Jonathan Woodard v. City of San Francisco, a Public Entity et al

 Case Background

Jonathan Woodard filed a personal injury lawsuit against the City of San Francisco, County of San Francisco, and California Department of Transportation on November 2, 2021, in the Superior Court of California, County of San Francisco. The case, CGC-21-596310, alleged premises liability for a non-vehicle-related incident. Judge Daniel A. Flores presided over the case.

Cause

On December 14, 2020, Jonathan Woodard was walking near 219 Velasco Ave. in San Francisco when he tripped and fell on an uneven, raised, broken, and deteriorating roadway. The dangerous condition of the public property caused Woodard to fall forward and sustain serious injuries. The City of San Francisco, County of San Francisco, and California Department of Transportation allegedly owned, maintained, managed, and controlled the premises where the incident occurred. The defendants failed to repair the hazardous roadway, barricade the area, or warn of the dangerous condition.

Injuries

Woodard suffered serious bodily injuries as a result of the trip and fall accident on the defective roadway. The complaint does not specify the exact nature of the injuries sustained.

Damages

Woodard incurred damages, including wage loss, loss of use of property, hospital and medical expenses, general damages, property damage, and loss of earning capacity. The complaint seeks compensatory damages in an amount to be proven at trial.

Key Arguments and Proceedings

Legal representation

  • Plaintiff(s):Jonathan Woodard
    • Counsel for Plaintiff: Arthur Djougourian| Patrick Khalil | Christopher Madeksho | Anthony Werbin

 

  • Defendant(s):California Department of Transportation | City and County of San Francisco | City of San Francisco, a Public Entity | County of San Francisco, a Public Entity
    • Counsel for Defendants: Mark David Lipton| Edmund T. Wang

 Claims

Woodard filed a premises liability claim against the defendants for negligence and dangerous condition of public property. He alleged that the defendants negligently owned, maintained, managed, and operated the premises, allowing a hazardous condition to exist. Woodard brought the claim pursuant to California Government Code Sections 835 and 815.2 regarding liability for dangerous conditions of public property. He served a government claim on the City and County of San Francisco on April 26, 2021, and they rejected it on May 17, 2021. He also served a claim on the California Department of Transportation on April 26, 2021.

Defense

In their response, the City denied all allegations in Woodard’s complaint and asserted that he had not been damaged in any way by their actions or omissions. The City raised numerous affirmative defenses against Woodard’s claims. They argued that the complaint failed to state sufficient facts for a cause of action and did not comply with government claim filing requirements. The City contended that Woodard’s claims were barred by statutes of limitations and provisions of the California Tort Claims Act.

Additionally, the City claimed they acted in good faith and that Woodard assumed the risks involved in his activities. They alleged comparative negligence on Woodard’s part and argued that other parties may have contributed to or caused the incident. The City asserted that any dangerous condition was trivial, they lacked notice of it, and it did not cause Woodard’s alleged injuries.

The City also claimed discretionary immunity for their actions and decisions regarding the property. They argued Woodard had full knowledge of any dangerous conditions and assumed the associated risks. Overall, the City denied liability and damages, seeking dismissal of the complaint and recovery of their legal costs.

 Jury Verdict

On May 22, the jury rendered a verdict in favor of the defendant and against the plaintiff.

Court Documents:

Available Upon Request