Trial Reports
2005

Personal Injury

PERSONAL INJURY
Case Type --AA, WA; Work-related automobile accident
Case Name --K. Michelle Blaylock vs. Gerald W. Pezely
Case Number --020912735
Court/Judge --3rd District/Dever
Verdict/Settlement --Settlement, 1/05
Amount --This case settled for an undisclosed amount.
Injuries --Plaintiff’s daughter suffered minor injuries and made a full recovery, but plaintiff herself suffered injuries to her head, neck and back. Plaintiff claimed permanent impairment.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff --Kevin K. Robson and Traci A. Timmerman, then Traci A. Gundersen, of Bertch Robson
Attorney(s) - Defense --Dennis L. Mangrum and Richard S. Nemelka of Nemelka & Mangrum; then Dale J. Lambert and Rebecca L. Hill of Christensen & Jensen
Expert Witness(es) - Plaintiff --Plaintiff designated Gary H. Lambert, MD; Jackson Maddux, MD; unnamed personnel from Registered Physical Therapy, Incorporated; June C. Steinvorth, MD; Charles M. Bova, MD; unnamed personnel from Pioneer Valley Hospital/Rocky Mountain Physical Therapy; and Karl Kingery of Performance Physical Therapy--treating health care providers.
Damages --Plaintiff claimed past medical expenses of over $5,000, as well as unspecified future medical expenses and past wage loss.
Facts/Contentions --Plaintiff and defendant were both westbound on 6200 South, just past Cougar Lane. Plaintiff had her three-year-old daughter with her in plaintiff’s vehicle, which was traveling in the outside or “slow” lane. Plaintiff claimed defendant, who was traveling in the inside or “fast” lane, attempted to change lanes to his immediate right without looking and struck the rear driver’s side of plaintiff’s vehicle, causing plaintiff’s vehicle to make a rough 180-degree spin.
Defendant admitted that the accident occurred, but denied liability, claiming that plaintiff had the chance to avoid the collision but failed to take action to do so. Defendant claimed plaintiff was not keeping a proper lookout at the time of the collision. In his answer to plaintiff’s complaint, defendant stated that he (defendant) was in the course and scope of his employment with Renegade Oil, Incorporated at the time when the accident occurred and that Renegade Oil would defend him. Defendant had a co-worker from Renegade Oil with him as a passenger in defendant’s vehicle at the time of the accident.

PERSONAL INJURY
Case Type --DB; Dog-bite
Case Name --James B. Wells as parent, legal guardian and guardian ad litem for Sebastian Wells, a minor, vs. Richard R. and Sharon L. Hoover
Case Number --010905376
Court/Judge --3rd District/Henriod Verdict/Settlement --Settlement, 1/05
Amount --Pursuant to stipulation by the parties, the court appointed plaintiff conservator of the settlement proceeds from this case on behalf of his minor child. The total amount of the settlement proceeds is $68,000.00; of that amount, $7,500.00 is to be paid to Dunn & Dunn for attorney’s fees (plaintiff’s attorneys agreed to reduce their usual fees and accepted one-third of all settlement proceeds over $40,000.00), and $1,938.29 is to be paid to Dunn & Dunn for reimbursement of costs. The remaining settlement proceeds, totaling $58,561.71, are to be invested by the conservator in an interest-bearing account at a federally insured bank and may not be withdrawn without the consent of the court until plaintiff’s minor child Sebastian, who is now eight years old, reaches the age of 18, at which time the settlement proceeds and interest in the conservatorship account are to be released to him.
Injuries --Plaintiff’s minor child suffered serious bite injuries to his head, face, arm, torso, left leg and thigh leg that caused permanent scarring and required reconstructive surgery. In addition, plaintiff claimed, his minor child suffered severe psychological trauma and will require extensive counseling in the future.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff --Tim Dalton Dunn, Robert C. Morton and Susan Black Dunn of Dunn & Dunn
Attorney(s) - Defense --David W. Lund of Petersen & Hansen; later of Petersen & Associates
Expert Witness(es) - Plaintiff --Plaintiff designated Christine A. Cheng, MD; Kristina Hindert, MD of The Children’s Center; Murline C. Steck, PhD of Associated Clinical and Counseling Psychologists; Mary Beth Bush, LCSW of The Children’s Center; Colin K. Kelly, MD of Primary Children’s Medical Center; Howard A. Kadish, MD; Kim T. Heaton, MD of Taylorsville Instacare; Nanette C. Kunkel, MD of Primary Children’s Medical Center; and Barbara P. Reid, MD of Primary Children’s Medical Center--treating health care providers.
Damages --Plaintiff claimed unspecified past and future medical expenses for his minor child, including past and future expenses for psychological treatment.
Facts/Contentions --Plaintiff claimed his minor child Sebastian, then aged five, was invited to play with defendants’ minor child at defendants’ home. While the two children were playing in the back yard of the home, plaintiff claimed, defendants’ chow dog escaped from his fenced-in dog run and attacked plaintiff’s minor child, biting him repeatedly. Plaintiff claimed the dog refused to let plaintiff’s minor child go and dragged him across the yard. Plaintiff claimed his minor child was finally able to free himself forcibly from the dog’s jaws as the dog attempted to drag the child into the dog run.
Defendants admitted that their dog injured plaintiff’s minor child in the back yard of defendants’ home. However, defendants claimed that the dog was properly restrained and they (defendants) had no way of knowing that the dog would somehow escape from his run and attack the child.

PERSONAL INJURY
Case Type --MA; Miscellaneous (store display injury)
Case Name --Shirley A. Pearson vs. K Mart Corporation; and Does 1 through 10
Case Number --010905804
Court/Judge --3rd District/Frederick
Verdict/Settlement --Settlement, 1/05
Amount --This case settled for an undisclosed amount.
Injuries --Plaintiff suffered unspecified injuries and claimed permanent impairment.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff --William R. Rawlins of the Law Office of William R. Rawlins
Attorney(s) - Defense --Rodney R. Parker, Kara L. Petit and Robert W. Thompson of Snow, Christensen & Martineau
Damages --Plaintiff claimed unspecified past and future medical expenses and wage loss.
Facts/Contentions --Plaintiff was shopping with her daughter in defendant K Mart’s store located at 4670 South 900 East. Plaintiff claimed that as she was looking at a store display, a number of boxes containing microwave ovens fell without warning and pinned plaintiff against the display of merchandise she had been looking at. Plaintiff claimed she later learned that another shopper who had been supplied with a motorized cart by the store had bumped the stack of boxes containing microwave ovens with the motorized cart, causing the boxes to fall and injure plaintiff. Plaintiff named the Doe defendants as unidentified K Mart employees who negligently stacked the boxes in such a way that they could fall and injure plaintiff when they were bumped with the cart. Plaintiff named defendant K Mart under the doctrine of respondeat superior, which holds that an employer is liable for damages caused by the employer’s employee (in this case the Doe defendant employees) if the employee was in the course and scope of his or her employment with that employer at the time when the employee caused the damages. Plaintiff further claimed that defendant K Mart was negligent in providing a motorized cart to another shopper without also providing supervision and/or instruction to make sure that the other shopper was capable of operating the motorized cart in the store without endangering other patrons.
Defendant K Mart denied liability, claiming plaintiff failed to use reasonable care to avoid the consequences of the negligence of others. Defendant K Mart also claimed plaintiff’s injuries might have been pre-existing or might have been caused by the negligence of third parties, such as the driver of the motorized cart, over whom defendant K Mart had no control.
In January of 2002, defendant K Mart filed for an automatic stay of these proceedings pursuant to defendant K Mart’s having filed bankruptcy in the U. S. Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Illinois. Thereafter the record shows no further proceedings in this case until January of 2005, when the parties filed their stipulation of settlement and joint motion for dismissal.

PERSONAL INJURY
Case Type --AA, TA, WA; Work-related automobile/truck accident
Case Name --Tonda Ford vs. Preferred Steel, Incorporated
Case Number --040903800
Court/Judge --3rd District/Frederick
Verdict/Settlement --Settlement, 1/05
Amount --This case settled for an undisclosed amount,
Injuries --Plaintiff suffered unspecified injuries.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff --Michael F. Richman of Siegfried & Jensen
Attorney(s) - Defense --Roger H. Bullock and Peter H. Barlow of Strong & Hanni
Damages --Plaintiff claimed unspecified past and future medical expenses, past lost wages, and future loss of earning capacity, as well as unspecified property damages.
Facts/Contentions --Plaintiff was northbound on I-15 at about 7100 South. Plaintiff claimed an employee of defendant Preferred Steel, who was also northbound on I-15 in the course and scope of his employment with defendant Preferred, and who was driving a semi owned and operated by defendant Preferred, attempted to make a lane change without looking and struck the left rear fender of plaintiff’s vehicle with the right front of his truck. Plaintiff said that when the impact occurred, she lost control of her vehicle, spun in front of defendant’s truck, and then struck the cement barrier with the rear of her vehicle and came to rest facing northeast in the inside lane of traffic. Plaintiff named defendant Preferred under the doctrine of respondeat superior, which holds that an employer is liable for damages caused by the employer’s employee if the employee was in the course and scope of his or her employment with that employer at the time when the employee caused the damages.
Defendant claimed the accident was caused by plaintiff’s own negligence or that of third parties over whom defendant had no control.

PERSONAL INJURY
Case Type --SF; Fall
Case Name --Don Herbert vs. Reed Pierson dba A. H. Pierson Investment Company; and Does 1 through 10
Case Number --030919803
Court/Judge --3rd District/Hanson
Verdict/Settlement --Verdict, 1/05
Amount --The court issued an order to show cause why this case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute, and attorneys for both sides appeared at a show cause hearing, where they requested and were granted 120 days in which to resolve the case or certify it for trial. When the 120 days allowed elapsed and nothing further was filed by wither side, the court dismissed the case without prejudice for failure to prosecute.
Injuries --Plaintiff suffered a fracture of the right ankle;, including a posterior malleolus fracture and complete disruption of the mortise; lateral dislocation of the right talus; and a green-stick fracture of the right fibula. He required surgical reduction of the fracture with the use of syndesmosis screws. He underwent a log period of rehabilitation and later developed arthritis in the injured area, which caused him additional pain. Plaintiff claimed he was a very active individual before this injury, but now cannot run or jump and is unable to play pick-up softball and basketball with friends as he used to do before the accident. He also claimed he used to race off-road motorcycles before his injury but now cannot even ride them. Plaintiff claimed he was formerly a downhill skier, but now cannot get his injured leg and foot into a ski boot. He said the leg and foot swell painfully when he engages in certain activities. He claimed he had to live with his mother during his rehabilitation and was unable to work for several months.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff --D. Kendall Perkins
Attorney(s) - Defense --Dale J. Lambert of Christensen & Jensen
Damages --Plaintiff claimed approximately $8,000 in past medical expenses and over $20,000 in past lost wages, as well as unspecified future medical expenses, including possible expenses for future surgery. Plaintiff sought $500,000 in damages for these unspecified future expenses in combination with his pain and suffering.
Facts/Contentions --Plaintiff was a visitor at a rental property. Plaintiff claimed the property was registered as being owned by A. H. Pierson Investment Company; however, plaintiff added, he was unable to locate any company by that name when he checked with the Utah Department of Commerce. Plaintiff therefore alleged that the name of A. H. Pierson Investment Company was a dba for defendant Reed Pierson; plaintiff further alleged that defendant Reed Pierson was the actual owner of the home. While plaintiff was visiting the home, he claimed, a Halloween party was going on (it was the night of October 31, 2000), and there were numerous guests on the premises, both inside and outside of the house. Plaintiff, who was with friends of defendant Pierson, attempted to leave the premises with his friends, who had only been paying a brief visit. Plaintiff claimed the house had a front porch entry, with five steps gong up onto the porch from a concrete walkway at ground level. Plaintiff stated that the steps and walkway were not illuminated, and, plaintiff claimed, there were other guests standing on the porch and steps as plaintiff attempted to leave. As plaintiff was going down the steps from the porch, he claimed, he could not see where he was stepping and unknowingly, as he attempted to step off the last step onto the walkway, instead stepped off the walkway and onto a grassy area, where his foot sank into a trench that had been dug earlier near a flower bed. Plaintiff claimed the trench, which was between six and nine inches deep and approximately the width of a man’s shoe, was located between the flower bed and the lawn. Plaintiff claimed that when he stepped into the trench, his foot became tightly wedged so that he was unable to move it, and plaintiff’s momentum swung his body around the wedged foot and caused him to experience a severe twisting fall. Plaintiff named the Doe defendants, but also named defendant Pierson, as having dug the trench earlier and failed to mark it, illuminate it or otherwise identify it as a hazard.
Defendant Pierson denied liability, claiming plaintiff’s injuries were caused by his own negligence in not looking where he was stepping or by the negligence of other parties, including those persons living in the house at the time of the accident.

PERSONAL INJURY
Case Type --AA, TA, WA; Work-related automobile/ pick-up truck accident
Case Name --Leona Hollingsworth vs. David Clark, aka Dick Clark; Tyler Clark; and Does 1 through 10
Case Number --030914081
Court/Judge --3rd District/Dever
Verdict/Settlement --Settlement, 1/05; this case was successfully mediated by Robert H. Henderson of Alternate Dispute Resolution.
Amount --This case settled for an undisclosed amount.
Injuries --Plaintiff suffered three broken ribs, chest contusions; head and neck trauma; and contusions to her right knee. She later underwent right knee replacement surgery; she claimed the accident necessitated this surgery and also left her with migraine headaches, neck pain, hearing loss episodes of dizziness, numbness in her extremities, and knee pain.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff --Reid Tateoka and William A. Mark of McKay, Burton & Thurman; later Reid Tateoka of McKay, Burton & Thurman and William A. Mark of Jensen, Johnson & Bornemeier
Attorney(s) - Defense --John Clyde Hansen of Petersen & Hansen; then Lloyd R. Jones of Petersen & Associates Expert Witness(es) - Plaintiff --Plaintiff designated Newell Knight--accident reconstructionist.
Expert Witness(es) - Defense --Defendants designated Jeff B. Chung, MD--independent medical evaluation (IME) physician; and Gregory S. DuVal of DuVal Investigations and Accident Reconstruction--accident reconstructionist.
Damages --Plaintiff claimed unspecified past and future medical expenses and wage loss.
Facts/Contentions --Plaintiff, who was driving to work, was on M Street, crossing Second Avenue. Plaintiff claimed defendant Tyler Clark, who was in the course and scope of his employment with defendant David Clark and was driving a truck that was owned by defendant David Clark, ran a stop sign on Second Avenue and plowed into the passenger side of plaintiff’s vehicle in the middle of the M Street/Second Avenue intersection. The truck was loaded with cement and cement mixing equipment, and plaintiff claimed the crash broke the rear axle of plaintiff’s car and knocked off the rear wheel, throwing it approximately 40 feet away into a nearby yard. Plaintiff was taken by ambulance to the hospital. Plaintiff named defendant David Clark under the doctrine of respondeat superior, which holds that an employer is liable for damages caused by the employer’s employee if the employee was in the course and scope of his or her employment with that employer at the time when the employee caused the damages. Plaintiff named the Doe defendants as having controlled or failed to maintain the truck which defendant Tyler Clark was driving or having controlled the circumstances of defendant Tyler Clark’s employment.
The Clark defendants admitted that the accident occurred and admitted that defendant Tyler Clark was driving the Ford F250 pick-up truck involved in the accident; however, defendants denied liability, claiming that defendant Tyler Clark was unable to see the stop sign because it was obscured by the branch of a tree. The Clark defendants claimed the accident was caused by the negligence of the property owner who failed to cut the tree-branch back and give drivers on Second Avenue a clear view of the stop sign. The Clark defendants also claimed plaintiff might have failed to meet the $3,000 threshold for special damages required by law before an injured plaintiff may bring suit.

PERSONAL INJURY
Case Type --AA, TA; Automobile/pick-up truck accident
Case Name --Honi Thompson and David Thompson vs. Jaren L. Nielsen
Case Number --020908556
Court/Judge --3rd District/Hilder
Verdict/Settlement --Judgment on jury verdict, 12/04
Amount --The jury found that defendant was not negligent; the jury returned a verdict of no cause of action. The court therefore dismissed plaintiff’s complaint with prejudice and with costs. Defendant claimed $1,274.30 in costs.
Injuries --Plaintiff Honi Thompson suffered unspecified injuries.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff --Gregory J. Sanders of Kipp & Christian
Attorney(s) - Defense --Roger H. Bullock, Byron G. Martin and Peter H. Barlow of Strong & Hanni Expert Witness(es) - Plaintiff --Dr. Ronald Applebaum--neurosurgical expert who testified by video deposition; David M. Ingebretsen of Collision Forensics and Engineering--accident reconstructionist
Expert Witness(es) - Defendant --Newell Knight--accident reconstructionist; defendant designated but did not call Dr. Michael Chung--independent medical evaluation (IME) physician.
Damages --Plaintiff Honi Thompson claimed unspecified past medical expenses. Plaintiff David Thompson, husband of plaintiff Honi Thompson, claimed unspecified damages for past loss of consortium. The parties stipulated to the fact that no future damages would be claimed.
Facts/Contentions --Plaintiffs claimed defendant ran a red light on eastbound 12600 South and struck plaintiffs’ vehicle. Plaintiff Honi Thompson, who was driving the vehicle, said she was attempting to make a left turn from westbound 12600 South onto southbound 2700 West.
Defendant claimed the light was yellow when he entered the intersection, attempting to go straight through it. Defendant was driving a Chevrolet pick-up truck and pulling a boat on a trailer. Defendant claimed plaintiff Honi Thompson negligently turned left across his path of travel when their two vehicles were so close together that he was unable to avoid a collision.
The three occupants of the two vehicles (defendant’s wife was with him in his truck) and the four other witnesses to the accident all told conflicting stories as to when the traffic light turned yellow and then red. Defendant argued that Utah statute says a driver attempting to make a left turn must yield to oncoming traffic approaching from the opposite direction if that traffic is so close as to constitute a hazard; the order to yield is not contingent on the color of the traffic light.
Plaintiffs originally named Ray’s Gardening as an additional defendant; however, the court dismissed this defendant by granting a defense motion for summary judgment “to avoid future misunderstanding by witnesses or jurors.”

PERSONAL INJURY
Case Type --BA, PL; Bicycle accident, product liability claim
Case Name --Matthew Happe vs. White Brothers Cycle Specialties; Does 1 through 10; and XYZ Corporations 1 through 10
Case Number --040913981
Court/Judge --3rd District/Peuler
Verdict/Settlement --Dismissal, 12/04
Amount --The court dismissed this case without prejudice for plaintiff’s failure to serve defendants with notice of the action within 120 days of the filing of the complaint.
Injuries --Plaintiff suffered unspecified injuries.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff --David W. Parker
Attorney(s) - Defense --None listed.
Damages --Plaintiff claimed unspecified general and special damages.
Facts/Contentions --Plaintiff claimed that while he was riding a bicycle, the fork in the bicycle failed, causing plaintiff to be injured. Plaintiff named defendants as having manufactured, distributed and sold the bicycle; he contended that the fork was defective.

PERSONAL INJURY
Case Type --DB; Dog-bite
Case Name --Paul Ewald and Joann Ewald, individually and as natural parents and guardians of minor plaintiff Alexandra M. Ewald, vs. Wes Barbee; Rachel Barbee; Jaime Russell; and Megan Russell
Case Number --040912683
Court/Judge --3rd District/Peuler
Verdict/Settlement --Settlement, 12/04
Amount --Under the terms of the settlement between the parties, plaintiffs Paul and Joann Ewald, parents of minor plaintiff Alexandra Ewald, were appointed conservators of the settlement proceeds. Total amount of the settlement was $12,000, of which $3,200 was to be paid to Morrison & Morrison for attorneys’ fees; $1,600 was to be paid to the Law Office of Rex B. Bush for attorney’s fees and a further $135 to be paid to Rex B. Bush for a medical report from a treating physician; $44.28 was to be paid to Paul and Joann Ewald for out-of-pocket expenses and a further $28.99 to be paid to Paul and Joann Ewald to replace clothing damaged in the attack; and $161.25 was to be paid to medical providers to satisfy subrogation liens. The balance of the settlement proceeds,totaling $6,593.18, are to be placed in a federally insured interest-bearing savings account and shall not be withdrawn until minor plaintiff Alexandra Ewald reaches the age of 18, at which time the proceeds of the settlement will be released to her.
Injuries --Minor plaintiff Alexandra Ewald suffered a deep circular puncture wound 22 centimeters in circumference. She will require scar revision surgery in the future.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff --Rex B. Bush of the Law Office of Rex B. Bush; then William E. Morrison and Grant W. P. of Morrison of Morrison & Morrison
Attorney(s) - Defense --This claim was settled with an adjuster from Bear River Mutual Insurance Company.
Damages --Minor plaintiff Alexandra Ewald claimed past medical expenses of $400 as well as $4,000 in future medical expenses for scar revision surgery. She is under ongoing medical care.
Facts/Contentions --Plaintiffs claimed the Russell, defendants, who are husband and wife and live in Idaho, were at the home of the Barbee defendants, who are husband and wife; defendants Rachel Barbee and Megan Russell are sisters. Plaintiffs claimed the Russell defendants had their Weimaraner dog with them at the house of the Barbee defendants. Plaintiffs claimed minor plaintiff Alexandra Ewald, who was seven years old at the time, was playing at the residence with defendants’ minor child and several other neighborhood children. When she went upstairs to use the restroom, plaintiffs claimed, minor plaintiff Alexandra Ewald was suddenly attacked from behind by the Weimaraner and severely bitten on the right buttock. Plaintiffs claimed that though minor plaintiff Alexandra Ewald was not afraid of dogs before this incident, she is now extremely anxious and frightened around large dogs.

