Fearon v. Ault: 2025 Contra Costa Injury Verdict
Table of Contents
Case Background
This civil action originated from a motor vehicle collision that occurred on January 8, 2018, near Interstate 680 southbound, approximately 500 feet north of Stone Valley Road, in Danville, Contra Costa County, California. Plaintiff Sherene Fearon filed a Complaint for Personal Injury against Defendants Tammy Ault and Robert Nobriga on December 6, 2019, alleging that the Defendants’ negligent actions caused her harm and resulting damages.
Cause
The heart of the lawsuit rested on the claim of negligence. Fearon alleged that the Defendants, specifically Tammy Ault, acted carelessly while operating a motor vehicle, and that this carelessness was the direct legal cause of her injuries. Robert Nobriga was named as a Defendant because he was the owner of the vehicle driven by Ault, and Fearon alleged he had entrusted the vehicle to her and/or was vicariously liable for her actions.
Injury
The Complaint identified the action as one for Personal Injury. Though specific details of the injuries were not outlined in the primary claim document, the lawsuit asserted that Fearon suffered physical harm and was entitled to compensation for those injuries.
Damages Sought
Fearon pursued damages across several categories:
Medical Expenses: Compensation for past and future hospital, doctor, and health care costs.
Loss of Earnings: Reimbursement for income Fearon had already lost and would lose in the future because of her injuries.
Property Damage: Costs related to the damage of her motor vehicle.
General Damages: Financial recovery for the physical pain, suffering, inconvenience, and emotional distress she endured.
Key Arguments and Proceedings
The lawsuit proceeded through the legal system in Contra Costa County, California, with the Defendants filing their Answer to the Complaint on April 6, 2020. In their Answer, the Defendants, Tammy Ault and Robert Nobriga, generally denied the allegations of negligence and causation. They raised several affirmative defenses, including the assertion that Fearon's own negligence contributed to the collision and any resulting harm. The parties engaged in pre-trial preparations, leading up to the jury trial date, which the Court set for April 15, 2025.
Legal Representation
Plaintiff(s): Sherene Fearon
· Counsel for Plaintiff(s): John P. Strouss, III, Esq.
Defendant(s): Tammy Ault | Robert Nobriga
· Counsel for Defendant(s): Douglas K. Wood | Brian H. O'Driscoll | Harmon Handloff
Key Arguments or Remarks by Counsel
The trial, overseen by the Honorable Danielle K. Douglas, centered on who bore responsibility for the 2018 collision.
Claims
The Plaintiff's attorney argued that the evidence demonstrated Tammy Ault's failure to operate her vehicle safely and reasonably under the circumstances. They maintained that Ault's negligent driving was the substantial factor that directly caused Fearon’s injuries and the associated financial and emotional losses.
Defense
Attorneys for Ault and Nobriga argued that Ault acted reasonably and that her actions were not the cause of the crash or Fearon’s harm. Crucially, the defense argued that if the jury found Ault was negligent, they must also consider the issue of comparative negligence meaning Fearon’s own actions or inaction played a role in causing her injuries, thereby reducing the Defendants' responsibility and any potential damage award.
Jury Verdict
The jury began deliberations after hearing all evidence and closing arguments. On April 28, 2025, the jury delivered its verdict to the Court on a special verdict form, answering specific questions about the case's central issues.
Finding of Negligence and Causation
The jury considered the core claims of negligence against the Defendants.
The jury concluded that Tammy Nobriga had breached her duty of care, and that this failure significantly contributed to the harm Fearon suffered.
Finding of Comparative Fault
By finding Fearon was not negligent, the jury completely rejected the defense’s argument for comparative fault. This finding was a major determination, meaning the Defendants would be responsible for 100% of the total damages awarded.
Judgment on Jury Verdict
Following the jury’s verdict, the Court formally entered the judgment on July 9, 2025. The judgment affirmed the jury’s findings, legally solidifying the outcome of the trial.
The Court specified that the judgment would accrue interest at the legal rate of 10% per year from the date the judgment was entered until the full amount was paid. The judgment formally concluded the civil action in favor of the Plaintiff based on the findings of the jury.