Jurimatic by Exlitem

San Diego Jury Awards $13.1M in Motorcycle Crash

3 min read

San Diego Jury Awards $13.1M in Motorcycle Crash

S
Sohini Chakraborty
September 18, 2025

Table of Contents

Case Background

Plaintiff Kwayde Miller lived in Ramona, San Diego County. On October 19, 2019, he rode west on San Pasqual Road near Zermatt Lane. Defendants included the County of San Diego, Helen Azalea Elson, Daniel Joseph Elson, and Does. Plaintiff filed a late-claim petition after an initial denial. The Court granted relief on April 15, 2021. He then pursued this action.

Cause

Helen Elson drove a Mitsubishi east on San Pasqual Road. She attempted a left turn to northbound Zermatt Lane. She failed to yield to oncoming traffic. Consequently, her vehicle struck Plaintiff’s motorcycle in the intersection. Plaintiff also alleged a dangerous intersection. The location lacked a left-turn signal and a left-turn pocket. Lines were faded or missing. Sight distance was limited by elevation, geometry, and curvature. Signage and lane widths were inadequate. The speed limit was 45 mph. Plaintiff alleged the County controlled the area and ignored repeated risks.

Injury

The collision injured Plaintiff’s body and mind. He suffered shock and nervous-system injury. He reported significant pain and suffering. Symptoms persisted and restricted activities. He alleged reduced quality of life. He sought ongoing medical evaluation and care.

Damages

Plaintiff incurred medical and incidental expenses. He expected future treatment and diagnostics. He claimed lost earnings and diminished earning capacity. He also reported property damage to his motorcycle and related items. He sought costs, interest, and further relief.

Key Arguments and Proceedings

Legal Representation

Claims

Count 1 – Negligence

Against Helen Azalea Elson, Daniel Joseph Elson, and Does 1–50. They allegedly failed to yield and operated the vehicle unreasonably, causing the crash.

Count 2 – Dangerous Condition of Public Property (Gov. Code § 835 et seq.)

Against the County of San Diego and Does 51–100. Plaintiff alleged the intersection’s design, control, and maintenance created a substantial risk. He claimed notice, negligent acts by County employees, and failure to implement corrective measures.

Defense

Defendant County of San Diego issued a general denial. It asserted no common-law negligence under Gov. Code §815. It argued superseding cause under §§815.2(b), 820.8. It claimed no “dangerous condition” under §830.2, and immunities for missing signs (§§830.4, 830.8) and design (§830.6). It pleaded reasonableness under §835.4, discretionary-act immunity (§§815.2(b), 820.2), lack of notice (§835(b)), and that any danger was apparent to careful users. The County also raised Plaintiff’s contributory negligence, failure to mitigate, assumption of risk, late claim (§945.4), late suit (§945.6), statute of limitations, and Prop 213 limits (§3333.4).

Defendants Helen Azalea Elson and Daniel Joseph Elson filed a general denial. They argued Plaintiff’s comparative negligence. They alleged third-party fault. They invoked Proposition 213, citing Civil Code §§3333.3 and 3333.4 to restrict non-economic recovery if Plaintiff lacked insurance. They reserved the right to add further defenses.

Jury Verdict

On March 12, 2025, a San Diego jury returned a verdict in favor of Plaintiff Kwayde Miller, awarding a total of $13,148,000. The jury found Defendant Helen Elson negligent and determined her negligence substantially caused Miller’s harm. The award included $1,840,000 for future economic loss, $3,000 for future medical expenses, $2,000,000 for past noneconomic damages such as pain, suffering, and emotional distress, and $6,300,000 for future noneconomic damages, including physical impairment and loss of enjoyment of life.

Court Documents

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

Categories

Tags

Dangerous Public Property
Negligence Claim
Motorcycle Crash Lawsuit

About the Author

SC
Sohini Chakraborty
Editor
Sohini Chakraborty is a law graduate, with over two years of experience in legal research and analysis. She specializes in working closely with expert witnesses, offering critical support in preparing legal research and detailed case studies. She delivers well-structured legal summaries.