PERSONAL INJURY
Case Type --AA, TA, UM, IB; automobile/pick-up truck accident, uninsured motorist, suit for insurance benefits (subrogation)
Case Name --Bear River Mutual Insurance Company vs. Melissa Maxwell; and Craig Maxwell
Case Number --040912666
Court/Judge --3rd District/Peuler
Verdict/Settlement --Dismissal, 12/04
Amount --The court dismissed this case without prejudice for plaintiff’s failure to serve defendants with notice of the action within 120 days of the filing of the complaint.
Injuries --Plaintiff’s insured had a passenger who suffered unspecified injuries in the accident; plaintiff’s insured suffered $987.36 in property damages.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff --Daniel O. Duffin and Thomas A. Duffin of Duffin & Associates
Attorney(s) - Defense --None listed.
Damages --Plaintiff paid $3,000 in personal injury protection (PIP) benefits for the related medical expenses of its insured’s passenger; plaintiff paid its insured $987.36 for repairs to the insured’s vehicle and $12,500 in uninsured motorist benefits. Plaintiff retained and asserted full rights of subrogation regarding all these damages.
Facts/Contentions --Plaintiff claimed an uninsured pick-up truck driven by defendant Melissa Maxwell and owned by both defendants negligently rear-ended a vehicle driven by plaintiff’s insured. Plaintiff’s insured was in the left-turn lane of westbound Fort Union Boulevard, waiting to turn left onto southbound 900 East, at the time of the accident.

PERSONAL INJURY
Case Type --AA; Automobile accident
Case Name --Kory Perkins vs. Jeremy Evans
Case Number --020904356
Court/Judge --3rd District/Bohling; then Lubeck
Verdict/Settlement --Judgment, 12/04
Amount --After plaintiff’s attorney firm was given leave to withdraw on the eve of trial, the court reviewed and granted defendant’s motion for costs ad ordered plaintiff to pay defendant $3,175.60 for defendant’s costs of preparing for trial. Offer of judgment by defendant (not accepted) in April of 2003: $1,500.00. This case was mediated unsuccessfully.
Injuries --Plaintiff suffered unspecified injuries and claimed permanent impairment.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff --Kevin K. Robson and Traci A. Timmerman of Bertch Robson
Attorney(s) - Defense --Joseph J. Joyce, Kristin A. Van Orman and James D. Franckowiak of Strong & Hanni
Expert Witness(es) - Plaintiff --Plaintiff designated treating physicians J. Link Hebrew, MD; Terri DeJohn, MD; John Rizzi, MD; John Arias, MD; Alan L. Colledge, MD; Keith S. Hansen, DC; Ben Fulton, MD; Dennis Wyman, MD; and Richard Schwartz, MD.
Expert Witness(es) - Defense --Defendant designated Jeffrey Chung, MD--independent medical evaluation (IME) physician.
Damages --Plaintiff claimed past medical expenses of over $17,000, along with unspecified future medical expenses.
Facts/Contentions --Plaintiff was a passenger in a vehicle driven by a third party. Plaintiff claimed defendant rear-ended a trailer being towed by the vehicle in which plaintiff was riding after the vehicle in which plaintiff was riding stopped for traffic ahead of it on 1300 East at approximately 7755 South.
Defendant claimed plaintiff’s injuries were caused by the negligence of third parties over whom defendant had no control.
The day before the jury trial on this case was to begin, plaintiff’s counsel requested a hearing, and the parties met in chambers. Following this conference, the scheduled trial was stricken, the court granted plaintiff’s attorney Robson and the firm of Bertch Robson leave to withdraw from the case, and attorney Joyce served plaintiff with notice to appear in person or appoint new counsel within 20 days. When plaintiff did neither within the 20 days allowed, defendant moved the court to award defendant his costs of preparing for trial.

PERSONAL INJURY
Case Type --AA, BA; Automobile/bicycle accident
Case Name --Jorge Rivera, a minor, by and through his parent, Emma Pinedo, vs. Francis J. Miller; then vs. Lee Bourne, substitute defendant and personal representative for the estate of deceased defendant Francis J. Miller
Case Number --020905820
Court/Judge --3rd District/Bohling; then Lubeck
Verdict/Settlement --Settlement, 12/04
Amount --Minor plaintiff’s mother was appointed conservator of the proceeds of this settlement. Total settlement amount to be paid by State Farm (defendant’s insurance carrier) was $16,620.00 new money (over and above subrogation liens). Under the terms of the settlement agreement between the parties, $5,540 was to be paid to plaintiffs’ attorney; $1,000 was to be used to satisfy plaintiff’s remaining outstanding medical bills; $468 was to be paid to plaintiff’s mother to reimburse her for expenses; and $225 was to be paid for court costs. The remaining proceeds of this settlement, totaling $9,386.00, are to be used to fund a structured settlement using the office of Whittenburg Insurance Group and the James Street Group. Under the terms of the structured settlement, minor plaintiff Jorge Rivera, who is now 13, will receive guaranteed lump sum payments at age 19, age 21, and age 23; these payments will total $12,322.
Injuries --Minor plaintiff Jorge Rivera suffered unspecified injuries.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff --Carlos J. Clark
Attorney(s) - Defense --Mark Dalton Dunn of Victoria K. Kidman & Associates
Damages --Minor plaintiff Jorge Rivera claimed $11,624.16 in past medical expenses.
Facts/Contentions --Minor plaintiff Jorge Rivera claimed defendant Miller negligently allowed his automobile to strike minor plaintiff Jorge Rivera while minor plaintiff was riding his bicycle in Wendover.
Defendant Miller claimed the accident was caused by the negligence of minor plaintiff Jorge Rivera or of third parties over whom defendant Miller had no control; alternatively, defendant Miller claimed minor plaintiff Jorge Rivera’s injuries were pre-existing.
After defendant Miller died while this case was ongoing, his personal representative Lee Bourne was substituted as defendant in this case with the agreement of the parties.

PERSONAL INJURY
Case Type --MS, WA; Work-related miscellaneous (store display accident) injury claim
Case Name --Linda Battersby vs. Home Depot; and Does 1 through 5
Case Number --020913114
Court/Judge --3rd District/Medley
Verdict/Settlement --Settlement, 2/05
Amount --This case settled for an undisclosed amount.
Injuries --Plaintiff suffered head and neck injuries. She claimed she needed additional medical treatment for these injuries, but was unable to obtain it because of financial constraints.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff --Michael J. Thompson, Orem; then Clark S. Newhall
Attorney(s) - Defense --Daniel S. McConkie of Kirton & McConkie
Damages --Plaintiff claimed over $20,000 in past medical expenses and over $35,000 in past lost wages, as well as unspecified future medical expenses and lost wages. Plaintiff also claimed punitive damages for what she alleged was the Doe defendant’s extreme recklessness and carelessness in allowing the carpet to strike plaintiff. Facts/Contentions --Plaintiff stated that she was on defendant Home Depot’s premises as a customer when one of the Doe defendants, who was in the course and scope of his employment with defendant Home Depot, caused a roll of heavy carpet to fall on plaintiff’s head. Plaintiff was knocked unconscious and hospitalized; she stated in her complaint that she was still undergoing treatment. Plaintiff claimed she was unable to work after the accident and had a better job offer pending at the time of the accident which she was unable to accept because of her injuries. She was making $7 per hour at the place where she was actually working at the time of the accident.
Plaintiff named the Doe defendants as employees of defendant Home Depot under the doctrine of respondeat superior, which holds that an employer is liable for damages caused by the employer’s employee if the employee was in the course and scope of his or her employment with that employer at the time when the employee caused the damages. Plaintiff claimed that defendant Home Depot refused to give the name of the Doe employee who caused the accident to paramedics and never answered discovery demands for the name of the Doe employee who caused the accident.
Defendant Home Depot denied negligence and also denied breaching any duty of care to its customers. Defendant Home Depot claimed plaintiff’s injuries were caused by plaintiff’s own negligence or that of third parties over whom defendant Home Depot had no control.

PERSONAL INJURY
Case Type --AA; Automobile accident
Case Name --Paulo Curiel; Arlette Canaan; and Wadia Canaan vs. Tyler Openshaw
Case Number --020908971
Court/Judge --3rd District/Barrett
Verdict/Settlement --Settlement, 2/05
Amount --This case settled for an undisclosed amount.
Injuries --Plaintiff Wadia Canaan suffered neck and back pain with headaches and some facial trauma. Working diagnosis was paracervical strain with ligamentous injury to the cervical and upper thoracic spine. She underwent physical therapy. The other two plaintiffs suffered unspecified injuries.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff --H. Wayne Wadsworth, then Richard K. Spratley, of Gregory, Barton & Swapp
Attorney(s) - Defense --Lloyd R. Jones of Petersen & Hansen; then of Petersen & Associates
Expert Witness(es) - Defense --Defendant designated John P. Barbuto, MD--neurologist; and Stephen P. Marble, MD--independent medical evaluation (IME) physician. Damages --Plaintiff Paulo Curiel claimed $4,176.11 in past medical expenses; Plaintiff Arlette Canaan claimed $3,060.52 in past medical expenses; and plaintiff Wadia Canaan claimed $4,252.42 in past medical expenses. Facts/Contentions --This case, originally filed by plaintiff Paulo Curiel, was consolidated with two other cases arising out of the same accident and filed by the two other plaintiffs.
Plaintiff Paulo Curiel, a California resident, was the driver of a 1990 Acura, with the two Canaan plaintiffs, who are Utah residents, as his passengers. Plaintiff Wadia Canaan was a minor. Plaintiffs’ vehicle had been traveling south on the Old Bingham Highway and had stopped at the intersection of 4370 West, waiting to make a left turn. Plaintiffs claimed that defendant, who was traveling directly behind plaintiffs, failed to stop and rear-ended plaintiffs’ vehicle. One other passenger in plaintiffs’ vehicle was not injured.
Defendant admitted that his car collided with plaintiff’ vehicle, but denied liability, claiming the accident was caused by the negligence of plaintiff Paulo Curiel or of third parties over whom defendant had no control. Defendant also claimed plaintiffs’ injuries might have been pre-existing. The medical record showed that plaintiff Wadia Canaan had a history of headaches and a right ear tympanum problem.

PERSONAL INJURY
Case Type --AA; Automobile accident
Case Name --John R. Godsey vs. Shan L. Womack
Case Number --030903425
Court/Judge --3rd District/Peuler
Verdict/Settlement --Verdict, 2/05
Amount --Pursuant to defendant’s motion, this case was dismissed with prejudice and on the merits for plaintiff’s failure to prosecute.
Injuries --Plaintiff suffered unspecified injuries.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff --Bryan A. Larson and Cynthia A. Stonebraker of Larson, Turner, Fairbanks & Dalby; then Kevin K. Robson of Bertch Robson; plaintiff’s original counsel retained a lien in the case in the amount of $495.70 for costs. Attorney Robson withdrew 8 1/2 months after entering his appearance as counsel on behalf of plaintiff.
Attorney(s) - Defense --Terry M. Plant of Plant, Wallace, Christensen & Kanell; then of Plant, Christensen & Kanell
Damages --Plaintiff claimed unspecified past medical expenses and lost wages, as well as unspecified future medical expenses and loss of earning capacity.
Facts/Contentions --Plaintiff, a Utah resident, was northbound on I-215 in the #3 (outside) lane, with defendant, a California resident, northbound just ahead of plaintiff. Plaintiff claimed defendant became distracted by her passengers and changed lanes with no warning; plaintiff claimed that while trying to avoid a collision, he (plaintiff) crashed into the concrete sound barrier beside the freeway.
Defendant denied liability, claiming plaintiff’s injuries were caused by plaintiff’s own negligence or that of third parties over whom defendant had no control. Defendant also claimed plaintiff might have failed to meet the $3,000 threshold for special damages required by Utah law before an injured plaintiff may sue.
After plaintiff’s second counsel withdrew and plaintiff failed to respond to a notice from defendant to appear in person or appoint new counsel, defendant moved the court to dismiss the case for plaintiff’s failure to prosecute. Plaintiff did not oppose. The court therefore granted defendant’s motion.

PERSONAL INJURY
Case Type --AA, TA; Automobile/pick-up truck accident
Case Name --Lonnie Adams; and Judy Adams vs. Forrest Cuch; David Cuch; Wayne Harper; and Bryan Harper
Case Number --030905217
Court/Judge --3rd District/Dever
Verdict/Settlement --Verdict/settlement, 2/05
Amount --After the parties and/or their counsel appeared at the show-cause hearing, the court continued the case for 90 days to allow the parties to mediate, informing counsel that if the court did not hear anything further from the parties within 90 days, the case would be dismissed without prejudice. When the court did not hear from counsel within 90 days, the court dismissed the case without prejudice. The parties then informed the court that they had successfully reached a settlement by means of mediation, and the court dismissed the case with prejudice and ordered the parties each to bear their own costs, with the exception that the Cuch defendants agreed to pay plaintiffs’ share of the mediation costs. The case settled for an undisclosed amount.
Injuries --Plaintiffs suffered unspecified serious injuries, and both claimed permanent impairment.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff --Eric P. Lee, Craig A. Hoggan and M. Kevin Jones of Dart, Adamson & Donovan
Attorney(s) - Defense --For the Harper defendants: Paul H. Matthews, Richard N. Barnes and W. Kevin Tanner of Paul H. Matthews & Associates; for defendant David Cuch: Robert C. Morton of Dunn & Dunn
Damages --Each plaintiff claimed over $10,000 in past medical expenses, as well as $5,500 to $6,500 in property damages to their restored Oldsmobile 98, which was totaled. Plaintiffs also claimed unspecified past special damages for loss of use of the Oldsmobile 98 for an extended period of time.
Facts/Contentions --Plaintiffs, who are Montana residents, were northbound on I-15 near milepost 385, with plaintiff Lonnie Adams driving and plaintiff Judy Adams as his passenger. Plaintiffs were in their restored 1998 Oldsmobile 98. Plaintiffs claimed defendants Wayne and Bryan Harper, in a 1987 Acura Legend owned by defendant Wayne Harper and driven by Wayne Harper’s son, defendant Bryan Harper, were right behind plaintiffs. Defendant Bryan Harper was 16 years old at the time. Plaintiffs claimed there was a heavy snowstorm in progress. Plaintiffs claimed defendants Forrest and David Cuch, with 22-year-old defendant David Cuch driving and David Cuch’s father Forrest Cuch as passenger, passed the Harper and Adams vehicles in a 1998 Ford Ranger owned by defendant Forrest Cuch. Plaintiffs claimed the Cuch vehicle was going about 75 miles per hour when it passed plaintiffs’ vehicle, and the Harper vehicle was going about 75 miles per hour, in excess of the 55-miles-per-hur “advisory speed” recommended for those weather conditions by the Utah Highway Patrol. Plaintiffs claimed that shortly after passing the Adams and Harper vehicles, defendant David Cuch lost control of his vehicle, fish-tailed, and came to a stop blocking both northbound lanes of the highway. Both plaintiff Lonnie Adams and defendant Bryan Harper, according to plaintiffs, braked to avoid the Cuch vehicle, but defendant Bryan Harper lost control of his vehicle and struck plaintiffs’ vehicle. Plaintiffs claimed the Harper vehicle was still going about 60 miles per hour when it struck plaintiffs’ vehicle. Plaintiffs claimed defendant Bryan Harper was cited at the scene for going too fast for existing conditions. Plaintiffs named defendants Forrest Harper and Wayne Harper for allowing their sons to drive too fast in weather conditions which the fathers knew were beyond the sons’ skills or competence (negligent entrustment).
The Harper defendants denied liability, claiming the accident was caused by the negligence of plaintiff Lonnie Adams or of third parties, including defendant David Cuch, over whom the Harper defendants had no control. Defendant David Cuch answered pro se that the snow was not “heavy” at the time of the accident; he claimed that a light snowfall had just started and created only a thin layer of snow over the highway surface. Defendant David Cuch also denied going 75 miles per hour at the time of the accident; he claimed he was only going about 55 miles per hour and keeping up with the flow of traffic. Defendant David Cuch claimed that it was only because he was traveling at a responsible speed that he was able to stop his vehicle without going off the road or striking other vehicles after he hit a small patch of icy snow on the road as he came around a curve. Attorney Morton later entered his appearance on behalf of defendant David Cuch and filed another answer claiming that defendant David Cuch was driving the truck owned by his father, defendant Forrest Cuch, with his father’s consent, but not under his father’s “direction and control.” Defendant David Cuch denied negligence and contended that the accident was caused by the negligence of plaintiff Lonnie Adams or that of third parties, including the Harper defendants, over whom defendant David Cuch had no control. Defendant David Cuch als claimed that plaintiffs might not have reached the $3,000 threshold for special damages required under Utah law before an injured plaintiff may sue.
On behalf of defendant Forrest Cuch, attorney Morton filed a separate answer claiming that defendant Forrest Cuch was not negligent in entrusting his truck to his son to drive. Defendant Forrest Cuch claimed the accident was caused by the negligence of plaintiff Lonnie Adams or that of third parties, including the Harper defendants, over whom defendant Forrest Cuch had no control. Defendant Forrest Cuch further claimed that even if plaintiffs had met the $3,000 threshold for special damages required under Utah law before an injured plaintiff may sue, the medical expenses incurred by plaintiffs might not have been reasonable or necessary to treat the injuries they sustained in this accident. Defendant Forrest Cuch contended that the accident might have been caused by conditions beyond anyone’s control.
Plaintiffs moved the court for an order protecting plaintiffs from having to travel to Salt Lake City for depositions and independent medical examinations. Plaintiffs stated that they were elderly, in uncertain health, and had limited financial resources, in addition to which they had no reliable source of transportation following the accident. Plaintiffs stated that they would be more than willing to be deposed by telephone and undergo independent medical evaluations in the Gallatin, Montana area.
Both the Cuch and Harper defendants stated their intention to allocate fault to third persons, including the “student driver” in a phantom vehicle which was stopped on the side of I-15 at the time of the accident in such a way that it blocked the left lane of travel, causing defendant Bryan Harper to change lanes to the lane behind plaintiffs immediately before the accident.
Both the Cuch and Harper defendants moved to be dismissed from the action on grounds that plaintiffs failed to appear for scheduled depositions and independent medical examinations.
The court denied plaintiffs’ motion for a protective order and ordered that their depositions and independent medical evaluation examinations be scheduled in Salt Lake City before February 20, 2005 in such a manner as to enable them to handle all their appointments in one trip. Following this order, the court ordered the parties to appear at a scheduled hearing to show cause why this case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute.

PERSONAL INJURY
Case Type --AA, TA, WA; Work-related automobile/dump truck accident
Case Name --Ashley Restivo v. Roger Willey; and South Salt Lake City Corporation
Case Number --040911395
Court/Judge --3rd District/Bohling
Verdict/Settlement --Settlement, 2/05
Amount --This case settled for an undisclosed amount.
Injuries --Plaintiff suffered a closed head injury; concussion; blurred vision; a broad-based disc bulge distorting the thecal sac at C4/5, C5/6 and C6/7; cervical radiculitis; cervical sprain/strain; lumbar sprain/strain; and a chest wall contusion. Plaintiff claimed permanent impairment.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff --Michael A. Katz and Brad L. Anderson of Siegfried & Jensen
Attorney(s) - Defense --South Salt Lake City Attorney Dave Carlson and Assistant South Salt Lake City Attorney Janice Frost
Damages --Plaintiff claimed unspecified past and future medical expenses and lost wages.
Facts/Contentions --Plaintiff was eastbound on 3300 South at approximately 172 feet east of 500 West. Plaintiff stated that a car driven by a third party was stopped for traffic in the #1 (inside) lane of eastbound traffic, with the result that plaintiff started to change lanes into the #1 (inside) lane, realized she could not complete the lane change, and returned to the #2 (outside) lane, where she came to a complete stop for traffic ahead. Plaintiff claimed defendant Willey, who was in the course and scope of his employment with defendant South Salt Lake City and was driving a dump truck owned and operated by defendant South Salt Lake City in the #2 (outside) eastbound lane of 3300 South, failed to stop and crashed into the rear of plaintiff’s vehicle, pushing it into the stopped car in the #1 (inside) lane. Plaintiff named defendant South Salt Lake City under the doctrine of respondeat superior, which holds that an employer is liable for damages caused by the employer’s employee if the employee was in the course and scope of his or her employment with that employer at the time when the employee caused the damages.
Defendant South Salt Lake City moved to dismiss the case on grounds that plaintiff failed to file a “notice of claim” with South Salt Lake City. Defendant South Salt Lake City withdrew this motion after it became apparent that plaintiff had filed the proper notice.
Defendant Willey filed a pro se answer in which he claimed he was southbound on 500 West, made a left turn onto eastbound 3300 South, and suddenly saw the plaintiff cut in front of him so closely that he was unable to stop his truck in time to avoid hitting plaintiff’s car. Both defendants then filed an answer claiming that defendant Willey was unable to stop as a result of plaintiff’s negligent and improper lane change, which caused the accident. Defendants claimed plaintiff was cited at the scene for improper lane change. Defendants claimed plaintiff assumed the risk of her injuries when she made the negligent and improper lane change in front of defendant Willey’s truck.

