Personal Injury Lawyer Blog
(Please note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this car accident case and its proceedings.)
Plaintiffs’ Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Opposition to Motion for Summary Adjudication
INTRODUCTION
Sean Black is suing defendants William Hill (“Hill”) and Liquor Products, Inc. (“L-P”) for the serious neck and back injuries he suffered when the car driven by William Hill struck Sean Black’s SUV at highway speeds, causing Sean’s SUV to violently roll over three times, crushing its roof in the process. Sean’s wife Carrie Black has a loss of consortium claim. William Hill was employed by L-P and was within the course and scope of employment when the collision took place.
This motion should be denied on both substantive and procedural grounds. Substantively, defendant Hill brings this motion on the grounds that there is no evidence to support plaintiffs’ request for punitive damages. The motion should be denied because ample evidence exists to show that defendant Hill acted with malice, oppression, and a willful and conscious disregard of the safety of Sean Black. Just before the subject collision, defendant Hill consciously and recklessly cut off Sean repeatedly, drove erratically, swerved towards Sean, and shook his fist at Sean, all while holding a cigarette and traveling at 65 to 70 miles-per-hour.
Defendant Hill’s motion must also be denied on substantive grounds because he incorrectly argues that punitive damages are allowable only if the defendant intended to injure the plaintiff. Neither statutory nor case law supports this baseless requirement. For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.
Procedurally, William Hill filed the incorrect motion. Rather than a motion for summary adjudication, defendant Hill should have filed a demurrer, a motion to strike, or motion for judgment on the pleadings if he wants to attack plaintiffs’ pleadings. Such a dispute cannot and should not be resolved by a motion for summary adjudication. As defendant’s motion for summary adjudication fails on substantive and procedural grounds, it must be denied. (See Part 2 of 6.)
For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.