Pablo Scipione vs. Kinkisharyo (USA) Inc., et al

  • Court: State of California, Superior Court, County of Los Angeles, North District
  • Case number:  MC027686
  • Filed: January 25, 2018
  • Judge: Mary Ann Murphy | Michelle Williams Court | Richard J. Burdge Jr. | Stephen P. Pfahler | David J. Cowan | Melvin D. Sandvig | Michael C. Kelley | Wendy Chang | Stephen Morgan | Brian C. Yep
  • Case type: Premise Liability

Parties Involved

Verdict Information

  • Verdict date: 
    • Phase One: April 29, 2024
    • Phase Two: May 20, 2024
    • Phase Three: May 21, 2024
  • Total damages awarded to the Plaintiff: $54,158,431.00
    • Past Economic losses (lost earnings): $571, 330
    • Future Economic Losses:
      • Lost earnings – $4,695,242.00
      • Medical expenses – $4,691,859
    • Past non economic losses like physical pain and mental suffering: $12,400,000
    • Future non-economic losses: $34,800,000
    • Punitive Damages: $4,200,000

About the Case


Plaintiff asserted that Defendant Kinkisharyo International LLC (KILLC) was a Delaware limited liability company authorized to operate in California, with headquarters at 300 N Continental Blvd Suite 300, El Segundo, CA 90245. Altech Services, Inc. (“Altech”) was a New York Corporation authorized to do business in California as “California Transportation Field Services,” headquartered at 400 Continental Blvd 6th floor, El Segundo, CA 90245.

Plaintiff Pablo Scipione worked as an Altech employee, performing specialized electrical services for various companies, including KILLC. His duties involved training, supervising a team of electrical technicians, maintaining electrical systems in Electric Rail Train Vehicles, troubleshooting, and creating electrical schematics and work instructions for Altech’s work on KILLC’s vehicles. Plaintiff asserts that Defendants KILLC and Does 1 through 50 owned, operated, and maintained the train factory at 2825 East Avenue P, Palmdale, CA 93550, where he sustained his injuries.

On February 2, 2016, Plaintiff, while performing his job at the Train Factory, slipped on a wet and slippery train roof and suffered severe injuries due to Defendants’ negligence. Defendants knew or should have known about the hazardous conditions, including inadequate lighting and wet surfaces, but failed to correct them.

In April 2016, KILLC hired Plaintiff as an employee. However, they later denied his workers’ compensation claim, arguing he was an Altech employee at the time of the injury. Plaintiff alleges KILLC’s conduct forced him to initiate this premises liability lawsuit, incurring significant legal costs.

The Defendants’ failure to address known safety hazards, despite numerous complaints, demonstrated a reckless disregard for worker safety, justifying punitive damages to deter similar conduct in the future. Plaintiff alleged that his negligence claim was supported by evidence of KILLC’s management ignoring safety warnings, leading to his injury.


As a direct and proximate result of the Defendants’ negligence and carelessness, the Plaintiff had received severe injuries. These injuries had greatly impaired his health, strength, and activity, causing him ongoing mental, physical, and nervous pain and suffering, resulting in damages according to proof. Consequently, he had employed physicians and others for medical care, incurring medical and incidental expenses, and expected to incur further expenses for treatment. This negligence had also prevented him from performing his usual occupation, reducing his capacity to work and causing additional damages. Plaintiff had believed that, due to the Defendants’ negligence, he would continue to face reduced earning capacity and further damages.


In the present premises liability lawsuit, the Plaintiff prayed for judgment against the Defendants. He had sought non-economic damages in an amount according to proof. Additionally, he had requested economic damages according to proof. He had also pursued interest and prejudgment interest. Moreover, he had sought costs of the suits incurred. He had asked for equitable relief as the court deemed appropriate. Furthermore, he had requested an award of punitive damages in a sum according to proof at trial. Lastly, he had sought any other relief the court deemed proper.

Jury Verdict

The jury verdict was bifurcated into three phases. On April 29, 2024, the California jury found that the Plaintiff was not an employee of Kinkisharyo International LLC during the incident on February 2, 2016.

On May 20, 2024, in the second phase of the special verdict, the jury found that Kinkisharyo International LLC did retain some control over Altech’s manner of performance in assembling the trains. It was found that Kinkisharyo International LLC retained control over the work by providing poor lighting conditions, overworking the assembly plant workers, performing a water test in violation of its own policy, and leaving the top of the train wet before asking the Plaintiff to conduct electrical work. It was held that Pablo was harmed and Kinkisharyo International LLC negligent exercise of its retained control was responsible for the harm. The jury granted the Plaintiff $54,158,431.00 as damages.  The amount was divided as under:-

  • Past Economic losses (lost earnings) – $571, 330
  • Future Economic Losses:
    • Lost earnings – $4,695,242.00
    • Medical expenses – $4,691,859
  • Past non economic losses like physical pain and mental suffering – $12,400,000
  • Future non-economic losses – $34,800,000

Additionally, on May 21, 2024, in the third phase of the special verdict, the court awarded $4,200,000 in punitive damages to the Plaintiff against the Defendant. Altogether, the Plaintiff was entitled to recover $58,358.43 from the Defendant under this premises liability lawsuit.

Court Documents:

Available upon request