PERSONAL INJURY
Case Type --AA, UM, IB; Automobile accident, uninsured motorist, suit for insurance benefits (subrogation)
Case Name --Bear River Mutual Insurance Company vs. Troy Wallace; and Justine Degele
Case Number --030912301
Court/Judge --3rd District
Verdict/Settlement --Verdict, 2/05
Amount --The court entered judgment against defendant Wallace in the amount of $9,108.25, which included $1,986.40 in accrued pre-judgment interest and $121.85 in costs.
Injuries --Plaintiff’s insured suffered unspecified injuries.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff --Daniel O. Duffin and Thomas A. Duffin of Duffin & Associates
Attorney(s) - Defense --None listed.
Damages --Plaintiff paid its insured $4,000 for past medical expenses and $3,000 for past lost wages.
Facts/Contentions --Plaintiff claimed defendant Wallace, driving an uninsured automobile owned by defendant Degele, negligently rear-ended a vehicle driven by plaintiff’s insured on the southbound off-ramp from I-15 to Center Street in Orem.
Plaintiff’s proposed judgment was originally denied by the court on grounds that it required either signed return receipts from the defendants or an affidavit under the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act. Plaintiff’s attorneys filed an affidavit stating that they were unable to determine defendant Wallace’s military service status. At the time of the accident, plaintiffs stated, both defendants were living in Utah. However, plaintiff’s attorneys stated, when they deposed defendant Degele, she told them that defendant Wallace had recently moved to Montana. Plaintiff’s attorneys stated in the affidavit that they then served defendant Wallace with notice of the action by registered U. S. Mail at the address given them by defendant Degele. They received no reply, and the letter was not returned by the post office. Plaintiff’s attorneys stated that they were unable to ascertain whether defendant Wallace was in the military service, but defendant Degele told them defendant Wallace was not in the military. Plaintiff’s attorneys stated that they were unable to make any further determination as to defendant Wallace’s military status. After plaintiff’s attorneys filed this affidavit, the court entered judgment.

PERSONAL INJURY
Case Type --AA, TA, WA; Work-related automobile/truck accident
Case Name --Yong Yath vs. Volvo Trucks North America, Incorporated dba Volvo; and Thomas Slayton
Case Number --030920016
Court/Judge --3rd District/Quinn
Verdict/Settlement --Settlement, 2/05
Amount --This case settled for an undisclosed amount.
Injuries --Plaintiff suffered multiple closed fractures of the mid-shaft humerus, an intracranial injury; bilateral pulmonary contusions; a closed fracture of the lumbar transfer processes for L2 and L4; a closed fracture of left lower ribs #7 and #8; and multiple hand lacerations. Plaintiff also claimed serious injuries to his head, back and neck which had not yet been diagnosed, as well as severe shock, permanent scarring and impairment.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff --Wayne H. Braunberger of Braunberger, Boud & Draper; then Chase Kimball of the Law Offices of Randall L. Meek
Attorney(s) - Defense --Tim Dalton Dunn and John Warren May of Dunn & Dunn
Damages --Plaintiff claimed unspecified past and future medical expenses and wage loss, as well as future loss of earning capacity.
Facts/Contentions --Plaintiff was driving his Celica 2-door coupe on northbound I-25 just north of California Avenue. Plaintiff claimed he was taking his daughter to work, and she was riding as a passenger in the vehicle. Plaintiff claimed his vehicle stalled on the freeway, and he and his daughter were unable to leave it or move it out of the traffic lane because of the heavy traffic around it. Plaintiff claimed that other traffic slowed and passed on wither side before defendant Slayton, who was in the course and scope of his employment with defendant Volvo and was driving a GMC truck owned by defendant Volvo, rear-ended plaintiff’s vehicle. Plaintiff claimed the investigating officer estimated defendant Slayton’s speed at impact to be around 60 miles per hour. Plaintiff claimed the rear bumper of plaintiff’s vehicle was shoved into the front seat by the force of the impact. Plaintiff named defendant Volvo under the doctrine of respondeat superior, which holds that an employer is liable for damages caused by the employer’s employee if the employee was in the course and scope of his or her employment with that employer at the time when the employee caused the damages. In his initial disclosures, plaintiff named five fact witnesses who were driving on the freeway and saw the accident occur.
Defendants admitted that the collision occurred and defendant Slayton was in the course and scope of his employment at the time of the accident. However, defendants denied negligence and claimed the accident was caused by the negligence of the plaintiff in not removing the stalled automobile from the freeway and in not ensuring a clear view of the stalled vehicle for 200 feet in each direction along the road. Defendants also claimed plaintiff’s injuries might have been pre-existing and plaintiff might have failed to meet the $3,000 threshold for special damages required under Utah law before an injured plaintiff may sue. Alternatively, defendants claimed the accident was caused by the negligence of third parties over whom defendants had no control.

PERSONAL INJURY
Case Type --AA, IB; Automobile accident, suit for insurance benefits (bad faith)
Case Name --(Name of case withheld)
Case Number --030919062
Court/Judge --3rd District/Hilder
Verdict/Settlement --Dismissal, 2/05
Amount --The court dismissed this case without prejudice for plaintiff’s failure to serve defendant with notice of the action within 120 days of the filing of the complaint.
Injuries --Plaintiff suffered severe unspecified injuries and claimed permanent impairment. Her injuries left her with memory loss and other disabilities, and she qualified for Social Security disability benefits following the accident.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff --Plaintiff was represented pro se.
Attorney(s) - Defense --None listed.
Damages --Plaintiff claimed unspecified past and future medical expenses and wage loss.
Facts/Contentions --Plaintiff claimed she was involved in a hit-and-run accident and sustained extensive personal injuries and property damage to her vehicle. Plaintiff claimed defendant, who insured her vehicle, refused to pay plaintiff’s damages when she filed a claim. Plaintiff filed an affidavit of impecuniosity, stating that because she was no longer able to work as a mortgage loan officer as she had done before the accident (earning $2,00 plus omissions each month), she was living on severely limited Social Security disability benefits and could not afford to pay the $155 filing fee in this case.

PERSONAL INJURY
Case Type --AA; Automobile accident
Case Name --Jennifer Kershaw vs. Bryan L. Udy
Case Number --030918169
Court/Judge --3rd District/Frederick
Verdict/Settlement --Settlement, 2/05
Amount --This case settled for an undisclosed amount.
Injuries --Plaintiff suffered unspecified injuries.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff --Ronald E. Dalby of Larson, Turner, Fairbanks & Dalby; then of Larson, Turner, Dalby & Ethington
Attorney(s) - Defense --John N. Braithwaite and H. Justin Hitt of Plant, Christensen & Kanell
Damages --Plaintiff claimed unspecified past and future medical expenses, lost wages, and out-of-pocket expenses, as well as unspecified past property damages.
Facts/Contentions --Plaintiff claimed she was driving through the parking lot of a gas station at 6070 South Highland Drive when defendant’s vehicle approached from her passenger side at a high rate of speed and smashed into plaintiff’s vehicle. Plaintiff claimed her car was totaled.
Defendant denied liability and claimed the accident was caused by plaintiff’s negligence. Defendant also claimed plaintiff might have failed to meet the $3,000 threshold for special damages required under Utah law before an injured plaintiff may sue.

PERSONAL INJURY
Case Type --AA; Automobile accident
Case Name --Kevin K. Larsen vs. Todd W. Potter; and Does 1 through 10
Case Number --030916691
Court/Judge --3rd District/Hilder
Verdict/Settlement --Dismissal, 2/05
Amount --The court dismissed this case without prejudice for plaintiff’s failure to serve defendant with notice of the action within 120 days of the filing of the complaint.
Injuries --Plaintiff suffered unspecified injuries and claimed permanent impairment.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff --Darren A. Davis of Siegfried & Jensen
Attorney(s) - Defense --None listed.
Damages --Plaintiff claimed unspecified past and future medical expenses and wage loss, as well as an unspecified loss of future earning capacity.
Facts/Contentions --Plaintiff was stopped in the outside (#3) northbound lane of State Street at 6100 South. Plaintiff claimed defendant Potter rear-ended plaintiff’s vehicle. Plaintiff named the Doe defendants as possibly having contributed to causing the accident.
Plaintiff moved the court for an extension of time in which to serve defendant by publication on grounds that defendant moved and could not be located and served with notice of the action by a constable.

PERSONAL INJURY
Case Type --AA; Automobile accident
Case Name --Robert Terry Winward vs. Holly Cody
Case Number --030914274
Court/Judge --3rd District/Dever
Verdict/Settlement --Judgment on the verdict, 3/05
Amount --The jury found defendant 100% negligent and further found that defendant’s negligence was the cause of plaintiff’s injuries. The jury awarded plaintiff $19,656.98 for special damages and $25,000 for general damages; total gross verdict was $44,656.98. Pursuant to the prior stipulation by the parties, the court offset the verdict by the $50,000 plaintiff had already received from defendant’s insurer and entered a total verdict for plaintiff in the amount of $0.
Injuries --Plaintiff suffered unspecified injuries.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff --Brent Gordon and D. Scott Berrett of Driggs, Bills & Day
Attorney(s) - Defense --Daniel S. McConkie of Kirton & McConkie
Expert Witness(es) - Plaintiff --Dr. T. D. Lahiri and Dr.
Thomas Wilkinson testified for plaintiff by deposition.
Damages --The parties stipulated to plaintiff’s incurred expenses as presented in plaintiff’s exhibits at trial.
Facts/Contentions --Plaintiff, a former Utah resident who now lives in Washington state, was northbound on 300 West in the left-turn lane, and defendant was eastbound on 3300 South. Plaintiff claimed he (plaintiff) had stopped for a red light at the intersection and then, when the left-turn arrow turned green for him, pulled out into the intersection, waiting for oncoming traffic to clear so he could make a left turn onto westbound 3300 South. Plaintiff claimed the traffic on 3300 South was very heavy, but had all stopped. Plaintiff claimed that as he (plaintiff) entered the intersection, defendant ran the red light and struck the driver’s side of plaintiff’s vehicle in the intersection of the two streets.
Plaintiff moved the court to allow service by alternative means after plaintiff attempted to serve defendant at her last known address and discovered that defendant had moved and left no forwarding address. The court ruled that if plaintiff served notice of the action on the Utah Division of Corporation and Commercial Code (which governs the operation of motor vehicles on Utah highways by non-residents or by Utah residents who have moved out of state), defendant’s last known address (by first-class mail), and defendant’s liability insurance carrier (by first class mail), service would be deemed to be complete.
Defendant (or her insurer) admitted that the accident occurred, but denied negligence and argued that plaintiff’s injuries were caused by plaintiff’s own negligence or that of third parties over whom defendant had no control.
Plaintiff moved for partial summary judgment finding that defendant was liable for causing the accident. The court did not grant this motion, and the issue of liability was presented to the jury on the special verdict form.
Defendant moved the court to exclude any mention of insurance coverage available to defendant if she were found to be liable in this suit.
The parties stipulated that the court might enter an offset of $50,000 against any verdict awarded to plaintiff. The offset was for $50,000 which plaintiff had already received from defendant’s insurance carrier. The parties stipulated to a set of jury instructions.
Defendant did not appear at trial; her attorney presented several exhibits. After trial, defendant’s attorney moved for a directed verdict; the court denied the motion.

PERSONAL INJURY
Case Type --AA, MA; automobile/motorcycle accident
Case Name --Robert D. Cardwell vs. Silvia S. Martinez
Case Number --050901207
Court/Judge --3rd District/Fratto
Verdict/Settlement --Settlement, 3/05
Amount --This case settled for an undisclosed amount.
Injuries --Plaintiff suffered unspecified injuries. He was taken from the scene to St. Mark’s Hospital by ambulance.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff --David C. Biggs of Steele, Ruffinengo & Biggs, of counsel to Siegfried & Jensen
Attorney(s) - Defense --Defendant filed a pro se answer.
Damages --Plaintiff claimed unspecified past and future medical expenses, past wage loss, and future loss of earning capacity.
Facts/Contentions --Plaintiff was riding his motorcycle on westbound 4500 South. He claimed that at about 500 West, defendant failed to yield the right of way while trying to make a left turn and collided with plaintiff. Plaintiff claimed defendant was cited at the scene for failure to yield the right of way.
Defendant claimed there was a car in front of her making a left turn, and once the other car had made its turn and was out of the way, defendant looked to be sure the way was clear and then started to make her turn. Defendant claimed that as she was turning left, her car was struck from behind on the passenger side by plaintiff’s motorcycle. Defendant admitted being cited at the scene and stated that she filed a “plea in abeyance” and paid a fine. Defendant claimed plaintiff did not seem to be injured at the scene.

PERSONAL INJURY
Case Type --AA; Automobile accident
Case Name --Judith Finch and Gary Finch vs. Joseph Larkin
Case Number --040923465
Court/Judge --33rd District/Fuchs
Verdict/Settlement --Settlement, 3/05
Amount --This case settled for an undisclosed amount.
Injuries --Plaintiff Judith Finch suffered a left shoulder injury which required surgery; a neck injury; a low back injury. She claimed that as a result of the accident, she experienced headaches and hip pain. Plaintiff Judith Finch claimed permanent impairment.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff --G. Steven Sullivan of Robert J. DeBry & Associates
Attorney(s) - Defense --Mark Dalton Dunn of Victoria K. Kidman & Associates
Damages --Plaintiff Judith Finch claimed past medical expenses of $15,900 and $9,900 in past lost wages, as well as possible unspecified future medical expenses and lost wages. Plaintiff Gary Finch claimed unspecified property damage to his vehicle.
Facts/Contentions --Plaintiff Judith Finch was southbound on 700 East, attempting to turn left onto eastbound 4500 South. Plaintiffs claimed defendant, who was eastbound on 4500 South, ran a red light and rear-ended plaintiff Gary Finch’s vehicle.
Defendant denied liability and negligence and claimed the accident was caused by the negligence of plaintiff Judith Finch or by conditions, acts and individuals beyond defendant’s control. Defendant also claimed plaintiff Judith Finch’s injuries might have been pre-existing.

PERSONAL INJURY
Case Type --AA; Automobile accident
Case Name --Jody Trujillo vs. Jennifer Bradbury
Case Number --040919959
Court/Judge --3rd District/Lewis
Verdict/Settlement --Dismissal, 3/05
Amount --The court dismissed this case without prejudice for plaintiff’s failure to serve defendant with notice of the action within 120 days of the filing of the complaint.
Injuries --Plaintiff suffered unspecified injuries.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff --Ronald E. Dalby of Larson, Turner, Dalby & Ethington
Attorney(s) - Defense --None listed.
Damages --Plaintiff claimed unspecified past and future medical expenses and wage loss.
Facts/Contentions --Plaintiff was southbound on 5600 West, in the far right-hand lane approaching the intersection of 4100 South. Plaintiff claimed defendant, who was northbound on 5600 West and was attempting to make a left turn, struck plaintiff as she crossed the outside lane.

PERSONAL INJURY
Case Type --WA, MS; Miscellaneous work-related injury claim (airport cart accident)
Case Name --Paula Kenney; and John Kenney vs. Salt Lake Airport Authority; Salt Lake City Corporation; Huntleigh USA Corporation; Northwest Airlines, Incorporated; and Does 1 through 5
Case Number --040919843
Court/Judge --3rd District/Fratto
Verdict/Settlement --Dismissal/answer, 3/05
Amount --The court dismissed this case without prejudice for plaintiff’s failure to serve defendant with notice of the action within 120 days of the filing of the complaint; this dismissal occurred on the same day defendant Huntleigh filed its answer.
Injuries --Both plaintiff suffered injuries; plaintiff Paula Kenney suffered injuries to her head and left knee. Both plaintiffs claimed permanent impairment resulting from the accident.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff --Daniel F. Bertch of Bertch Robson
Attorney(s) - Defense --For defendant Huntleigh: Dennis J. Conroy and Spencer Siebers of Silvester & Conroy
Damages --Plaintiffs claimed over $10,000 in combined special and general damages.
Facts/Contentions --Plaintiffs, who are elderly and physically infirm, had tickets to fly to Minnesota on a flight operated by defendant Northwest Airlines. Plaintiffs stated that they asked for assistance after checking in, and defendant Northwest arranged for a passenger cart to pick them up. When the cart arrived, plaintiffs claimed, it was driven by a third party who was in the course and scope of his employment with defendant Huntleigh. Plaintiffs claimed that when the driver found his cart battery was dead, he “just grabbed another one,” but did not check to see that the replacement cart was in good condition. Plaintiffs claimed the driver directed plaintiffs to sit on the rear bench of the cart and hold onto an upright support bar, but when the driver started to move the replacement cart, the cart lurched forward very suddenly, and the support bar, which was missing several bolts, gave way; plaintiffs were thrown off the cart and fell to the ground.
Plaintiffs claimed the driver operated the cart at an unreasonable and unsafe speed and failed to inspect the cart for dangerous defects like the missing bolts. Plaintiffs named defendant Huntleigh under the doctrine of respondeat superior, which holds that an employer is liable for damages caused by the employer’s employee if the employee was in the course and scope of his or her employment with that employer at the time when the employee caused the damages. Plaintiffs named defendant Northwest as having arranged for the cart to pick plaintiffs up; plaintiffs named the other defendants as owners/operators of the airport where the accident took place.
Defendant Huntleigh denied negligence and liability and contended that the plaintiffs’ injuries were caused by the acts and negligence of third parties over whom defendant Huntleigh had no control. Among these parties defendant Huntleigh named John S. Rutter and/or Ruttco, Incorporated, together with Ruttco’s employees and/or agents. Defendant Huntleigh claimed that about 11 days before the accident, Ruttco repaired the passenger cart from which plaintiffs were thrown; the repairs included replacement of the upright support bar. Defendant Huntleigh claimed plaintiffs’ injuries, if not caused by the negligence of Ruttco, were caused by the intervening acts of unknown parties. Defendant Huntleigh denied that it was acting as a “common carrier” and contended that it was therefore not subject to any higher standard of care.

PERSONAL INJURY
Case Type --AA; Automobile accident
Case Name --Rugile Wathen vs. Brian L. Hutchinson
Case Number --040919063
Court/Judge --3rd District/Reese
Verdict/Settlement --Dismissal, 3/05
Amount --The court dismissed this case without prejudice for plaintiff’s failure to serve defendant with notice of the action within 120 days of the filing of the complaint.
Injuries --Plaintiff suffered unspecified injuries and claimed permanent impairment.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff --Chase Kimball of the Law Office of Randal L. Meek
Attorney(s) - Defense --None listed.
Damages --Plaintiff claimed unspecified past and future medical expenses and past wage loss.
Facts/Contentions --Plaintiff originally filed this case before Judge Peuler as case number 030909777 on May 1, 2003. The previous action was dismissed without prejudice on January 2, 2004, leaving plaintiff one more year to file the claim again pursuant to the “Saving Statute,” Utah Code Annotated Section 78-12-40. Plaintiff refiled the claim on September 7, 2004.
Plaintiff claimed defendant ran a red light and struck plaintiff in the intersection of 900 East and 21100 South. Plaintiff claimed defendant was cited at the scene for running the red light.

PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM
Case Type – AA; Automobile accident
Case Name – Elie E. Broussard as legal guardian of her minor child Adan Broussard vs. Guila Valene Inseep
Case Number – 040921378
Court/Judge – 3rd District/Hilder
Verdict/Settlement – Settlement, 4/05
Amount – This case settled for an undisclosed amount.
Injuries – Minor plaintiff Adan Broussard suffered injuries to his head, neck, back, shoulders, hips, chest, and upper and lower extremities.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff(s) – Rick S. Lundell and Brian K. Lofgren of Lundell & Lofgren
Attorney(s) - Defense – None listed
Damages – Plaintiffs claimed unspecified past and future medical expenses and future loss of earning capacity. Plaintiffs also alleged gross negligence and willful and reckless behavior on the part of defendant and sought unspecified punitive damages.
Facts/Contentions – Plaintiff Elie Broussard was northbound on 5600 West, with minor plaintiff Adan Broussard as her passenger. Plaintiffs claimed defendant attempted to make an improper left turn from southbound 5600 West onto eastbound 3500 South directly in front of plaintiffs’ vehicle and collided with it.

PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM
Case Type – BT, NE; Assault, negligence claim
Case Name – Luis Alberto Vera-Garcia vs. Granite School District and Does 1 through 10
Case Number – 040923340
Court/Judge – 3rd District/Medley
Verdict/Settlement – Settlement, 4/05
Amount – This case settled for an undisclosed amount.
Injuries – Plaintiff suffered a closed head injury, bruises, lacerations, a rib-cage injury, and unspecified internal injuries. He claimed that after the incident, he suffered from depression and post-traumatic stress disorder.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff(s) – Charles A. Gruber and James H. Alcala Attorney(s) - Defense – Mark L. Shurtleff and Barry G. Lawrence of the Utah Attorney General’s Office
Damages – Plaintiff claimed unspecified past and future medical expenses and wage loss, as well as unspecified future loss of earning capacity.
Facts/Contentions – Plaintiff was taking summer classes at Grainger High School. He claimed that he had left the school building and was walking across the parking lot when he was attacked without provocation by a group of other students who were loitering in the parking lot. Plaintiff claimed defendant Granite School District knew the attacking students were aggressive and dangerous and had attacked several other students in the past.< Plaintiff claimed defendant Granite School District should have taken steps to protect students and keep them safe on its campus, but negligently failed to do so. Plaintiff named the Doe defendants as unknown individuals who were negligent in maintaining, operating and supervising the campus.
Defendant Granite School District moved to dismiss this claim on grounds that defendant was protected by the Governmental Immunity Act. Defendant Granite School District claimed that Section 63-30-10 of the Act provides immunity for injuries arising out of assault and battery.
After defendant Granite School District filed its motion to dismiss, plaintiff filed an amended complaint in which he claimed his injuries were caused by the “boisterous, rowdy and negligent behavior” of the students he encountered in the parking lot and not by an assault.
Defendant Granite School District renewed its motion to dismiss, claiming a party may not avoid governmental immunity by changing the language of a complaint. Defendant Granite School District claimed plaintiff was bound by the language of the Notice of Claim he filed and served on required officials before filing his Third District Court claim. In the Notice of Claim, the incident was referred to as an “attack.”
The case settled before the court could rule on defendant Granite School District’s motion.

