises liability, arguing that the store’s negligence in training employees created unsafe conditions that led to the shoplifter-related accident.

Key Arguments and Proceedings

Legal representation

  • Plaintiff(s): Ida Galo
    • Counsel for Plaintiff: Barry R. Eichen | Dean R. Maglione
    • Experts for Plaintiff(s): David Machalick |  Dr. Alkies Lapas
  • Defendant(s): Daljit Singh |  Ironbound Plaza Urban Renewal
    • Counsel for Defendants: Timothy J. Jaeger | Josie A. Scanlan

Claims

Galo’s lawsuit accused Save Smart, Daljit Singh, and Ironbound Plaza Urban Renewal of negligence, assault and battery, and premises liability. The complaint argued that Save Smart failed to train its employees properly, leading to reckless behavior. By allowing an untrained employee to pursue a shoplifter without considering public safety, Save Smart acted negligently. The legal team asserted that the store had a duty of care to pedestrians near its property. Their failure to uphold this duty led to serious injuries, reinforcing the premises liability claim.

Defense

Save Smart and the other defendants denied liability. They argued that their employees did not act negligently while chasing the shoplifter. The defense contended that the shoplifter, not Save Smart employees, caused Galo to lose balance. They also claimed that her preexisting strokes, not the fall, led to her current medical issues.

The defense further argued that the Save Smart employee did not intentionally strike Galo. They insisted the incident was unforeseeable and not an act of negligence. Additionally, they claimed Save Smart had no legal duty to prevent injuries caused by a fleeing shoplifter. The store’s security measures, they asserted, were reasonable

Jury Verdict

On January 27, 2025, the jury ruled in Galo’s favor. They found Save Smart liable for negligence and premises liability. The jury determined that the store’s reckless shoplifter pursuit and lack of employee training directly caused Galo’s injuries. They rejected the defense’s argument that her preexisting conditions were the primary cause of her medical state. Consequently, the jury awarded Galo an $8 million verdict in a premises liability lawsuit

Court Documents:

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