Orange County California moves forward with In-Person Civil Jury Trials During Pandemic. Everett Dorey obtains Unanimous Defense Verdict on behalf of the City of Orange.
March 05, 2021 8:25 PM ET
Legal Newswire POWERED BY LAW.COM
March 2, 2021. Santa Ana, California. In one highly anticipated catastrophic injury case, both sides were represented by seasoned litigation attorneys who are members of the American Board of Trial Advocates (“ABOTA”). Irvine law firm Everett Dorey LLP founding partner Seymour “Sy” Everett on behalf of the defendant. Bradley Knypstra founding partner of Newport Beach law firm, Knypstra Hermes Zermeno LLP on behalf of the plaintiff. The case was heard in the Orange County Superior Court south of Los Angeles County. The court used an oversized courtroom, installed Plexiglas partitions for witnesses, video cameras and socially distant jurors. The judge, lawyers, witnesses, and jury had to wear masks at all times. The courtroom was closed to visitors and the trial was “live streaming” on YouTube to allow public access.
When asked about the importance of a face-to-face trial during a pandemic, trial attorney Sy Everett replied, “In-person trials must continue as part of our country’s commitment to the jury system. Orange County has demonstrated this personally.” Trials can be open to jurors and parties be carried out in a safe and fair manner. We expect the rest of the country to put similar security measures in place in their courtrooms to ensure access to justice. “
Orange County’s “personal” trial is criticized when other courts across the country are criticized for refusing to allow “personal” trials. In particular, the Los Angeles County Supreme Court recently faced legal challenges when people complained about exposure to the coronavirus when it decided to conduct a limited number of “face-to-face” trials. Other California courts have chosen to conduct “zoom” trials, which has been the focus of controversy.
Lawyers on both sides, plaintiffs and defense attorneys, have argued that it is impossible to ensure that juries continue to watch out for “zoom trials” in their homes. Examples of jurors on exercise machines watching their children or surfing the Internet during “zoom attempts” have been a concern of all trial attorneys.
In the underlying Orange County case, plaintiff Christine Haynes was seen as one of Southern California’s most successful realtors, with sales of over $ 8 billion in North Orange County. The defendant, City of Orange, is one of the largest cities in Orange County, California. The plaintiff alleged she tripped and fell on a 2-inch differential on a city sidewalk while searching the neighborhood for an open house, resulting in cuts on her face, a torn hip labrum and a broken elbow who required extensive surgery and an implant to compensate for the loss of the plaintiff’s bone. The plaintiff alleged loss of income, medical expenses and pain and suffering.
Prior to the trial, the plaintiff’s attorney requested $ 3 million, which was lowered to $ 950,000 at the beginning of the trial. The defendant offered to settle the case for $ 250,000 only to have the plaintiff deny it.
At the trial, the plaintiff’s attorney relied on two lively and vocal witnesses who demonstrated the need for “face-to-face” trials, based on the ability of a jury to assess the witnesses’ credibility based on personal characteristics and statements. The two witnesses vigorously claimed that the city had taken note of the “dangerous situation”.
During a pre-trial Zoom deposit, one of the two witnesses exclaimed “F ** K the city” and blackmailed the city into paying “Pay the Lady”. During the cross-examination, trial attorney Sy Everett reiterated the deposition certificate and accused the witness of being an attorney for the plaintiff. The witness dramatically denied the testimony and threw himself behind the plexiglass. He exclaimed that Mr. Everett should have sympathy for the plaintiff, but admitted after further cross-examination that he had never notified the city. Everett Dorey’s trial attorney Ashley Anderson noted that the other witness claimed he had phoned the city personally six times but admitted under cross-examination that his alleged complaints were 9 years prior to the incident. When the witness was presented with never-before-seen impeachment photos 9 years before the incident with “Google Map” showing the sidewalk, he apparently lost all credibility to the jury.
The jury returned a unanimous defense verdict for Everett Dorey’s client. On behalf of the city, Everett Dorey will seek to reimburse all costs and appraisal fees under Section 998 of the California Code of Civil Procedure.
When Samantha Dorey, co-founder of Everett Dorey, was asked if she would recommend “personal” trials to her clients, Dorey replied, “Yes. If courts can protect jurors and parties by taking well-founded security measures and minimizing the potential risk of contracting the coronavirus, there is no reason why “in person” trials should not continue. The Orange County Superior Court paved the way for other courts. ”
Url:
http://everettdorey.com
Contact information:
Seymour B. Everett, III
Executive Partner
18300 from Karman Ave., Ste. 900
Irvine, CA 92612
T: 949.771.9233
www.everettdorey.com
Keywords: ICN Internal Distribution, Extended Distribution, Legal Newswire, English, Everett Dorey LLP, Orange County, Courts, Lawsuits, COVID-19 or Coronavirus, Judgment.