PERSONAL INJURY
Case Type – AA; Automobile accident
Case Name – Bear River Mutual Insurance Company vs. James F. Phillips
Case Number – 040927335
Court/Judge – 3rd District/Lubeck
Verdict/Settlement – Verdict, 4/05
Amount – The court entered judgment against defendant in the amount of $1,032.82, which included $122.82 in accrued pre-judgment interest and $50 in costs. Credit was given for $100 paid to plaintiff by defendant after this claim was filed.
Injuries – Plaintiff’s insured suffered unspecified injuries.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff(s) – Daniel O. Duffin of Duffin & Associates
Attorney(s) - Defense – None listed.
Damages – Plaintiff paid its insured $1,030 in PIP benefits to cover medical expenses.
Facts/Contentions – Plaintiff claimed defendant negligently struck another vehicle at the intersection of State Street and Beryl Avenue, causing the vehicle he struck to strike a third vehicle, which in turn struck a vehicle driven by plaintiff’s insured, who had stopped for traffic on State Street.
Plaintiff claimed defendant admitted liability and made one payment of $70 to cover plaintiff’s expenses for the PIP benefits which plaintiff paid to its insured. However, plaintiff claimed, defendant then failed to make any more payments, leaving a balance of $960 owing.
Defendant made another payment of $100 after plaintiff filed this complaint. Credit was given for this payment when judgment was entered.

PERSONAL INJURY
Case Type – AA, MA; Automobile/motorcycle accident
Case Name – Robert D. Cardwell vs. Silvia S. Martinez
Case Number – 050901207
Court/Judge – 3rd District/Fratto
Verdict/Settlement – Settlement, 5/04
Amount – This case settled for an undisclosed amount.
Injuries – Plaintiff suffered unspecified injuries.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff(s) – David C. Biggs of Steele, Ruffinengo & Biggs, of counsel to Siegfried & Jensen
Attorney(s) - Defense – Defendant was represented pro se.
Damages – Plaintiff claimed unspecified past and future medical expenses, past wage loss and future loss of earning capacity.
Facts/Contentions – Plaintiff was westbound on 4500 South. At the 500 West intersection, plaintiff claimed, defendant failed to yield right of way while attempting to make a left turn and struck plaintiff’s motorcycle. Plaintiff claimed defendant was cited at the scene for failure to yield.
Defendant filed a handwritten answer in which she claimed that when the car in front of her had turned, she waited a moment, saw the way appeared clear, and started to make her turn when she was struck from behind on the passenger side by plaintiff’s motorcycle. Defendant stated that she pled “plea in abeyance” to the citation and paid a fine.

PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM
Case Type – AA, TA, WA, OC; Ongoing case, work-related automobile/truck accident
Case Name – David Harding vs. Stefanie Toone; United Parcel Service; and Lance Jensen
Case Number – 040924169
Court/Judge – Third District
Verdict/Settlement – Award of attorneys’ fees, 4/05
Amount – The court awarded plaintiff’s attorneys $750 in fees and costs.
Injuries – Plaintiff suffered unspecified injuries.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff(s) – Mel S. Martin and Edward T. Wells of the Law Office of Mel S. Martin
Attorney(s) - Defense – For defendant UPS: Mitchel T. Rice, Richard L. Olsen and Paul C. Farr of Morgan, Minnock, Rice & James
Damages – Plaintiff claimed past medical expenses of $3,980; he sought $20,000 in combined special and general damages.
Facts/Contentions – Plaintiff claimed defendant Jensen was in the course and scope of his employment with defendant UPS when he pulled into traffic in his delivery truck without looking. Plaintiff claimed defendant Jensen’s abrupt entry into the lane of traffic occupied by defendant Toone required defendant Toone to take evasive action to avoid hitting the truck, with the result that defendant Toone swerved into plaintiff’s lane of traffic and collided with plaintiff’s vehicle. Plaintiff named defendant UPS under the doctrine of respondeat superior, which holds that an employer is liable for damages caused by the negligence of its employee if the employee was in the course and scope of his or her employment with that employer at the time when the employee caused the damages.
Defendant UPS was declared in default by the court and a judgment was entered against it after it failed to answer or appear. The court scheduled a hearing to determine the amount of damages owed by defendant UPS, but then defendant UPS contacted the court through its attorneys and moved to have the default judgment against it set aside. Defendant UPS claimed the notice of the plaintiff’s summons and complaint was not delivered to a paralegal at UPS headquarters in Atlanta, Georgia, as the record showed. Instead, UPS claimed, the notice of summons and complaint was inadvertently forwarded to the UPS garnishment representative in Marietta, Georgia. The court granted the UPS motion, which was not opposed by plaintiff, and set the default judgment aside. After the default judgment against it was set aside, defendant UPS filed an answer denying liability and claiming the accident was caused by plaintiff’s own negligence or that of third parties over whom defendant UPS had no control.
After the default judgment against defendant UPS was set aside and defendant UPS had filed its answer, the parties stipulated that plaintiff could submit an affidavit of attorneys’ fees and costs for preparing and entering the default judgment against defendant UPS, as well as the attorneys’ fees and costs incurred by plaintiff in preparing for the hearing on the issue of damages. Under the terms of the stipulation by the parties, defendant UPS had the right to object to the amount of fees and costs suggested by the plaintiff, and it did so. Plaintiff asked the court for $1125 to cover his costs and attorneys’ fees; defendant UPS claimed that $325 would be a more realistic reflection of the time and work involved.

PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM
Case Type – AA, MA; Automobile/motorcycle accident
Case Name – Kenneth W. Jamititus vs. Patrick Aman; Teresa Aman; and Heather Aman
Case Number – 040920430
Court/Judge – 3rd District/Quinn
Verdict/Settlement – Dismissal, 4/05
Amount – The court granted defendants’ motion to dismiss the case for plaintiff’s failure to serve defendants with notice of the action.
Injuries – Plaintiff suffered neck, chest and hip injuries, along with abrasions and contusions; he claimed permanent impairment.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff(s) – Robert B. Hart of Hart & Hart
Attorney(s) - Defense – Tim Dalton Dunn and Paul J. Simonson of Dunn& Dunn
Damages – Plaintiff claimed unspecified past and future medical expenses.
Facts/Contentions – Plaintiff named defendants Patrick Aman and Teresa Aman as the parents of sixteen-year-old defendant Heather Aman, claiming minor defendant Heather Aman made an improper left turn in front of plaintiff from the turn lane of southbound 1500 West while attempting to go east on 5300 South. Plaintiff claimed the vehicle driven by minor defendant Heather Aman struck plaintiff’s motorcycle, which was northbound on 1500 West.
Defendants moved to dismiss the case, claiming plaintiff forwarded a copy of the complaint to defendants’ insurance carrier but never actually served notice of the summons and complaint upon defendants themselves.

PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM
Case Type –AA, OC; Automobile accident, ongoing case
Case Name – Helen Balen vs. Aimee Waters; Vincente Garcias Gonzalez; and Does 1 through 5
Case Number – 040926878
Court/Judge – 3rd District/Henriod; then Roth
Verdict/Settlement – Settlement, 4/05
Amount – Plaintiff settled with defendant Waters for an undisclosed amount; the case against defendant Gonzalez is ongoing.
Injuries – Plaintiff suffered unspecified injuries and claimed permanent impairment.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff(s) – Kelton G. Busby of Gregory, Barton & Swapp
Attorney(s) - Defense – None listed.
Damages – Plaintiff claimed unspecified past and future medical expenses, past wage loss, and future loss of earning capacity.
Facts/Contentions – Plaintiff was driving on I-80 in the #1 (inside) westbound lane near milepost 114.
Plaintiff claimed a vehicle owned by defendant Gonzalez, which was driven either by defendant Gonzalez or by a Doe defendant, was stopped in the #2 (center) westbound lane of the freeway with its door open and no hazard lights displayed. Plaintiff claimed the driver of the Gonzalez vehicle fled the scene after the accident and has not been identified. Defendant Gonzalez, the vehicle’s owner, was found by tracing the vehicle’s VIN number and license plate number. Plaintiff stated in her claim that she believed the Gonzalez vehicle stopped in the middle of the road because it had engine trouble. Plaintiff claimed defendant Waters, who was traveling directly behind the Gonzalez vehicle in the #2 (center) westbound lane of the highway, abruptly veered into plaintiff’s lane in an attempt to avoid hitting the Gonzalez vehicle and struck plaintiff’s vehicle, at the same time colliding with the open door of the Gonzalez vehicle. Plaintiff claimed her own vehicle was forced off the road and into the median by the collision.

PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM
Case Type – AA; Automobile accident
Case Name – Erin Powell Coughtrie vs. Brian Brunatti
Case Number – 040925589
Court/Judge – 3rd District/Reese
Verdict/Settlement – Dismissal, 4/05
Amount – The court dismissed this case without prejudice for plaintiff’s failure to serve defendant with notice of the action within 120 days of the filing of the complaint.
Injuries – Plaintiff suffered unspecified injuries and claimed permanent impairment.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff(s) – Nathan A. Jardine
Attorney(s) - Defense – None listed.
Damages – Plaintiff claimed unspecified past medical expenses and wage loss.
Facts/Contentions – Plaintiff was waiting at a red light at the intersection of Newcastle and Highland Drive. Plaintiff claimed defendant failed to see that plaintiff had stopped and rear-ended plaintiff’s vehicle, causing a “spectacular crash” in which plaintiff’s vehicle spun 180 degrees and struck the vehicle ahead of her.

PERSONAL INJURY
Case Type --AA, UM, IB; Automobile accident, uninsured motorist, suit for insurance benefits (bad faith)
Case Name --Christie W. Whiting vs. Kaven L. Leavitt Jr.; Elizabeth K. Curtis; and Farmers Insurance Exchange
Case Number --040919075
Court/Judge --3rd District/Fratto
Verdict/Settlement --Dismissal, 3/05
Amount --The court dismissed this case without prejudice for plaintiff’s failure to serve defendant with notice of the action within 120 days of the filing of the complaint.
Injuries --Plaintiff suffered unspecified injuries.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff --Randall R. Grant of Grant & Grant
Attorney(s) - Defense --None listed.
Damages --Plaintiff sought $100,000 in combined general and special damages.
Facts/Contentions --Plaintiff was driving her vehicle at approximately 5400 South and 2900 West. Plaintiff claimed defendant Leavitt, driving an automobile owned by defendant Curtis, did not see that traffic ahead had stopped and rear-ended plaintiff’s vehicle at a high rate of speed, causing a chain-reaction accident.
Plaintiff claimed the defendants’ vehicle was either uninsured or underinsured. Plaintiff named defendant Farmers as the insurance carrier for plaintiff and plaintiff’s husband. Plaintiff claimed defendant Farmers failed to pay plaintiff the benefits to which she was entitled under the “uninsured/underinsured motorist” clause in the policy.

MISREPRESENTATION/NEGLIGENCE CLAIM
Case Type – MF, NE; Misrepresentation, negligence
Case Name – (Name of case withheld)
Case Number – 050902726
Court/Judge – 3rd District/Hilder
Verdict/Settlement – Settlement, 4/05
Amount – This case settled for an undisclosed amount.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff(s) – Steven W. Baeder; then Bryan A. Larson of Larson, Turner, Dalby & Ethington
Attorney(s) - Defense – The case settled before defendant filed an answer.
Damages – Plaintiffs sought unspecified monetary damages; $30,000 in punitive damages; costs; and attorneys’ fees.
Facts/Contentions – Parent plaintiffs, a husband and wife, claimed defendant, a chiropractor, provided services for parent plaintiffs’ minor child, but failed to submit the proper claims to Federal Blue Cross and Intermountain Health Care. Parent plaintiffs claimed that when defendant filled out the claim forms to submit to these entities, he used codes for services which chiropractors may not legally provide. Parent plaintiffs claimed that both IHC and plaintiff mother advised defendant several times that his claims would be denied unless they were properly executed; however, parent plaintiffs claimed, defendant refused to correct the forms and failed to respond to requests from the insurance providers for more information, with the result that his claims were not paid. Parent plaintiffs claimed that defendant also fraudulently billed the insurance providers for services that were never provided and supplies that were not used, as well as charging varying fees for missed appointments which parent plaintiffs claimed they canceled with defendant’s office by phone several days in advance in accordance with defendant’s policy. Parent plaintiffs claimed defendant provided them with medication in an unsealed, unlabeled bottle and performed spinal manipulations on their minor child without taking a preliminary x-ray. Parent plaintiffs claimed that when defendant demanded payment from them after the claims were denied, and they advised defendant that they would not pay the charges because they were inflated and defendant had failed to submit the proper claims that would have gotten him paid, defendant filed an action against parent plaintiffs in Third District Small Claims Court in which he misrepresented the situation and alleged that parent plaintiffs owed him payment. Parent plaintiffs claimed defendant telephoned them and left a message on their voice-mail saying that he knew there were errors in his billing and he intended to drop the charges, but he later refused to dismiss them.
The third plaintiff claimed she chose to receive treatment from defendant because he was a listed provider on her health care plan, the Blue Cross Value Care Provider List. The third plaintiff’s health care plan allowed her to pay a $15 co-pay for each visit, with the understanding that the rest of the fee for each service would be paid to defendant by the health insurance plan. The third plaintiff claimed defendant was removed from the provider list by the insurer while he was treating the third plaintiff, but did not inform her of this fact and continued to accept her $15 co-pays on each visit. The third plaintiff claimed defendant then failed to submit any claims at all to the third plaintiff’s new health insurance carrier after she informed him that she had changed carriers. The third plaintiff claimed defendant demanded payment from her and told her that Blue Cross had never paid him, though at the time Blue Cross had paid him for half of his claims and had advised him they were going to pay the other half. The third plaintiff claimed defendant sent her a bill demanding payment after he had been paid in full by Blue Cross, and this bill included $694 in accrued interest. The third plaintiff claimed the itemization section of the bill charged $48 more for each visit than defendant had agreed to accept from the insurance carrier as payment in full. The third plaintiff claimed that when she told defendant she had checked and discovered he had been paid by Blue Cross, he filed an action against her in Third District Small Claims Court.
All three plaintiffs moved the court to consolidate the two pending actions in Third District Small Claims Court and include those claims with this action, and the court granted the motion.

PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM
Case Type – WA, MS, NE; Work-related injury claim, miscellaneous (ductwork injury), negligence claim
Case Name – Bill L. Dorman vs. Powell Demolitions, Incorporated
Case Number – 020913593
Court/Judge – 3rd District/Henriod; then Lewis
Verdict/Settlement – Judgment on jury verdict, 05/05
Amount – After the jury found defendant was not negligent, the court entered a judgment of no cause of action and dismissed the suit against defendant.
Injuries – Plaintiff suffered multiple serious injuries requiring extensive hospitalization. He claimed permanent impairment and also claimed that he was not able to return to his former line of work.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff(s) – William J. Hansen of Christensen & Jensen and John E. Hansen of Scalley & Reading
Attorney(s) - Defense – Mark L. Poulsen and Bret W. Reich of Nelson, Snuffer, Dahle & Poulsen; then John R. Lund and Kara L. Petit of Snow, Christensen & Martineau
Expert Witness(es) - Plaintiff(s) – Paul A. Randle, PhD–economist; Helen M. Woodard, MA–vocational rehabilitationist; Paul Gogulski, PE–construction expert
Expert Witness(es) - Defense – Jayne E. Clark, MD; E. Paul France, PhD, of MRA Forensic–biomechanical expert; Kelly R. Johnson, MBA, CPA, of Norman, Townsend & Johnson–economist; Sharon Weinberg, MS, CPC, of Denver, Colorado–vocational rehabilitationist
Damages – Plaintiff claimed unspecified extensive past and future medical expenses and lost wages.
Facts/Contentions – Plaintiff worked for Sharpe Air, a heating and air conditioning subcontractor on a construction project at the Merrill Engineering Building on the University of Utah campus. Plaintiff claimed Sharpe was hired to install a new system in the building, and defendant Powell, another subcontractor, was hired to do the demolition of the previous system so that Sharpe could install the new one.
Plaintiff claimed defendant Powell, running behind schedule, asked plaintiff to help with the demolition work. Plaintiff stated that he was on a ladder cutting down old ductwork when the ductwork came away from its fastenings and knocked plaintiff off his ladder, injuring him severely. Plaintiff claimed defendant Powell’s employees had cut some of the metal straps (plumber’s tape) holding the ductwork in place but did not inform plaintiff that they had done so before plaintiff got up on the ladder to cut it loose. Plaintiff said the ductwork broke loose after he cut one metal strap. Plaintiff claimed defendant Powell failed in its duty to provide a safe workplace for plaintiff by leaving the ductwork in a dangerous condition, and compounded its initial negligence by failing to warn plaintiff that the ductwork was dangerous.
Defendant Powell claimed it did not ask plaintiff to help with any work for defendant. Defendant further claimed plaintiff took it on himself to cut the ductwork loose while he and a co-worker were waiting for a drill to recharge.
Defendant also claimed that its contract with the general contractor on the job did not encompass the removal of the old HVAC ductwork, but that plaintiff’s employer Sharpe contracted with the general to remove the old HVAC system and install the new one. Defendant claimed Sharpe then subcontracted with defendant Powell to remove and dispose of the old HVAC ductwork. Defendant claimed that under the terms of Sharpe’s contract with defendant, Sharpe was to disconnect and cap the existing ducts.
Defendant claimed plaintiff did not present any evidence which proved that any of defendant’s workers cut the straps, or even that any of the straps were cut at all, before plaintiff started cutting straps on the ductwork.

PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM
Case Type – AA; Automobile accident
Case Name – Kay Durfee vs. Joyce Benedict
Case Number – 040917561
Court/Judge – 3rd District/Frederick
Verdict/Settlement – Settlement, 05/05
Amount – This case settled for an undisclosed amount.
Injuries – Plaintiff suffered unspecified injuries which were treated chiropractically.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff(s) – Ronald E. Dalby of Larson, Turner, Dalby & Ethington
Attorney(s) - Defense – Joseph E. Joyce and James D. Franckowiak of Strong & Hanni
Damages – Plaintiff claimed unspecified past and future medical expenses and lost wages, along with unspecified future loss of earning capacity.
Facts/Contentions – Plaintiff claimed defendant rear-ended plaintiff’s vehicle, which had stopped for a traffic light at the intersection of 3800 South and 2700 West in West Valley City. Plaintiff claimed the impact pushed plaintiff’s vehicle into the one ahead of it, which in turn struck the vehicle at the head of the line.
Defendant denied liability, claiming plaintiff failed to meet the $3,000 threshold for special damages required by Utah law before an injured plaintiff may sue.

PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM
Case Type – AA; Automobile accident
Case Name – Brooke Jenkins vs. Mathew D. Fullmer
Case Number – 030907036
Court/Judge – 3rd District/Nehring; then Quinn
Verdict/Settlement – Dismissal, 05/05
Amount – The court dismissed this case without prejudice for plaintiff’s failure to serve defendant with notice of the action within 120 days of the filing of the complaint.
Injuries – Plaintiff suffered a fractured wrist and other unspecified injuries. Plaintiff claimed permanent impairment.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff(s) – D. Clayton Fairbourn and Douglas T. Hall
Attorney(s) - Defense – None listed Damages – Plaintiff claimed combined past special damages of $7,500 and sought $40,000 in general damages.
Facts/Contentions – Plaintiff was westbound on 10400 South. Plaintiff claimed defendant, who was eastbound on 10400 South, negligently caused his vehicle to collide with plaintiff’s vehicle in the 1700 West intersection.

PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM
Case Type – AA; Automobile accident
Case Name – Brandy Glenn vs. Jean Packard
Case Number – 030908548
Court/Judge – 3rd District/Fratto
Verdict/Settlement – Dismissal, 05/05
Amount – The court dismissed this case without prejudice after the parties failed to respond to an order to show cause why the claim should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute.
Injuries – Plaintiff suffered unspecified injuries.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff(s) – Ronald E. Dalby of Larson, Turner, Fairbanks & Dalby; then of Larson, Turner, Dalby & Ethington
Attorney(s) - Defense – None listed
Damages – Plaintiff claimed unspecified past and future medical expenses and lost wages, along with unspecified future loss of earning capacity.
Facts/Contentions – Plaintiff was northbound on 2700 West. Plaintiff claimed defendant, who was southbound on 2700 West, made an improper left turn in front of plaintiff in attempt to go east on 4100 South and struck plaintiff’s vehicle.
Plaintiff filed a motion asking the court to allow plaintiff to accomplish service of process by alternate means. At a hearing on the motion, plaintiff’s attorney claimed plaintiff’s process server had discovered defendant had moved to a rest home, but was unable to obtain the name or address of the facility. After the hearing, the court denied the motion without prejudice on grounds that plaintiff had not made sufficient efforts to serve defendant with notice of the action by the standard means.

PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM
Case Type – AA; Automobile accident
Case Name – Bear River Mutual Insurance Company vs. Randy Fox; Kenneth E. Fox; and Does 1 through 4
Case Number – 030917188
Court/Judge – 3rd District/Henriod
Verdict/Settlement – Verdict, 04/05
Amount – The court entered judgment against defendants in the amount of $1,444.68, which included $309.68 in accrued pre-judgment interest and $100 in costs.
Injuries – Plaintiff’s insured and the insured’s passenger suffered unspecified injuries.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff(s) – Daniel O. Duffin and Thomas A. Duffin of Duffin & Associates
Attorney(s) - Defense – None listed
Damages – Plaintiff paid its insured $1,035 in PIP benefits for medical expenses. Plaintiff retained and asserted full rights of subrogation.
Facts/Contentions – Plaintiff claimed minor defendant Randy Fox, driving a vehicle owned by defendant Kenneth Fox, rear-ended a vehicle driven by plaintiff’s insured. Plaintiff’s insured’s vehicle had stopped for traffic at approximately 3920 West on 4100 South. Both vehicles were eastbound. The vehicle driven by plaintiff’s insured was pushed into the vehicle ahead of it by the collision. Plaintiff named defendant Kenneth Fox as the parent who signed the application for minor defendant Randy Fox’s driver’s license; plaintiff claimed defendant Kenneth Fox was liable under Utah law for any damages caused by minor defendant Randy Fox. Plaintiff named the Doe defendants as others who permitted minor defendant Randy Fox to drive the vehicle which was involved in the accident.

PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM
Case Type – AA, TA, UM; Automobile/pick-up truck accident, uninsured motorist
Case Name – Shelby Insurance Company vs. Russell O. Pendelton; and Sadie G. Zampedri
Case Number – 050901650
Court/Judge – 3rd District/Dever
Verdict/Settlement – Verdict, 04/05
Amount – The court entered judgment against defendant Zampedri in the amount of $8,263.85, which included all PIP benefits paid by plaintiff to its insureds for medical expenses, the uninsured motorist benefits plaintiff paid to its insureds, and the benefits plaintiff paid to its insureds for repairs to their vehicle, as well as $132.02 in accrued pre-judgment interest and $133.50 in costs. The court entered judgment against defendant Pendelton in the amount of $3,329.02, which included all PIP benefits paid by plaintiff to its insureds for medical expenses, $132.02 in accrued pre-judgment interest and $107 in costs.
Injuries – Plaintiff’s insured driver suffered unspecified injuries.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff(s) – Daniel O. Duffin and Thomas A. Duffin of Duffin & Associates
Attorney(s) - Defense – None listed
Damages – Plaintiff paid its insureds $3,000 in PIP benefits to cover medical expenses, $4,250 in uninsured motorist benefits, and $748.33 for repairs to plaintiff’s insureds’ vehicle. Plaintiff retained and asserted full rights of subrogation.
Facts/Contentions – Plaintiff claimed defendant Zampedri, driving an uninsured vehicle owned by defendant Pendelton, rear-ended a vehicle driven by one of plaintiff’s two insureds. Plaintiff’s insureds’ vehicle had stopped for traffic on the southbound off-ramp of I-15 at 106th South.

PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM
Case Type – AA; Automobile accident
Case Name – Scott North vs. Albert Jereb
Case Number – 030913629
Court/Judge – 3rd District/Fratto
Verdict/Settlement – Dismissal, 05/05
Amount – The court dismissed this case without prejudice after the parties failed to respond to an order to show cause why the claim should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute.
Injuries – Plaintiff suffered unspecified injuries.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff(s) – Ronald E. Dalby of Larson, Turner, Fairbanks & Dalby; then of Larson, Turner, Dalby & Ethington
Attorney(s) - Defense – Lloyd R. Jones of Petersen & Hansen; then of Petersen & Associates
Damages – Plaintiff claimed unspecified past and future medical expenses and lost wages, along with unspecified future loss of earning capacity.
Facts/Contentions – Plaintiff was westbound on 3900 South. Plaintiff claimed defendant, who was eastbound on 3900 South, made an improper left turn in front of plaintiff in an attempt to go north on 1300 West and struck plaintiff’s vehicle.
Defendant admitted that the accident occurred, but claimed it was caused by plaintiff’s own negligence, conditions beyond defendant’s control, or the negligence of individuals beyond defendant’s control. Defendant also suggested that plaintiff’s injuries might have been pre-existing.
The parties stipulated to a 60-day extension of the discovery deadline.

PERSONAL INJURY
Case Type – AA, WA; Work-related automobile accident
Case Name – Amanda Nolan vs. Michael A. Collinger; and Sahara, Incorporated
Case Number – 050903491
Court/Judge – 3rd District/Lubeck
Verdict/Settlement – Settlement, 06/05
Amount – This case settled for an undisclosed amount.
Injuries – Plaintiff suffered unspecified injuries.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff(s) – Mel S. Martin and Edward T. Wells
Attorney(s) - Defense – Joseph E. Minnock of Morgan, Minnock, Rice & James
Damages – Plaintiff claimed over $20,000 in combined special and general damages.
Facts/Contentions – Plaintiff claimed defendant Collinger, acting in the course and scope of his employment with defendant Sahara, negligently collided with plaintiff’s vehicle at approximately 278 South and 500 West in Bountiful. Plaintiff named defendant Sahara under the doctrine of respondeat superior, which holds that an employer is liable for damages caused by its employee if the employee was in the course and scope of his or her employment with that employer at the time when the employee caused the damages.
Defendants admitted that the accident occurred, but claimed it was caused by plaintiff’s own negligence.

PERSONAL INJURY
Case Type – AA, TA, AR; Drug-related automobile/truck accident
Case Name – Deborah Bush vs. Chris Kelly
Case Number – 020903325
Court/Judge – 3rd District/Hilder
Verdict/Settlement – Settlement, 06/05
Amount – This case settled for an undisclosed amount.
Injuries – Plaintiff suffered back and abdominal injuries. One of the twins she was carrying at the time of the accident was born dead.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff(s) – Roger H. Hoole of Hoole & King
Attorney(s) - Defense – Joseph J. Joyce and Kristin A. Van Orman of Strong & Hanni
Damages – Plaintiff claimed $4,300.87 in past medical expenses and sought $40,000 in general damages, as well as punitive damages to be determined by the court for what plaintiff described as defendant’s willful and reckless behavior. Defendant disputed the claim for punitive damages on grounds that the case was not an “exceptional” one.
Facts/Contentions – Plaintiff claimed defendant, who was eastbound on 3300 South, ran a red light and T-boned plaintiff’s vehicle, which was southbound on West Temple and was proceeding through the 3300 South intersection with the green light. Plaintiff was 19 weeks pregnant at the time of the accident, and was carrying live twins. Plaintiff stated that she had only become pregnant with great difficulty, since she underwent surgery paid for by the Miracle Fund followed by in vitro fertilization.. Plaintiff claimed that a scan taken immediately after the accident revealed two live babies, but that after she experienced cramping following the accident and was placed on complete bed rest by her doctor, another scan taken nine days later revealed only one live baby. When plaintiff eventually went into labor and delivered, one of the twins was born dead; plaintiff claimed the fetal death was caused by the stresses of the accident.
Plaintiff claimed defendant told a Salt Lake firefighter at the scene of the accident that he was under the influence of GHB, which he used recreationally in small amounts. Plaintiff claimed that immediately after the accident defendant tried to switch places with his passenger and claim the passenger was in fact driving in order to avoid a DUI charge. Defendant denied this claim, but eventually pled guilty to a charge of obstruction of justice in connection with his attempt to switch places with his passenger in exchange for a dismissal of the DUI charge filed against him in connection with his admission to the firefighter that he had taken GHB. Defendant was sentenced to six months in jail and ordered to pay a $2040 fine.
Defendant admitted running the red light and causing the accident, but denied liability for the death of the fetus and moved for partial dismissal of this case, contending that under Utah law the death of a fetus does not qualify as grounds for a wrongful death claim. Plaintiff claimed Utah law provides for recovery in a wrongful death claim involving the death of a fetus when the unborn child experienced pain and suffering before dying, as plaintiff claimed occurred in this instance. Defendant contended that a child not born alive has never had the status of a person and is thus unable to bring or maintain a legal action.
Plaintiff sought and was granted leave to serve defendant with notice of the action by alternate means after she was unable to locate defendant.

PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM
Case Type – AA, PA; automobile/pedestrian accident
Case Name – Imelda Sundquist vs. Robert L. Egbert
Case Number – 050911467
Court/Judge – 3rd District/Frederick
Verdict/Settlement – Settlement, 07/05
Amount – This case settled for an undisclosed amount.
Injuries – Plaintiff suffered multiple serious injuries and claimed permanent impairment.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff(s) – Michael A. Katz of Siegfried & Jensen
Attorney(s) - Defense – None listed
Damages – Plaintiff claimed unspecified past medical expenses, wage loss and loss of services, as well as unspecified future medical expenses.
Facts/Contentions – Plaintiff was crossing State Street in a crosswalk at 5460 South. Plaintiff claimed defendant, who was in the left-turn lane of westbound 5460 South, made a left turn without keeping a proper lookout when the light turned green for him and struck plaintiff, who had not yet reached the other side of the street.

PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM
Case Type – AA, TA, WA, UM; Work-related automobile/truck accident, uninsured employer claim
Case Name – Bear River Mutual Insurance Company vs. J & K Service Express; and Shane D. Wilson
Case Number – 050909174
Court/Judge – 3rd District/Iwasaki
Verdict/Settlement – Verdict, 07/05
Amount – The court entered judgment against defendant Wilson for $1,098.62 in property damages, $1,620.76 in PIP benefits, accrued pre-judgment interest to be determined and $134 in costs.
Injuries – Plaintiff’s insured suffered unspecified injuries.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff(s) – Daniel O. Duffin of Duffin & Associates
Attorney(s) - Defense – The company president of defendant J & K replied on behalf of the defendant company.
Damages – Plaintiff paid its insured $1.098.62 in property damages and $1,629.76 in no-fault (PIP) damages for medical expenses.
Facts/Contentions – Plaintiff claimed defendant Wilson, who was in the course and scope of his employment with defendant J & K and was driving a Freightliner semi owned and operated by defendant J & K, attempted to make an improper lane change and sideswiped a vehicle driven by plaintiff’s insured. Plaintiff also claimed the truck was not insured at the time of the collision. Plaintiff named defendant J & K under the doctrine of respondeat superior, which holds that an employer is responsible for damages caused by the negligence of its employee if the employee was in the course and scope of his/her employment with that employer at the time when the employee caused the damages.
The president of defendant J & K responded on behalf of the company, contending that the company truck was insured at the time of the accident. However, the company president claimed, his partner paid plaintiff’s insured $600 pursuant to a private settlement agreement to avoid going through the insurance company. The company president contended that since plaintiff’s insured accepted the settlement payment, the company had no further liability. The company president also contended that the accident was not caused by the negligence of defendant Wilson, who was not cited at the scene. Rather, the company president claimed, plaintiff’s insured tried to pass the truck on the right to get ahead of him and struck the truck when the right lane ended.

PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM
Case Type – AA; Automobile accident
Case Name – Camille Fankhauser vs. Carrie Ann Taylor; and Ginger A. Taylor
Case Number – 050908657
Court/Judge – 3rd District/Hanson
Verdict/Settlement – Settlement, 07/05
Amount – This case settled for an undisclosed amount.
Injuries – Plaintiff suffered a severe cervical strain with radiculopathy and back injuries which left her with mental restlessness, irritability and inability to sleep.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff(s) – E. H. Fankhauser
Attorney(s) - Defense – None listed
Damages – Plaintiff claimed $4,000 in past medical expenses and $1,000 in future medical expenses. Plaintiff sought $25,000 in general damages (pain and suffering).
Facts/Contentions – Plaintiff was northbound on Highland Drive at Lakewood Drive (5420 South). Plaintiff claimed minor defendant Carrie Ann Taylor, who was aged 17 and was driving a vehicle owned by her mother, rear-ended plaintiff’s vehicle after it slowed for oncoming traffic ahead while waiting to make a left turn onto westbound Lakewood Drive. Plaintiff named defendant Ginger Taylor as mother of minor defendant Carrie Ann Taylor and owner of the vehicle involved in the collision and as the person who signed minor defendant Carrie Ann Taylor’s driver’s license application.

PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM
Case Type – AA; Automobile accident
Case Name – Patricia Biggs vs. Shantell M. Knight
Case Number – 050908466
Court/Judge – 3rd District/Dever
Verdict/Settlement – Settlement, 07/05
Amount – This case settled for an undisclosed amount.
Injuries – Plaintiff suffered unspecified injuries.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff(s) – Joseph W. Steele and David C. Biggs of Steele, Ruffinengo & Biggs, of counsel to Siegfried & Jensen
Attorney(s) - Defense – Lloyd R. Jones of Petersen & Associates
Damages – Plaintiff claimed unspecified past and future medical expenses.
Facts/Contentions – Plaintiff claimed defendant rear-ended plaintiff’s vehicle, which was waiting to make a right turn from northbound Monarch Meadows Way onto eastbound 13400 South. Plaintiff claimed she pulled forward as several of the cars ahead of her turned the corner, but then had to stop again for oncoming traffic on 13400 South, and that was when defendant rear-ended her vehicle.
Defendant denied liability, claiming the accident was caused by plaintiff’s own negligence or conditions or individuals beyond defendant’s control. Defendant also suggested that plaintiff’s injuries might have been pre-existing.

PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM
Case Type – AA, UM; Automobile accident, uninsured motorist claim
Case Name – Vesta Fire Insurance Company vs. William Robert Lemieux
Case Number – 050908350
Court/Judge – 3rd District/Dever
Verdict/Settlement – Verdict, 07/05
Amount – The court entered judgment against defendant in the amount of $11,566.99, which included $3,000 in PIP benefits, $5,000 in uninsured motorist benefits, $1,820.90 in accrued pre-judgment interest and $150.90 in costs.
Injuries – Plaintiff’s insured suffered unspecified injuries.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff(s) – Daniel O. Duffin of Duffin & Associates
Attorney(s) - Defense – None listed
Damages – Plaintiff paid its insured $3,000 in no-fault (PIP) damages for medical expenses and $5,000 in uninsured motorist benefits.
Facts/Contentions – Plaintiff claimed defendant’s uninsured pick-up truck negligently collided with a vehicle driven by plaintiff’s insured in Utah County.

PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM
Case Type – AA; Automobile accident
Case Name – Shelle Marchant vs. Iseleli Fiefia; and Charles Fiefia
Case Number – 050908255
Court/Judge – 3rd District/Hilder
Verdict/Settlement – Settlement, 7/05
Amount – This case settled for an undisclosed amount.
Injuries – Plaintiff suffered unspecified injuries.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff(s) – John F. Fay and James L. Mouritsen of Gregory, Barton & Swapp
Attorney(s) - Defense – None listed
Damages – Plaintiff claimed unspecified past medical expenses.
Facts/Contentions – Plaintiff claimed minor defendant Iseli Fiefia, driving a vehicle owned by his parent, defendant Charles Fiefia, rear-ended plaintiff’s vehicle, which had stopped for a red light on southbound 3200 West in West Valley City. Plaintiff claimed the minor defendant failed to stop after he dropped something he was holding and reached down to pick it up.

PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM
Case Type – AA; Automobile accident
Case Name – Jose Antonio Garcia vs. Susan Gall
Case Number – 050904348
Court/Judge – 3rd District/Lewis
Verdict/Settlement – Dismissal, 07/05
Amount – The court dismissed this case without prejudice for plaintiff’s failure to serve defendant with notice of the claim within 120 days of the filing of the complaint.
Injuries – Plaintiff suffered unspecified injuries and claimed permanent impairment.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff(s) – Tad D. Draper of Braunberger, Boud & Draper
Attorney(s) - Defense – None listed
Damages – Plaintiff claimed unspecified past and future medical expenses and lost wages, as well as unspecified future loss of earning capacity.
Facts/Contentions – Plaintiff was southbound on 700 East and had stopped for a red light. When the light turned green for him, plaintiff claimed, he started through the intersection. Plaintiff claimed defendant ran the red light in the other direction and struck the front side of plaintiff’s vehicle.
Plaintiff offered to arbitrate this claim before the American Arbitration Association.

PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM
Case Type – SF, IB, OC; Slip/fall injury claim, suit for insurance benefits (bad faith), ongoing case
Case Name – Duane Devore vs. Spencer Masterson; and Farmers Home Mutual Insurance Company
Case Number – 050906655
Court/Judge – 3rd District/Lewis
Verdict/Settlement – Voluntary dismissal, 7/05
Amount – Plaintiff voluntarily dismissed his claim against defendant Farmers, but not his claim against defendant Masterson.
Injuries – Plaintiff suffered unspecified injuries and claimed permanent impairment.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff(s) – Brent Gordon of Driggs, Bills & Day (withdrew after plaintiff voluntarily dismissed his claim against Farmers)
Attorney(s) - Defense – For defendant Farmers: Carolyn Stevens Jensen of Williams & Hunt
Damages –Plaintiff claimed unspecified past medical expenses and lost wages.
Facts/Contentions – Plaintiff rented a basement apartment on property owned by defendant Masterson. Plaintiff claimed it was not the tenants’ responsibility to remove snow and ice from the steps and walkways on the property; plaintiff claimed the snow removal was the responsibility of defendant Masterson. Plaintiff claimed that because defendant Masterson failed to remove the snow from the steps leading down to plaintiff’s apartment, the snow turned to ice, and plaintiff slipped and fell on it as he was going down the steps to his apartment.
Plaintiff named defendant Farmers as plaintiff’s own insurance carrier. Plaintiff claimed defendant Farmers failed to pay plaintiff the third-party liability benefits plaintiff was owed under the terms of his policy with defendant Farmers after plaintiff filed a claim related to the fall he suffered on the steps of his apartment.

PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM
Case Type – MS; Miscellaneous (elevator accident)
Case Name – Jose Cordoba; Ruth Cimmers; and Billie Worthen vs. Kone, Incorporated and Does 1 through 5
Case Number – 050900035
Court/Judge – 3rd District/Lewis
Verdict/Settlement – Dismissal, 07/05
Amount – The court dismissed this case without prejudice for plaintiff’s failure to serve defendant with notice of the claim within 120 days of the filing of the complaint.
Injuries – Plaintiffs each suffered unspecified injuries.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff(s) – Michael E. Day of Day, Shell & Liljenquist
Attorney(s) - Defense – None listed
Damages – Plaintiffs all claimed unspecified past and future medical expenses and lost wages, as well as unspecified future loss of earning capacity.
Facts/Contentions – Plaintiffs were passengers in an elevator at Salt Lake International Airport. Plaintiffs claimed the elevator was maintained by the Doe defendants, who were employees in the course and scope of their employment with defendant Kone. Plaintiff claimed the elevator was incorrectly and negligently maintained by the Doe defendants, with the result that it suddenly fell several feet to the ground floor without warning, injuring plaintiffs. Plaintiffs named defendant Kone under the doctrine of respondeat superior, which holds that an employer is responsible for damages caused by the negligence of its employee if the employee was in the course and scope of his/her employment with that employer at the time when the employee caused the damages.

PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM
Case Type – AA, TA; Automobile/pick-up truck accident
Case Name – Gavin R. McGregor vs. Andrew J. Calkins
Case Number – 040916692
Court/Judge – 3rd District/Dever
Verdict/Settlement – Settlement, 07/05
Amount – This case settled for an undisclosed amount.
Injuries – Plaintiff suffered unspecified injuries.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff(s) – John F. Gray of Liapis & Gray; then of Gray & Gray
Attorney(s) - Defense – Jeffrey C. Miner of Morgan, Minnock, Rice & James
Damages – Plaintiff claimed unspecified past and future medical expenses and lost wages, as well as unspecified future loss of earning capacity.
Facts/Contentions – Plaintiff was northbound on E Street in the Avenues District of Salt Lake City. Plaintiff claimed defendant, who was driving a pick-up truck loaded with home furnishings, ran a stop sign at 5th Avenue and struck plaintiff’s vehicle.
Defendant admitted that the accident occurred, but denied liability and claimed plaintiff’s injuries were caused by plaintiff’s own negligence or that of third parties over whom defendant had no control. Defendant also suggested that plaintiff’s injuries might have been pre-existing.

PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM
Case Type -- AA; Automobile accident
Case Name -- Raphael Rawlins vs. David A. Fagnant
Case Number -- 030924836
Court/Judge -- 3rd District/Noel; then Himonas
Settlement/Verdict -- Stipulation for dismissal, 08/05
Amount -- The parties agreed to submit this matter for binding arbitration.
Injuries -- Plaintiff suffered unspecified injuries and claimed permanent impairment.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff -- John F. Fay and James L. Mouritsen of Gregory, Barton & Swapp
Attorney(s) - Defense -- J. Michael Hansen of Nelson, Chipman, Quigley & Hansen; then John M. Chipman and Bruce Burt of Nelson, Chipman, Quigley & Payne
Expert Witness(es) - Plaintiff -- Plaintiff designated David N. Ingebretsen of Collision Forensics & Engineering, Incorporated--accident reconstructionist
Damages -- Plaintiff claimed past medical expenses of over $20,000, as well as unspecified past property damages and future medical expenses. Plaintiff sought $20,000 in general damages (pain and suffering).
Facts/Contentions -- Plaintiff was eastbound on I-80 in Salt Lake County. At milepost 140, plaintiff claimed, his vehicle broke down suddenly and came to a stop, leaving him stranded in his lane of traffic. Plaintiff claimed defendant, who was traveling behind plaintiff’s vehicle, did not see plaintiff come to a stop and rear-ended plaintiff’s vehicle at highway speed.
Defendant admitted striking plaintiff's vehical at highway speed, but denied liability, claiming plaintiff’s injuries were caused by his own negligence. Defendant also claimed plaintiff’s injuries might have been pre-existing.

PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM
Case Type -- AA, TA; Automobile/pick-up truck accident
Case Name -- Aleisha A. Watkins vs. Kelly C. Graves; Shine Collision Repair; and Does 1 through 10
Case Number -- 030923813
Court/Judge -- 3rd District/Hilder
Settlement/Verdict -- Judgment on jury verdict, 08/05
Amount -- The jury found defendant Graves was negligent and his negligence was a proximate cause of plaintiff’s injuries. The jury awarded plaintiff $3,805.50 in special damages and $30,000 in general damages. When it issued judgment on the verdict, the court added $1,014.72 in accrued pre-judgment interest and $767.72 in costs for a total verdict of $35,587.94. A note from the court clerk indicated that the judgment was not entered because it was not clear which defendant the verdict applied to.
Injuries -- Plaintiff suffered head, neck and back injuries which caused headaches, cognitive difficulties, neck and back spasms and emotional distress.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff -- Kenneth L. Christensen of the Law Offices of William R. Rawlings
Attorney(s) - Defense -- Warren F. Wadsworth of Petersen & Hansen; then of Petersen & Associates
Expert Witness(es) - Plaintiff -- Lance Rawlings, DC
Facts/Contentions -- Plaintiff was northbound on Little Cottonwood Canyon Road, about four miles east of Wasatch Boulevard. Plaintiff claimed defendant Graves, who was in the course and scope of his employment with defendant Shine and was driving a pick-up truck owned and operated by defendant Shine, rear-ended plaintiff’s vehicle after plaintiff stopped for another automobile accident in the road ahead. Plaintiff named defendant Shine under the doctrine of respondeat superior, which holds that an employer is liable for damages caused by its employee if the employee was in the course and scope of his or her employment with that employer at the time when the employee caused the damages. Plaintiff named the Doe defendants as unknown parties who might have been partially responsible for causing the accident.

PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM
Case Type -- SF; Fall
Case Name -- Lori Loftus vs. Paul Engh and Connie Engh dba Rosewood Gardens; and PC Properties
Case Number -- 030906708
Court/Judge -- 3rd District/Hilder
Settlement/Verdict -- Dismissal, 08/05
Amount -- The court dismissed this case after plaintiff failed to submit a certificate of readiness for trial by the court’s deadline (which fell 21 days after an earlier 90-day deadline had expired). Offer of settlement by plaintiff (rejected by defendant): $8,000.
Injuries -- Plaintiff suffered a laceration on her nose which required 11 stitches and left her with a scar running down the bridge of her nose. Plaintiff also suffered two broken front teeth. The teeth were broken below the gum-line, and plaintiff’s dentist extracted them and replaced them with a four-tooth bridge. Plaintiff also claimed the fall permanently damages her eyeglasses and sunglasses.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff -- Barry N. Johnson and David M. Kono of Bennett Tueller Johnson & Deere
Attorney(s) - Defense -- E. H. Fankhauser
Expert Witness(es) - Plaintiff -- Plaintiff designated Randall Wallace of The Rockridge Group, Incorporated--licensed commercial contractor and construction expert.
Damages -- Plaintiff claimed unspecified past medical expenses and property damages. She sought total combined general and special damages of $25,000.
Facts/Contentions -- Plaintiff was visiting the Engh defendants’ property to purchase potted flowers. She had been looking at plants on a raised display level. She claimed that when she tried to descend the railroad-tie steps leading down from the display level to toe store area, she tripped and fell, landing on her face on the concrete below. Plaintiff claimed the steps violated applicable building codes because they were too shallow and had no handrail, and potted plants had been grouped at the base of the steps. Following the accident, plaintiff was taken to an Instacare facility by her husband. Plaintiff named defendant PC Properties as the property manager of the site where the accident occurred.
Defendants admitted that plaintiff fell, but denied liability, claiming that plaintiff’s injuries were caused by her own negligence in not watching where she was stepping. Defendants claimed that the property was governed by the Utah State Building Code, not the International Building Code as plaintiff claimed. However, even if the IBC had governed the property, defendants contended, the stairs complied with IBC code.
In response, plaintiff argued that under the governing code, stairs are required to have a maximum rise of no more than seven to seven and a half inches; that handrails are required on flights of more than four stairs; and that no stair may rise more than three-eights of an inch higher than any other stair in the same flight. Plaintiff argued that the stairs she tripped on violated all of these requirements.

PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM
Case Type -- MS; Miscellaneous (trampoline injury)
Case Name -- Denise Maw vs. Jereme Miles
Case Number -- 030900082
Court/Judge -- 3rd District/Lewis
Settlement/Verdict -- Jury verdict, 08/05
Amount -- The jury returned a verdict of no cause of action, finding that defendant was not negligent and was not the proximate cause of plaintiff’s injuries; the court dismissed the claim against defendant.
Injuries -- Plaintiff suffered right knee injuries, including a torn anterior cruciate ligament and a complex tear of the posterior horn of the lateral meniscus. The injuries required surgical repair.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff -- Robert H. Wilde and Reid C. Davis of the Law Office of Robert H. Wilde
Attorney(s) - Defense -- Kristin A. VanOrman and James D. Franckowiak of Strong & Hanni
Expert Witness(es) - Plaintiff -- Rachel Degener Buckman, head diving coach at the University of Utah--safety expert
Expert Witness(es) - Defense -- Paul France, PhD--biomechanical expert
Damages -- Plaintiff claimed unspecified past medical expenses, as well as unspecified past and future wage loss.
Facts/Contentions -- Plaintiff and defendant were neighbors. Plaintiff claimed she was visiting with defendant in defendant’s back yard, and defendant invited plaintiff to jump on defendant’s trampoline. Plaintiff said she declined at first, but then agreed after defendant persisted. Plaintiff claimed she had not been jumping very long when defendant climbed onto the trampoline and started jumping with plaintiff. Plaintiff claimed defendant “double-bounced” plaintiff, moving into the center of the trampoline and jumping very high in a rhythm out of synchronization with plaintiff’s rhythm in order to send plaintiff high into the air. Plaintiff claimed that when defendant engaged in this behavior, plaintiff lost her balance and her knee collapsed beneath her. She was taken to a nearby emergency room by ambulance. Plaintiff claimed that after the accident, she was in too much pain to work and lost her job as a result. She said that when she was able to work again after her surgery, she had to take a job that paid 50 cents less per hour than her former job and did not pay any bonuses. Plaintiff claimed she earned an average of $250 per month in bonuses at her previous job.
Defendant denied liability, claiming that when the incident occurred, defendant and plaintiff were jumping no more than six to 12 inches off the surface of the trampoline. Defendant claimed plaintiff’s injuries were caused by her own negligence or that of third parties over whom defendant had no control.

PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM
Case Type –AA; Automobile accident
Case Name – Lucila O’sses-Shamy vs. Fritz Ashauer
Case Number – 030917572
Court/Judge – 3rd District/Himonas
Verdict/Settlement – Dismissal, 08/05
Amount – The court dismissed this case for plaintiff’s failure to prosecute.
Injuries – Plaintiff suffered low back and neck injuries.
Attorney(s) – Plaintiff – Phillip B. Shell of Day, shell & Liljenquist
Attorney(s) - Defense – None listed
Damages – Plaintiff claimed past medical expenses of over $3,000, as well as unspecified future medical expenses, past wage loss and future loss of earning capacity.
Facts/Contentions – Plaintiff claimed defendant’s vehicle struck plaintiff’s vehicle as plaintiff was backing out of her assigned parking stall in the apartment complex where she lives. Plaintiff said that before backing out of the stall, she looked carefully both ways and saw defendant’s vehicle pointed away from her about five car-lengths to her left. As she began to back out of the stall, plaintiff claimed, defendant suddenly started to back up very rapidly and struck plaintiff’s car on the driver’s-side front door, pushing plaintiff’s vehicle sideways.

PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM
Case Type –AA; Automobile accident
Case Name – Joe Shaffer vs. Jeffrey Woodard
Case Number – 030914272
Court/Judge – 3rd District/Noel
Verdict/Settlement – Settlement, 08/05
Amount – This case settled for an undisclosed amount.
Injuries – Plaintiff suffered unspecified injuries.
Attorney(s) – Plaintiff – Brock Van de Kamp, then Randal G. Payne, of Siegfried & Jensen
Attorney(s) - Defense – William A. Stegall of Stegall & Associates
Expert Witness(es) - Plaintiff – Plaintiff named his medical treatment providers and Tim Grange, MD–independent medical examination (IME) physician.
Damages – Plaintiff claimed unspecified past and future medical expenses, past wage loss and future loss of earning capacity.
Facts/Contentions – Plaintiff, who was southbound on I-15 at approximately 10500 South, claimed defendant rear-ended his vehicle after plaintiff stopped for traffic ahead.
Defendant admitted that the accident occurred, but denied negligence and liability, claiming plaintiff’s injuries were caused by the negligence of third parties over whom defendant had no control.

PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM
Case Type –AA; Automobile accident
Case Name – Van Lloyd Hall vs. Shawn Lowe
Case Number – 039022500
Court/Judge – 3rd District/Himonas
Verdict/Settlement – Dismissal, 08/05
Amount – The court dismissed this case for plaintiff’s failure to prosecute.
Injuries – Plaintiff suffered neck and lower back injuries with accompanying headaches, neck pain, left arm numbness, pain and weakness in his left hand, and loss of sleep. Plaintiff claimed permanent impairment.
Attorney(s) – Plaintiff – Alan R. Stewart
Attorney(s) - Defense – None listed
Damages – Plaintiff claimed over $8,000 in past medical expenses, as well as unspecified future medical expenses. Plaintiff sought $75,000 in general damages (pain and suffering).
Facts/Contentions – Plaintiff, who was westbound on 7800 South at 1800 West, claimed defendant rear-ended his vehicle after plaintiff stopped for heavy rush-hour traffic ahead of him.

PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM
Case Type –SF, CX; Trip injury claim, cross-claim
Case Name – Michaela Eldridge vs. Jones Lang LaSalle Americas, Limited; M & S Income and Growth Fund, LLP; and Does 1 through 5
Case Number – 020908047
Court/Judge – 3rd District/Dever
Verdict/Settlement – Settlements, 07/05, 08/05
Amount – Plaintiff settled with each named defendant separately for an undisclosed amount.
Injuries – Plaintiff suffered a twisted ankle and a torn Achilles tendon. She also suffered shoulder injuries which she claimed were caused by the fact that she had to use crutches while recovering from her ankle injury. Attorney(s) – Plaintiff – Kevin K. Robson and Traci A. Timmerman of Bertch Robson
Attorney(s) - Defense – For Jones Lang: Michael P. Zaccheo and Brian C. Webber of Richards, Brandt, Miller & Nelson; for M&S: Robert C. Morton, Tim Dalton Dunn and Kathleen M. Liuzzi of Dunn & Dunn
Damages – Plaintiff claimed over $25,000 in past medical expenses.
Facts/Contentions – Plaintiff claimed defendants Jones Lang and M&S own and/or manage the building where plaintiff works. Plaintiff stated that she was at work in the building, and she and a co-worker went down the hall, which had recently been re-carpeted, to get a drink of water. Plaintiff claimed she tripped over a depression in the carpet and injured her ankle. Plaintiff claimed the carpet-layers (the Doe defendants) laid the carpet directly over open holes in the floor where electric outlets used to be without doing anything to fill in the holes, and one of these holes lay directly beneath the depression into which plaintiff stepped. Plaintiff claimed the named defendants were negligent in failing to correct a dangerous situation in plaintiff’s workplace and then failed to warn plaintiff of the danger. Plaintiff further claimed the Doe defendants were grossly negligent in laying the carpet directly over the open holes without filling the holes in.
Defendant Jones Lang denied negligence and liability. Defendant Jones Lang filed a cross-claim against defendant M&S, claiming plaintiff’s injuries were caused by the negligence of defendant M&S and other third parties over whom defendant Jones Lang had no control.
Defendant M&S was declared in default and a hearing on damages was scheduled, but defendant M&S moved to have the default certificate set aside. The CEO of the company submitted an affidavit in which he stated that his company oversaw the asset management of the true owner of the building where plaintiff was injured. The CEO stated that the company was incorrectly named in the original complaint and service was accepted by a temporary receptionist who was hired from an agency to fill in for the company receptionist while she was on vacation. The CEO stated that the temp failed to pass on the papers regarding the lawsuit, with the result that the next communication the company received was the notice of the declaration of default and the scheduling of the hearing on damages. The court set aside the default certificate and vacated the scheduled hearing, and the parties stipulated that defendant M&S would thenceforth be referred to by its correct name and that plaintiff and cross-claim plaintiff would not be required to file amended complaints to correct defendant M & S’s name. Defendant M&S filed an answer denying negligence and liability.

PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM
Case Type –WA, SF, OC; Work-related slip/fall, ongoing case
Case Name – Ronald D. Walker vs. Delane Barrus; Kirk Schroeder; Cameron Ashley, Incorporated dba Cameron Building Products; Jared Wallace; Cluff Enterprises, Incorporated; Does 1 through 10; and XYZ Entities 1 through 10
Case Number – 020900687
Court/Judge – 3rd District/Nehring; then Quinn
Verdict/Settlement – Verdict, 08/05
Amount – The court granted defendant Wallace’s unopposed motion for summary judgment. The case against the other defendants is ongoing.
Injuries – Plaintiff suffered a fractured right ankle, a fractured right leg, severe injuries to his right foot, a fractured left heel, two fractured vertebrae, a left shoulder injury and multiplecontusions. He claimed permanent impairment.
Attorney(s) – Plaintiff – Mark T. Flickinger and Dwight C. Flickinger of Flickinger & Sutterfield, Provo Attorney(s) - Defense – For defendant Barrus: Carolyn Stevens Jensen of Williams & Hunt; for defendant Schroeder: Brian J. Babcock and Shawn W. Potter of Babcock, Bostwick, Scott, Crawley & Price (withdrew); defendant Schroeder was later represented pro se; for defendant Cameron Ashley: Paul M. Belnap, Byron G. Martin, A. Joseph Sano of Strong & Hanni; for defendant Wallace: Thomas J. Scribner, Donald E. McCandless, Lori D. Fowlke, Paul Waldron and Richard J. Culbertson of Scribner & McCandless, Provo
Expert Witness(es) - Plaintiff – Plaintiff designated Jay P. Christofferson, PhD–occupational safety and health expert.
Expert Witness(es) - Defense – Defendant Cameron Ashley designated John L. Hymel–occupational safety and health expert
Damages – Plaintiff claimed unspecified past and future medical expenses, past wage loss and future loss of earning capacity.
Facts/Contentions – Plaintiff was working as an employee of a third-party HVAC company that was acting as a subcontractor on a house construction job in Alpine, Utah. Plaintiff claimed the residence was owned by defendant Barrus, who was serving as general contractor for the building of the house. Plaintiff claimed defendant Schroeder acted as agent or supervisor for the work on behalf of defendant Barrus. Plaintiff claimed defendants Wallace and Cluff did the framing on the roof and nailed several 2 x 4s to the roof to serve as secure footholds for people working on the roof. Plaintiff claimed the Doe defendants, the XYZ entities or their employees told plaintiff the 2 x 4s were safely anchored when plaintiff had to go onto the roof to drill holes for the HVAC ductwork. However, plaintiff claimed, the 2 x 4 above where plaintiff was standing came loose from the roof, and a bundle of shingles stacked against the 2 x 4 slid down and swept plaintiff off the roof. Plaintiff claimed that when he was lying on the ground after falling, more shingles fell off the roof and struck him where he lay, adding to his injuries. Plaintiff claimed the bundles of shingles were stacked on the roof by one of the Doe defendants in the course and scope of his employment with defendant Cameron Ashley. Plaintiff named all the defendant companies under the doctrine of respondeat superior, which holds that an employer is liable for damages caused by that employer’s employee if the employee was in the course and scope of his or her employment with that employer at the time when the employee caused the damages.
Defendant Cameron Ashley denied liability and denied acting in such a way as to cause injury to plaintiff. Defendant Cameron Ashley stated that it could not respond to allegations against a Doe who was supposed to be its employee for lack of information. Defendant Cameron Ashley contended that plaintiff’s injuries were caused by his own negligence or that of the other named defendants. Defendant Cameron Ashley further contended that plaintiff assumed the risk of his injuries when he went up onto the roof after seeing the bundles of shingles there. Defendant Cameron Ashley claimed its liability ended when it delivered the bundles of shingles to the residence safely and without complaint, and it did not owe any duty of care to plaintiff, who had produced no proper evidence of causation against defendant Cameron Ashley. Defendant Cameron Ashley claimed the bundles of shingles were delivered two weeks before plaintiff fell, and plaintiff had to move bundles of shingles to expose the section of roof where plaintiff was supposed to drill the hole for the HVAC ductwork, so that plaintiff himself might have created the instability that caused the shingles to crash down on him when he moved them. DefendantCameron Ashley claimed that plaintiff stated in his own deposition that before the accident occurred, a 2 x 4 on which another worker was standing came loose, and plaintiff became concerned about the security of the board he was standing on. Defendant Cameron Ashley claimed that in his deposition, plaintiff stated that he asked a co-worker to hand him some nails to put into the 2 x 4 plaintiff was standing on to secure it more firmly to the roof, but after plaintiff had hammered two nails into the board, a co-worker began using a Saws-All to cut a hole in the roof near where a 2 x 4 was supporting a bundle of shingles; this; defendant Cameron Ashley claimed, was the 2 x 4 that came loose. Defendant Cameron Ashley claimed plaintiff said in his deposition that nothing about the way defendant Cameron Ashley stacked the shingles struck plaintiff as improper.
Defendant Cameron Ashley moved for summary judgment releasing it from liability, but plaintiff objected, claiming defendant Cameron Ashley’s employees failed to nail the 2 x 4s securely into the roof trusses as is common practice on construction sites.
The court denied defendant Cameron Ashley’s motion for summary judgment.
Defendant Barrus denied that defendant Schroeder supervised the work on the home and denied breaching any duty of care defendant Barrus might have owed plaintiff. Defendant Barrus claimed plaintiff’s injuries were caused by the negligence of third parties over whom defendant Barrus had no control; defendant Barrus also contended that plaintiff assumed the risk of his injuries when he went up onto the roof after seeing the bundles of shingles there. Defendant Wallace admitted doing roofing work on the residence, but moved for summary judgment, claiming he did not come to work on the project until two weeks after plaintiff was injured. Defendant Schroeder filed an answer denying liability, but failed to respond to discovery demands or other case-related communications after his attorneys withdrew.
The principal shareholders of defendant Cluff claimed defendant Cluff ceased to exist in September of 2000 when the company filed Chapter 7 bankruptcy. The principal shareholders claimed defendant Cluff acted as a framing subcontractor on the job, and defendant Cluff’s employees did not nail any 2 x 4s on the roof.
Several defendants claimed that depositions indicated no one was sure exactly who nailed the 2 x 4s up on the roof.

PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM
Case Type –AA, TA; Automobile/truck accident
Case Name – Shaun Bryson vs. Samuel Fisher
Case Number – 040913836
Court/Judge – 3rd District/Quinn
Verdict/Settlement – Settlement, 08/05
Amount – This case settled for an undisclosed amount. Offer of judgment by defendant made one month before the case settled: $2,500 new money (over and above the personal injury protection benefit payment –PIP or “no-fault”money–which plaintiff received from his own insurer).
Injuries – Plaintiff suffered unspecified injuries and claimed permanent impairment.
Attorney(s) – Plaintiff – Jared R. Faerber; and Todd D. Gardner of Bateman, Goodwin & Gardner
Attorney(s) - Defense – Jonathan L. Hawkins, then Paul C. Farr, of Morgan, Minnock, Rice & James
Damages – Plaintiff claimed past medical expenses of over $3,000, as well as unspecified future medical expenses, past wage loss and future loss of earning capacity.
Facts/Contentions – Plaintiff, who was southbound on I-215, claimed defendant fell asleep at the wheel of his vehicle and rear-ended plaintiff’s truck.
Defendant admitted that the accident occurred, but denied liability, claiming plaintiff’s injuries were pre-existing.

PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM
Case Type – AA, PA; automobile/pedestrian accident
Case Name – Imelda Sundquist vs. Robert L. Egbert
Case Number – 050911467
Court/Judge – 3rd District/Frederick
Verdict/Settlement – Settlement, 07/05
Amount – This case settled for an undisclosed amount.
Injuries – Plaintiff suffered multiple serious injuries and claimed permanent impairment.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff(s) – Michael A. Katz of Siegfried & Jensen
Attorney(s) - Defense – None listed
Damages – Plaintiff claimed unspecified past medical expenses, wage loss and loss of services, as well as unspecified future medical expenses.
Facts/Contentions – Plaintiff was crossing State Street in a crosswalk at 5460 South. Plaintiff claimed defendant, who was in the left-turn lane of westbound 5460 South, made a left turn without keeping a proper lookout when the light turned green for him and struck plaintiff, who had not yet reached the other side of the street.

PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM
Case Type – AA, TA, WA, UM; Work-related automobile/truck accident, uninsured employer claim
Case Name – Bear River Mutual Insurance Company vs. J & K Service Express; and Shane D. Wilson
Case Number – 050909174
Court/Judge – 3rd District/Iwasaki
Verdict/Settlement – Verdict, 07/05
Amount – The court entered judgment against defendant Wilson for $1,098.62 in property damages, $1,620.76 in PIP benefits, accrued pre-judgment interest to be determined and $134 in costs.
Injuries – Plaintiff’s insured suffered unspecified injuries.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff(s) – Daniel O. Duffin of Duffin & Associates
Attorney(s) - Defense – The company president of defendant J & K replied on behalf of the defendant company.
Damages – Plaintiff paid its insured $1.098.62 in property damages and $1,629.76 in no-fault (PIP) damages for medical expenses.
Facts/Contentions – Plaintiff claimed defendant Wilson, who was in the course and scope of his employment with defendant J & K and was driving a Freightliner semi owned and operated by defendant J & K, attempted to make an improper lane change and sideswiped a vehicle driven by plaintiff’s insured. Plaintiff also claimed the truck was not insured at the time of the collision. Plaintiff named defendant J & K under the doctrine of respondeat superior, which holds that an employer is responsible for damages caused by the negligence of its employee if the employee was in the course and scope of his/her employment with that employer at the time when the employee caused the damages.
The president of defendant J & K responded on behalf of the company, contending that the company truck was insured at the time of the accident. However, the company president claimed, his partner paid plaintiff’s insured $600 pursuant to a private settlement agreement to avoid going through the insurance company. The company president contended that since plaintiff’s insured accepted the settlement payment, the company had no further liability. The company president also contended that the accident was not caused by the negligence of defendant Wilson, who was not cited at the scene. Rather, the company president claimed, plaintiff’s insured tried to pass the truck on the right to get ahead of him and struck the truck when the right lane ended.

PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM
Case Type – AA; Automobile accident
Case Name – Camille Fankhauser vs. Carrie Ann Taylor; and Ginger A. Taylor
Case Number – 050908657
Court/Judge – 3rd District/Hanson
Verdict/Settlement – Settlement, 07/05
Amount – This case settled for an undisclosed amount.
Injuries – Plaintiff suffered a severe cervical strain with radiculopathy and back injuries which left her with mental restlessness, irritability and inability to sleep.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff(s) – E. H. Fankhauser
Attorney(s) - Defense – None listed
Damages – Plaintiff claimed $4,000 in past medical expenses and $1,000 in future medical expenses. Plaintiff sought $25,000 in general damages (pain and suffering).
Facts/Contentions – Plaintiff was northbound on Highland Drive at Lakewood Drive (5420 South). Plaintiff claimed minor defendant Carrie Ann Taylor, who was aged 17 and was driving a vehicle owned by her mother, rear-ended plaintiff’s vehicle after it slowed for oncoming traffic ahead while waiting to make a left turn onto westbound Lakewood Drive. Plaintiff named defendant Ginger Taylor as mother of minor defendant Carrie Ann Taylor and owner of the vehicle involved in the collision and as the person who signed minor defendant Carrie Ann Taylor’s driver’s license application.

PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM
Case Type – AA; Automobile accident
Case Name – Patricia Biggs vs. Shantell M. Knight
Case Number – 050908466
Court/Judge – 3rd District/Dever
Verdict/Settlement – Settlement, 07/05
Amount – This case settled for an undisclosed amount.
Injuries – Plaintiff suffered unspecified injuries.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff(s) – Joseph W. Steele and David C. Biggs of Steele, Ruffinengo & Biggs, of counsel to Siegfried & Jensen
Attorney(s) - Defense – Lloyd R. Jones of Petersen & Associates
Damages – Plaintiff claimed unspecified past and future medical expenses.
Facts/Contentions – Plaintiff claimed defendant rear-ended plaintiff’s vehicle, which was waiting to make a right turn from northbound Monarch Meadows Way onto eastbound 13400 South. Plaintiff claimed she pulled forward as several of the cars ahead of her turned the corner, but then had to stop again for oncoming traffic on 13400 South, and that was when defendant rear-ended her vehicle.
Defendant denied liability, claiming the accident was caused by plaintiff’s own negligence or conditions or individuals beyond defendant’s control. Defendant also suggested that plaintiff’s injuries might have been pre-existing.

PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM
Case Type – AA, UM; Automobile accident, uninsured motorist claim
Case Name – Vesta Fire Insurance Company vs. William Robert Lemieux
Case Number – 050908350
Court/Judge – 3rd District/Dever
Verdict/Settlement – Verdict, 07/05
Amount – The court entered judgment against defendant in the amount of $11,566.99, which included $3,000 in PIP benefits, $5,000 in uninsured motorist benefits, $1,820.90 in accrued pre-judgment interest and $150.90 in costs.
Injuries – Plaintiff’s insured suffered unspecified injuries.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff(s) – Daniel O. Duffin of Duffin & Associates
Attorney(s) - Defense – None listed
Damages – Plaintiff paid its insured $3,000 in no-fault (PIP) damages for medical expenses and $5,000 in uninsured motorist benefits.
Facts/Contentions – Plaintiff claimed defendant’s uninsured pick-up truck negligently collided with a vehicle driven by plaintiff’s insured in Utah County.

PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM
Case Type – SF; Slip/fall
Case Name – Adeline Jouflas vs. May Department Stores dba Meier & Frank; Chavez, Incorporated; Bird Construction, Incorporated; and Does 1 through 5
Case Number – 030910250
Court/Judge – 3rd District/Medley
Verdict /Settlement – Settlement, 10/05
Amount – The parties in this case settled for an undisclosed amount.
Injuries – Plaintiff suffered torn ligaments in her left ankle which required surgical repair.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff – Nick J. Colessides
Attorney(s) - Defense – For defendants May dba Meier & Frank and Bird: Robert L. Janicki and Steven T. Densley of Strong & Hanni; for defendant Chavez: Barbara L. Maw of the Law Office of /Barbara L. Maw
Damages – Plaintiff claimed $7,000 in past medical expenses. She sought $100,000 in general damages (pain and suffering).
Facts/Contentions – Plaintiff was visiting defendant May’s Meier & Frank store in Cottonwood Mall as an invited customer during defendant May’s remodeling project. Plaintiff claimed the Doe defendants, who were contractors and subcontractors working on the project, failed to maintain the store entrance in a safe condition while laying tile on the floor and left gaps where floor-tiles had been removed, with the result that plaintiff fell and injured her ankle as she was walking into the store. Plaintiff claimed defendants failed to warn customers that the floor was not safe. She named defendant Bird as the contractor and defendant Chavez as a subcontractor, claiming they should have made sure their employees maintained the floor in a safe condition or else warned customers about the hazard.
Defendant May denied liability, claiming it warned customers about the floor. Defendant May claimed plaintiff’s injuries were caused by her own negligence or that of defendants Bird and/or Chavez.
Defendant Chavez denied liability, claiming it had nothing to do with the laying of the floor tile. Defendant Chavez claimed plaintiff’s injuries were caused by her own negligence or that of third parties over whom defendant Chavez had no control. Defendant Chavez claimed it owed no extra duty to warn plaintiff about the hazard because the condition that created the hazard was easily discoverable by plaintiff.
Defendant Bird denied liability and claimed it exercised due care in maintaining the store entrance in a safe condition during the remodeling project.

PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM
Case Type – AA, WA, CX; Work-related automobile injury, counter-claim and cross-claim
Case Name – Christopher Pons vs. Cheryl V. Gomez Cheryl V. Gomez vs. Wasatch Title Company
Case Number – 020914455
Court/Judge – 3rd District/Noel; then Himonas; the arbitration on this claim was conducted by Scott Daniels. Verdict /Settlement – Arbitration confirmation, 11/05
Amount – The court confirmed the arbitrator’s finding and entered judgment for plaintiff on the issue of liability, finding that defendant was 100 percent liable for plaintiff’s injuries. Damages have yet to be determined. The court dismissed defendant’s counter-claim/cross-claim with prejudice.
Injuries – Plaintiff suffered unspecified injuries. In the counter-claim and cross-claim, defendant Gomez claimed she suffered unspecified injuries.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff – H. Wayne Wadsworth, then Richard K. Spratley and Roger W. Griffin of Gregory, Barton & Swapp, then of Gregory Swapp; and George W. Burbidge, Mark L. Anderson and Anneliese L. Cook-Booher of Christensen & Jensen
Attorney(s) - Defense – Michael J. Walk of Victoria K. Kidman & Associates; representing defendant Gomez (cross-claim plaintiff) on counter-claim and cross-claim: J. David Nelson of Nelson, Snuffer, Dahle & Poulsen; and Stephen J. Trayner of Strong & Hanni; for cross-claim defendant Wasatch Title: Michael W. Homer, Jesse C. Trentadue, Benjamin P. Thomas, Kevin D. Swenson and Thomas B. Price of Suitter Axland
Expert Witness(es) - Plaintiff – Plaintiff designated his treating health-care providers; and Gregory S. DuVal–accident reconstructionist.
Expert Witness(es) - Defense – Defendant Gomez designated Newell G. Knight–accident reconstructionist; and Stephen P. Marble, MD–independent medical examination (IME) physician; cross-claim defendant Wasatch Title designated Mathew D. Mecham, MS, PE, of MRA Forensic Sciences–biomechanical expert.
Damages – Plaintiff claimed $5,500 in past medical expenses and sought $20,00 in general damages (pain and suffering). In the cross-claim and counter-claim, defendant Gomez claimed over $4,000 in past medical expenses, as well as unspecified future medical expenses and past and future loss of household services. Facts/Contentions – Plaintiff was driving behind defendant, signaling for a right turn, at the intersection of 300 West and 3450 South. Plaintiff claimed that defendant’s vehicle started to turn right and then swerved left in front of plaintiff’s vehicle so abruptly that plaintiff was unable to avoid a collision.
Defendant counter-claimed that plaintiff caused the accident by attempting to pass defendant unlawfully. In the cross-claim, defendant Gomez claimed that plaintiff Pons was in the course and scope of his employment with cross-claim defendant Wasatch Title when he caused the accidcent; defendant Gomez therefore named defendant Wasatch Title in the cross-claim under the doctrine of respondeat superior, which holds that an employer is liable for damages caused by that employer’s employee if the employee was in the course and scope of his or her employment with that employer at the time when the employee caused the damages.
Cross-claim defendant Wasatch Title denied liability and claimed it did not breach any duty of care to anyone. The parties agreed to arbitrate the matter, and the arbitrator found that Gomez was 100 percent responsible for causing the accident.

PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM
Case Type – AA, WA; Work-related automobile accident
Case Name – (Name of case withheld)
Case Number – Not filed
Verdict /Settlement – Settlement, 11/05
Amount – This case settled for an undisclosed amount; however, plaintiff’s attorney described it as “very satisfactory” to his client.
Injuries – Plaintiff suffered extensive back and neck injuries.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff – Gregory P. Nielsen of Smart, Schofield, Shorter & Lunceford
Attorney(s) - Defense – This case was settled with general counsel from defendant employer, a major American corporation.
Damages – Plaintiff claimed between $6,000 and $10,000 in past medical expenses and between $8,000 and $10,000 in past wage loss, as well as unspecified future loss of earning capacity. Plaintiff will not require any further medical treatment in the future for the injuries he suffered in this accident.
Facts/Contentions – Plaintiff claimed defendant individual, who was in the course and scope of his employment with defendant employer, rear-ended plaintiff’s vehicle at speed. Plaintiff named defendant employer under the doctrine of respondeat superior, which holds that an employer is liable for damages caused by that employer’s employee if the employee was in the course and scope of his or her employment with that employer at the time when the employee caused the damages.

PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM
Case Type – MS, PL, NE; Miscellaneous (chair injury), product liability, premises liability, negligence
Case Name – Alice Cairo vs. Tropitone Furniture Company, Incorporated; Marriott International, Incorporated; and Does 1 through 10
Case Number – 050909958
Court/Judge – 3rd District/Henriod
Verdict /Settlement – Settlement, 11/05
Amount – This case settled for an undisclosed amount.
Injuries – Plaintiff suffered near-amputation of the tip of her right fourth distal finger; she claimed permanent impairment.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff – Kevin Robson and York Major of Bertch Robson
Attorney(s) - Defense – For defendant Tropitone: Nathan D. Alder of Christensen & Jensen; for defendant Marriott: William R. Rawlings of the Law Office of William R. Rawlings
Damages – Plaintiff claimed $22,585.08 in past medical expenses. Plaintiff sought punitive damages for what she claimed was defendants’ willful, knowing and reckless disregard of her safety.
Facts/Contentions – Plaintiff was staying as an invited and paying guest at defendant Marriott’s Salt Lake City hotel and was sitting by the hotel pool in a lounge chair manufactured by defendant Tropitone. She claimed that when she attempted to adjust the back of the chair, the back of the chair suddenly collapsed, pinched her finger and nearly amputated the tip. Plaintiff claimed the ratchets which controlled the back of the chair were unreasonably sharp, heavy, unstable and dangerous. Plaintiff claimed defendants knew or should have known that there was a problem with the chair-back ratchets, but they continued to put the chairs out for the use of guests without taking any steps to fix the problem and safeguard the paying customers; therefore plaintiff sought punitive damages.
Defendant Marriott denied breaching any duty of care to plaintiff or its other guests. Defendant Marriott claimed plaintiff’s injuries were caused by her own negligence or that of third parties over whom defendant Marriott had no control. Defendant Marriott also disputed plaintiff’s demand for punitive damages, claiming it did not act willfully or maliciously toward plaintiff or any of its other guests. The case settled before defendant Tropitone filed an answer.

PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM
Case Type – PL, NE; Product liability, negligence claim
Case Name – Rick Barker, legal parent and guardian of minor plaintiff Jaren Barker, vs. Staples, Incorporated
Case Number – 050909673
Court/Judge – 3rd District/Frederick
Verdict /Settlement – Settlement, 11/05
Amount – This case settled for an undisclosed amount.
Injuries – Minor plaintiff suffered a forehead laceration which required sutures. Plaintiffs claimed minor plaintiff suffered permanent scarring.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff – Shawn H. Robinson of Cook, Skeen & Robinson
Attorney(s) - Defense – Phillip S. Ferguson and Heather L. Thuet of Christensen & Jensen
Damages – Plaintiffs claimed unspecified past medical expenses on behalf of the injured minor plaintiff.
Facts/Contentions – Plaintiffs claimed defendant allowed a dangerous condition to exist in its Salt Lake County store and failed to correct the danger, with the result that minor plaintiff, who was four years old, was injured while in the store.
Defendant denied breaching any duty of care to minor plaintiff or his parents. Defendant also denied liability, claiming that minor plaintiff’s injuries resulted from his own conduct or the negligence of his parents.

PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM
Case Type – AA; Automobile accident
Case Name – Joshua Carter vs. Willard Kirchmann
Case Number – 050915862
Court/Judge – 3rd District/Lewis
Verdict /Settlement – Settlement, 11/05
Amount – This case settled for an undisclosed amount.
Injuries – Plaintiff suffered unspecified injuries.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff – Randal G. Payne of Siegfried & Jensen
Attorney(s) - Defense – This case settled with an adjuster from Farmers Insurance.
Damages – Plaintiff claimed unspecified past and future medical expenses.
Facts/Contentions – Plaintiff was eastbound on 3500 South and stopped for traffic ahead at approximately 6455 West. Plaintiff claimed defendant failed to maintain a proper look-out and rear-ended plaintiff’s vehicle.

PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM
Case Type – AA; Automobile accident
Case Name – Nu Khong vs. Jeffery Taylor Turner
Case Number – 050916729
Court/Judge – 3rd District
Verdict /Settlement – Settlement, 11/05
Amount – This case settled for an undisclosed amount. Plaintiff filed notice of intent to submit the case to arbitration when she filed this claim.
Injuries – Plaintiff suffered unspecified injuries.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff – Dan Wilson, Ogden
Attorney(s) - Defense – None listed.
Damages – Plaintiff claimed $6,966 in past medical expenses.
Facts/Contentions – Plaintiff was a passenger in a vehicle which was westbound on 4500 South. Plaintiff claimed defendant, who was eastbound on 4500 South, made an improper left turn in an attempt to head north on 500 East and collided with the vehicle in which plaintiff was riding.

PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM
Case Type – AA; Automobile accident
Case Name – Felicia Opra vs. Tiffany Sleight
Case Number – 040915050
Court/Judge – 3rd District/Bohling
Verdict /Settlement – Settlement, 11/05
Amount – This case settled for an undisclosed amount.
Injuries – Plaintiff suffered injuries to her neck and right shoulder. She underwent surgery for the shoulder injury and claimed permanent impairment.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff – Robert W. Hughes
Attorney(s) - Defense – Lynn S. Davies, Christian W. Nelson and Nathan S. Morris of Richards, Brandt, Miller & Nelson
Damages – Plaintiff claimed $32,000 in past medical expenses, $10,000 in future medical expenses and $12,000 in property damages for the loss of her vehicle, which was totaled in the accident. She sought $150,000 in general damages (pain and suffering).
Facts/Contentions – Plaintiff was northbound on 900 East at the Van Winkle Expressway intersection. Defendant was westbound on Van Winkle. A third-party vehicle was stopped in the southbound left-turn lane of 900 East, waiting to turn left onto eastbound Van Winkle. The traffic lights at the intersection were not working because of a power outage.
Plaintiff claimed she stopped completely at the intersection and waited for traffic until it was her turn to cross the intersection. However, plaintiff claimed, as she was going through the intersection, defendant failed to yield, came into the intersection and struck her vehicle, knocking it into the third-party vehicle in the southbound left-turn lane of 900 East. After striking the third-party vehicle, plaintiff’s vehicle overturned, and plaintiff was unable to get out of the vehicle until emergency personnel arrived at the scene to extricate her.
When plaintiff was unable to locate defendant in order to accomplish service of process, plaintiff sought and was granted leave to accomplish service of process by publication.
Defendant admitted that the accident occurred, but denied liability, claiming plaintiff’s injuries were caused by her own negligence or that of third parties over whom defendant had no control, including the authorities who failed to ensure the proper operation of the traffic signals.

PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM
Case Type – BT, WA, SH, MS, ED; Claim for work-related battery, sexual harassment, miscellaneous tort (false imprisonment), and intentional infliction of emotional distress
Case Name – [Name of case withheld]
Case Number – 040916073
Court/Judge – 3rd District/Hanson
Verdict /Settlement – Settlement, 11/05
Amount – This case settled for an undisclosed amount 9 days after the court dismissed the claim for plaintiff’s failure to prosecute.
Injuries – Plaintiff claimed she suffered extreme emotional distress and was traumatized by her experience in defendants’ facility.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff – Regis P. Covey
Attorney(s) - Defense – For defendant owner: Donald Joseph Purser, then Andrew M. Morse and Richard A. Vazquez of Snow, Christensen & Martineau, who represented the other defendants
Damages – Plaintiff sought punitive damages for what she claimed was defendants’ willful and reckless disregard of her wellbeing.
Facts/Contentions – Plaintiff visited a local haunted house with a girlfriend. Plaintiff claimed that at a certain location in the facility known as the Psycho Circus, three of the haunted house’s
young male employees, who were in the course and scope of their employment with defendant facility and were dressed as clowns, cornered plaintiff and her girlfriend, detained them forcibly and told them they would not be allowed to leave until they had kissed one another in a graphic and sexual manner. Plaintiff claimed the young men used coarse and offensive language in making this demand Plaintiff said she and her girlfriend did not succeed in escaping until approximately 30 minutes later, when they reported the incident to management. Plaintiff named the three male employees as defendants. She also named the haunted house and its owner/operator under the doctrine of respondeat superior, which holds that an employer is liable for damages caused by that employer’s employees if the employees were in the course and scope of their employment with that employer at the time when the employees caused the damages.
Defendants denied liability and claimed plaintiff’s allegations were frivolous and unsubstantiated. Defendant facility and defendant owner contested plaintiff’s entitlement to punitive damages because, they claimed, neither they nor their employees ever acted maliciously in their dealings with plaintiff.
The court denied a motion to consolidate this case with another claim brought against the same defendants by plaintiff’s girlfriend.

PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM
Case Type – Automobile accident
Case Name – Stacy Rees vs. Jay Olsen
Case Number – 050904286
Court/Judge – 3rd District/Fratto
Verdict /Settlement – Settlement, 11/05
Amount – This case settled for an undisclosed amount.
Injuries – Plaintiff suffered unspecified injuries.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff – Edward T. Wells and Mel S. Martin
Attorney(s) - Defense – J. Kelly Walker of Petersen & Associates
Damages – Plaintiff claimed $20,000 in combined general and special damages.
Facts/Contentions – Plaintiff claimed defendant negligently collided with plaintiff’s vehicle at 3200 West and 7800 South.
Defendant denied liability and claimed plaintiff’s injuries might have been pre-existing. If plaintiff’s injuries were not pre-existing, defendant claimed, they were caused by plaintiff’s own negligence or that of third parties over whom defendant had no control.

PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM
Case Type – AA; Automobile accident
Case Name – Wesley Jeppson; and Summer Jeppson vs. Shanna L. Bates
Case Number – 040916146
Court/Judge – 3rd District/Peuler
Verdict /Settlement – Settlement, 11/05
Amount – This case settled for an undisclosed amount.
Injuries – Both plaintiffs suffered unspecified injuries and claimed permanent impairment.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff – Gerry B. Holman of Winder & Haslam
Attorney(s) - Defense – Jaryl L. Rencher and Kevin Gardner of Epperson & Rencher
Damages – Plaintiff Wesley Jeppson claimed $8,562 in past medical expenses, and plaintiff Summer Jeppson claimed $12,038.93 in past medical expenses.
Facts/Contentions – Plaintiffs were eastbound on 780 South, going through the intersection at 700 East. Plaintiffs claimed they had the green light, but defendant, who was northbound on 700 East, ran the red light and struck plaintiffs’ vehicle
Defendant denied liability and claimed plaintiffs’ injuries they were caused by plaintiffs’ own negligence or that of third parties over whom defendant had no control. Alternatively, defendant claimed, the accident was unavoidable or was caused by conditions or events beyond defendant’s control.

PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM
Case Type – PL, NE; Product liability, negligence
Case Name – David Klepper vs. Advance Brands; and Flying J, Incorporated
Case Number – 050905846
Court/Judge – 3rd District/Fratto
Verdict /Settlement – Settlement, 11/05
Amount – This case settled for an undisclosed amount. Offer of judgment by defendant Flying J (not accepted): $3,500.
Injuries – Plaintiff suffered dental injuries which required repair.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff – Jared R. Faerber of the Law Offices of Jared R. Faerber; and Todd Gardner of Batement, Goodwin & Gardner
Attorney(s) - Defense – For defendant Advance: John R. Lund of Snow, Christensen & Martineau; for defendant Flying J: Rick L. Rose and Kristine M. Larsen of Ray, Quinney & Nebeker
Damages – Plaintiff claimed unspecified past medical and dental expenses and wage loss. Plaintiff also sought punitive damages for what he claimed was defendants’ willful and reckless disregard of his wellbeing.
Facts/Contentions – Plaintiff purchased a meal at a restaurant operated by defendant Flying J. Among other things, the meal contained sausages manufactured by defendant Advance. Plaintiff claimed that when he bit into the sausages, he found metal chips in them. Plaintiff claimed that when he brought the problem to the attention of employees of defendant Flying J, the employees prepared a report of the incident. However, plaintiff claimed, the employees of defendant Flying J later lost or destroyed the metal chips.
Defendant Flying J admitted that its assistant manager prepared the incident report. Defendant Flying J also admitted that it no longer had the metal chips in its possession; however, defendant Flying J denied liability, claiming plaintiff’s injuries they were caused by plaintiff’s own negligence or that of third parties over whom defendant Flying J had no control. Defendant Flying J also claimed plaintiff assumed the risk of his injuries when he ordered the meal at defendant Flying J’s facility.
Defendant Advance denied liability, claiming plaintiff assumed the risk of his injuries when he ordered the meal at defendant Flying J’s facility. Defendant Advance also claimed it had no control over the sausages after they left its plant; defendant Advance claimed the sausages were not contaminated with metal chips when they left defendant Advance’s plant, but might have been modified or abused after leaving defendant Advance’s control.
Both defendants disputed plaintiff’s entitlement to punitive damages, claiming they never acted maliciously in their dealings with plaintiff.

PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM
Case Type – SF; Slip/fall
Case Name – Tracy Evans vs. Reams Food Service
Case Number – 050905777
Court/Judge – 3rd District/Maughan
Verdict /Settlement – Settlement, 11/05
Amount – This case settled for an undisclosed amount.
Injuries – Plaintiff suffered unspecified injuries and was taken from the scene to a local emergency room by ambulance.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff – Samuel Adams and Darren A. Davis of Siegfried & Jensen (withdrew); plaintiff was later represented pro se.
Attorney(s) - Defense – Julianne P. Blanch of Snow, Christensen & Martineau
Damages – Plaintiff claimed unspecified past medical expenses.
Facts/Contentions – Plaintiff claimed he slipped and fell on a wet floor in defendant’s store in Taylorsville. Plaintiff claimed defendant failed in its duty to maintain a dry floor or, if the presence of moisture on the floor was unavoidable, failed to warn customers about the dangerous condition.
Defendant denied liability and claimed plaintiff’s injuries they were caused by plaintiff’s own negligence or that of third parties over whom defendant had no control. Defendant alternatively claimed the accident was unforeseeable.

PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM
Case Type – AA; Automobile accident
Case Name – Donovan Visser vs. Thomas Visser
Case Number – 050906416
Court/Judge – 3rd District/Peuler
Verdict /Settlement – Dismissal, 11/05
Amount – The court dismissed this case without prejudice for plaintiff’s failure to serve defendant with notice of the action within 120 days of the filing of the complaint.
Injuries – Plaintiff suffered injuries to his head, neck, spine and knees.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff – /Alan W. Mortensen of Dewsnup, King & Olsen
Attorney(s) - Defense – None listed.
Damages – Plaintiff claimed unspecified past medical expenses and wage loss, as well as unspecified future loss of earning capacity.
Facts/Contentions – Plaintiff was a passenger in a vehicle driven by defendant. Both plaintiff and defendant are from Michigan, but they were driving in Utah when they were involved in the accident that gave rise to this case. Plaintiff claimed defendant lost control of the vehicle and ran off the road, injuring plaintiff.

Contract

Text

Wrongful Death

WRONGFUL DEATH
Case Type --WD, BT; Wrongful death, assault
Case Name --The estate of Casey Paul Barrow; and Teresa Marie Lopez vs. Jeannette Gomez
Case Number --040922877
Court/Judge --3rd District/Hilder
Verdict/Settlement --Dismissal, 3/05
Amount --The court dismissed this case without prejudice for plaintiff’s failure to serve defendant with notice of the action within 120 days of the filing of the complaint.
Injuries --Casey Paul Barrow died of his injuries.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff --D. Bruce Oliver
Attorney(s) - Defense --None listed.
Damages --Plaintiffs sought $1,000,000 for combined damages to cover past medical expenses and pain and suffering.
Facts/Contentions --Plaintiffs claimed defendant was acting as a foster parent to decedent Casey Paul Barrow, aged 17 months, in defendant’s home. Plaintiffs claimed defendant either dropped or threw decedent repeatedly until he suffered injuries which caused his death.

MEDICAL MALPRACTICE CLAIM
Case Type –MM; Medical malpractice claim
Case Name – (Name of case withheld)
Case Number – 030903002
Court/Judge – 3rd District/Boyden
Verdict/Settlement – Dismissal, 05/05
Amount – The court dismissed this case without prejudice after the parties failed to respond to an order to show cause why the claim should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute.
Injuries – Plaintiff’s minor child suffered neurological damage that caused cognitive and developmental impediments. Plaintiff claimed the minor child suffered permanent impairment.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff(s) – James R. Hasenyager and Peter W. Summerill of Hasenyager & Summerill
Attorney(s) - Defense – Shawn McGarry of Kipp & Christian
Damages – Plaintiff claimed unspecified extensive past and future medical expenses and future loss of earning capacity on behalf of the minor child.
Facts/Contentions – Plaintiff, the mother and guardian of a minor child, claimed she took the minor child to defendant health care facility for an operation in which tubes were to be placed in the minor child’s ears to alleviate recurrent otitis media (middle-ear infections). Plaintiff claimed the operation was performed by defendant MD with assistance from nursing personnel employed by defendant health care facility and a third-party anesthesiologist. Plaintiff claimed that during the surgery, the minor child began to desaturate rapidly (the oxygen level of her blood began to drop), but defendant MD continued and completed the procedure without determining and correcting the cause of the desaturation, with the result that the minor child suffered anoxia (oxygen deprivation) and permanent impairment.
Defendants denied breaching any standard of care and claimed that oxygenation of the minor child was appropriately maintained throughout the surgery. Defendants claimed the minor child’s injuries were caused by the actions or negligence of third parties beyond defendants’ control. Defendants further claimed plaintiff’s action was barred by the statute of limitations, since the injury occurred in 1995 and plaintiff filed this action in 2003.

MEDICAL MALPRACTICE CLAIM
Case Type – MM; Medical malpractice claim
Case Name – (Name of case withheld)
Case Number – 040903804
Court/Judge – 3rd District/Frederick
Verdict/Settlement – Verdict, 05/05
Amount – The court granted defendant MD’s motion for summary judgment and dismissed this case with prejudice.
Injuries – Plaintiff suffered a fracture of the proximal radius that healed in a misaligned position, requiring surgical repair.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff(s) – Jeffrey T. Colemere of Smart, Schofield, Shorter & Lunceford (withdrew shortly after the first motion for summary judgment was filed on grounds that plaintiff had failed to respond to attorney Colemere’s phone calls and requests for information)
Attorney(s) - Defense – Stephen W. Owens of Epperson & Rencher
Damages – Plaintiff claimed unspecified past medical expenses and lost wages.
Facts/Contentions – Plaintiff consulted defendant MD after plaintiff was involved in a motorcycle accident in which plaintiff suffered injuries to his jaw, clavicle, chest and left arm. The left arm wound was a deep, oblique laceration from dorsal to mid-antecubital which completely transected the brachioradialus, the carpi radialus longus and the pronator teres, exposing the radius and the ulna. The radial artery and accompanying veins were completely transected; the superficial radial nerve was intact but fully exposed. Plaintiff claimed defendant MD performed surgery on this wound without reviewing the x-rays beforehand and thus failed to perceive, diagnose and repair the mal-aligned fracture of the proximal radius, with the result that it healed in the mal-aligned position. Plaintiff claimed he sought further medical treatment from another physician when he experienced popping in the joint and discovered that he could not move his elbow beyond a range of 15 degrees to 100 degrees with 5 degrees of supination and 40 degrees of pronation. Plaintiff claimed another surgeon performed surgery to repair this condition, prying the radius and the ulna apart and installing support pins. Plaintiff claimed he was completely unable to work following the accident until after he had recovered from the second surgery.
Defendant MD filed a motion for summary judgment, asking the court to dismiss the case on grounds that plaintiff failed to comply with the mandatory pre-litigation requirements set forth in Utah’s Health Care Malpractice Act. Defendant MD withdrew the motion after plaintiff produced a certificate of compliance signed by the Division of Occupational and Professional Licensing. Defendant MD then filed an answer denying negligence and claiming that he did not breach any standard of care owed to plaintiff. Defendant MD further denied that plaintiff was experiencing popping in the left elbow joint on his follow-up visit to defendant MD after the first surgery. Defendant MD further suggested that plaintiff’s injury might have been caused by persons, events or conditions beyond defendant MD’s control.
Defendant MD filed another motion for summary judgment after plaintiff’s counsel withdrew and plaintiff failed to respond to notice served upon him by defendant MD to appear in person or appoint new counsel. In the second motion for summary judgment, defendant MD claimed plaintiff failed to present competent testimony by a medical expert as proof of his claim, despite the fact that the parties earlier agreed on a deadline for the appointment and disclosure of expert witness.

ATTORNEY DISCIPLINE
Case Type – AD; Attorney discipline
Case Name –In the Matter of the Discipline of M. Shane Smith
Case Number – 030909340
Court/Judge – 3rd District/Hanson
Verdict/Settlement – Judgment, 05/05
Amount – The court granted the Utah State Bar’s petition and disbarred respondent.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff(s) – Kate A. Toomey of the Utah State Bar’s Office of Professional Conduct
Attorney(s) - Defense – Respondent was represented pro se.
Facts/Contentions – In its petition for disbarment, the Utah State Bar filed 45 claims against respondent in connection with nine separate complaints lodged with the Office of Professional Conduct by respondent’s clients. The Bar claimed respondent did not serve his clients competently; violated the scope of his representation of his clients when he failed to abide by their wishes; abandoned his representation of his clients without taking steps to protect those clients’ interests; failed to file motions and other court documents for his clients in a timely manner; failed to communicate with his clients as their cases required; charged illegal and/or excessive fees; failed to safeguard his clients’ property; engaged in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation; and failed to respond to lawful demands for information from a disciplinary authority. The Bar contended that respondent’s conduct caused actual and/or potential harm to his clients, and his multiple offenses revealed a pattern of repeated malfeasance for selfish or dishonest motives. The Bar claimed respondent’s failure to respond to requests for information made by the Office of Professional Conduct was intentional.
In its detailing of the claims against respondent, the Bar contended that respondent agreed to represent individuals and companies, accepted retainer fees from them, and then either failed to perform the work he agreed to perform for them, performed the work incorrectly, abandoned his representation of them without giving them notice that he had done so or intended to do so, and/or failed to return the unearned portion of the retainer fees to the clients or to provide an accounting of how the fees were used. The Bar claimed respondent failed to keep his clients reasonably informed of the status of their cases and/or the progress of the work he agreed to perform for them.
Respondent filed a pro se answer denying the Bar’s claims.
The Bar moved the court to order respondent to comply with the Bar’s discovery requests. The court granted the motion and issued the order. When respondent still failed to comply, the Bar moved the court to impose sanctions against respondent, strike respondent’s answer and declare respondent in default. The court granted this motion.

ATTORNEY DISCIPLINE
Case Type – AD; Attorney discipline
Case Name – In the Matter of the Discipline of Alan Barber
Case Number – 050905594
Court/Judge – 3rd District/Fratto
Verdict/Settlement – Judgment, 05/05
Amount – The court granted the Utah State Bar’s petition and disbarred respondent.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff(s) – Kate A. Toomey of the Utah State Bar’s Office of Professional Conduct
Attorney(s) - Defense – Respondent did not answer or appear.
Facts/Contentions – The Utah State Bar filed a petition for reciprocal disbarment against respondent after respondent was disbarred by the Idaho State Bar for failure to respond to disciplinary authorities. The Idaho State Bar claimed respondent violated Idaho’s rules of professional conduct related to diligence, communication, a reasonable fee structure, duty to return unearned fees, malfeasance and scope of representation.
The Idaho State Bar noted in its order of disbarment that respondent had multiple prior disciplinary offenses; had engaged in a pattern of misconduct for selfish or dishonest motives; refused to acknowledge the wrongful nature of his behavior; obstructed the disciplinary proceedings against him by failing or refusing to comply with the orders of the disciplinary agency; and showed no remorse or intention of making restitution to the clients he overcharged and failed to serve properly.
Respondent was allowed 30 days in which to claim that the imposition of equivalent discipline in Utah would be unwarranted, but failed to respond.

LEGAL MALPRACTICE CLAIM
Case Type – LM, NE; Legal malpractice/negligence claim
Case Name – (Name of case withheld)
Case Number – 050909746
Court/Judge – 3rd District/Frederick
Verdict/Settlement – Dismissal, 06/05
Amount – Plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed this complaint.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff(s) – Edward P. Moriarity, Jeffrey D. Gooch and Ryan M. Springer of Moriarity, Gooch, Badaruddin & Booke
Attorney(s) - Defense – None listed
Facts/Contentions – Plaintiffs, who are husband and wife, worked for the same company that employed the husband’s father for 30 years. Plaintiff husband worked as assistant shop foreman and service manager, and 90 to 95 percent of his job consisted of office work.
Plaintiff husband sought medical care and was hospitalized after his leg turned black and began to swell. In the course of the treatment he received, he was diagnosed with AIDS. He said he called his boss at work and told him that he had AIDS but wanted very much to return to work as son as he could; plaintiff husband said his boss told him the company wanted him to come back. Plaintiff husband was off work four about four months while he received treatment, and when he returned, he was in a wheelchair.
Plaintiffs claimed that shortly after plaintiff husband returned to the company, the shop foreman and the company president told plaintiff wife that plaintiff husband was no longer wanted at the company because the fact that he had AIDS and was using a wheelchair made “everyone” uncomfortable. Plaintiff wife claimed the shop foreman and the company president told plaintiff wife she had to tell her husband what they had told her, and her husband was devastated by the news. Plaintiff husband was fired the following day. Plaintiffs claimed the company vice president admitted verbally that the company should not terminate plaintiff husband for having AIDS or using a wheelchair “because that would be discrimination.”
Plaintiffs claimed that when plaintiff husband applied for unemployment benefits after being terminated, the company denied that it had fired him. Plaintiff wife claimed the company officers called her into the head office and threatened to “come down hard” on her if her husband did not withdraw his claim for unemployment benefits. Plaintiff wife said she was frightened by this threat and quit because of it.
Plaintiffs retained a lawyer and filed suit in federal court against the company for discrimination, wrongful discharge of plaintiff husband and constructive discharge of plaintiff wife. Plaintiffs maintained the suit for two years in spite of several motions to dismiss filed by the company. At the end of that time the company filed for bankruptcy, and plaintiffs’ suit was automatically stayed. Plaintiffs said they retained defendant attorney and his employer, defendant law firm, at the time to help them preserve their interests and represent them as creditors in the company’s bankruptcy action.
Plaintiffs claimed their attorney in the wrongful discharge suit against the company sent defendant attorney/firm three letters asking what plaintiffs needed to do to preserve their interests in the bankruptcy action, but defendant attorney/firm did not respond to any of the letters. Plaintiffs claimed defendant attorney finally wrote a letter to the wrongful discharge attorney stating that the Unsecured Creditors’ Committee and the company’s largest creditor had prepared a reorganization plan which would liquidate all the assets of the company. Plaintiffs claimed defendant attorney said in the letter that he did not know whether plaintiffs would receive any money pursuant to the reorganization plan. Plaintiffs claimed that after receiving this letter, their wrongful discharge attorney sent defendant attorney/firm two more letters asking what plaintiffs could do to perfect their claims. After receiving the second letter, plaintiffs claimed, defendant attorney replied that the deadline for proof of claims had been set and had expired a year and five months earlier, and it was very unlikely that plaintiffs would be allowed to prove their claim so long after the deadline had expired. Plaintiffs claimed that when their wrongful discharge attorney first wrote defendant attorney/firm, the deadline had not yet been set or expired.
Plaintiffs claimed defendant attorney breached the duty of care he owed plaintiffs and also breached his fiduciary duty to plaintiffs inasmuch as plaintiffs would have prevailed in their claim against the company if defendant attorney had acted in their best interests as he agreed to when he agreed to represent them in the bankruptcy proceedings. Plaintiffs named defendant law firm under the doctrine of respondeat superior, which holds that an employer is responsible for damages caused by the negligence of its employee if the employee was in the course and scope of his/her employment with that employer at the time when the employee caused the damages. Plaintiffs claimed defendant law firm was responsible for the negligence and legal malpractice of its employee, defendant attorney.

LEGAL MALPRACTICE CLAIM
Case Type –LM; Legal malpractice claim
Case Name – (Name of case withheld)
Case Number – 040924022
Court/Judge – 3rd District/Lewis
Verdict/Settlement – Dismissal, 07/05
Amount – The court dismissed this case without prejudice for plaintiff’s failure to serve defendant with notice of the claim within 120 days of the filing of the complaint.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff(s) – Plaintiff was represented pro se.
Attorney(s) - Defense – None listed
Damages – Plaintiff sought $100,000.81 in compensatory damages, as well as punitive damages to be determined by the court.
Facts/Contentions – Plaintiff claimed defendant attorney allowed personal considerations to prejudice defendant attorney’s legal obligations to plaintiff while defendant attorney was serving as plaintiff’s legal representative. Plaintiff also claimed defendant attorney knowingly presented inadequate evidence to a federal court in a matter in which defendant attorney was representing plaintiff when more evidence was available, with the result that plaintiff obtained an adverse judgment from the federal court when he might have prevailed. Plaintiff claimed defendant attorney did not make a thorough and diligent attempt to obtain all the available medical evidence in plaintiff’s case, although plaintiff told defendant attorney where this evidence might be found. Plaintiff further claimed that after the verdict was handed down, defendant attorney deliberately appealed the case and then withdrew, knowing that these actions taken in this order would prohibit plaintiff from obtaining other representation to help him manage his appeal of the verdict.
Plaintiff filed an affidavit of impecuniosity in this case.

WRONGFUL DEATH-MEDICAL MALPRACTICE CLAIM
Case Type -- WD, MM; Wrongful death, medical malpractice
Case Name -- (Name of case withheld)
Case Number -- 020907302
Court/Judge -- 3rd District/Iwasaki
Settlement/Verdict -- Jury verdict, 08/05
Amount -- The jury returned a verdict of no cause of action against all of the defendants, and the court dismissed the claim against them.
Injuries -- Sixteen months after he suffered the spinal cord hemorrhage which rendered him quadriplegic, the decedent died of causes related to the spinal cord injury.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff -- Michael F. Richman, James W. Gilson and Gary B. Ferguson of Siegfried & Jensen and David Biggs of Steele, Ruffinengo & Biggs
Attorney(s) - Defense -- For defendant health care facility: Robert G. Wright of Richards, Brandt, Miller & Nelson; for defendant pulmonologist: R. Scott Williams and Catherine Larson of Strong & Hanni; for defendant on-call physician: Philip R. Fishler of Strong & Hanni; for defendant radiologist: Jamie R. Siglin of Williams & Hunt; for defendant neurologist: Curtis J. Drake and Tawni J. Sherman of Snell & Wilmer
Expert Witness(es) - Plaintiff -- John R. MacFarlane, MD--treating physician (video deposition); C. Alan Brown, MD, Santa Barbara, California--cardiologist (video deposition); Robert A. Fink, MD, Berkeley,
California--neurosurgeon; Mark D’Esposito, MD, Berkeley, California--neurologist; William J. Halden, MD; J. Wallace Graham, MD--pathologist (performed decedent’s autopsy)
Expert Witness(es) - Defense -- Gregory Katzman, MD--neuroradiologist; Jonathan Woodcock, MD; Roger Freedman, MD
Damages -- Plaintiff claimed unspecified damages for past medical expenses; loss of the society, support and comfort of decedent; and decedent’s pain and suffering.
Facts/Contentions -- Plaintiff is the heir and personal representative of decedent, who at age 78 underwent a cervical laminectomy. The surgery was performed by decedent’s treating physician at a third-party health care facility. Plaintiff claimed that one week after the surgery, decedent became dizzy, collapsed, and was taken by emergency personnel to defendant health care facility. There, plaintiff claimed, defendant pulmonologist administered heparin (an anti-coagulant) to decedent, but failed to notify decedent’s treating physician that decedent had been admitted. After decedent was admitted to defendant health care facility, plaintiff claimed, decedent began to experience intense pain between his shoulder-blades, lost sensation in his legs and experienced weakness in his left arm. Plaintiff claimed decedent tried to get up, fell on the floor of his room, became hypertensive and was transferred to the ICU. There, plaintiff claimed, defendant on-call physician discontinued the heparin and ordered an emergency CT scan, which defendant radiologist read as showing “no acute hemorrhage.” Plaintiff claimed that defendant on-call physician re-started the heparin after hearing the CT scan results. Plaintiff claimed that when defendant on-call physician asked defendant neurologist to consult, defendant neurologist assessed a “high cord injury” and ordered an MRI, while continuing the heparin. Plaintiff claimed that by this time defendant was quadriplegic. Plaintiff claimed that the MRI revealed a large hematoma compressing the spinal cord. Three days after decedent was admitted to defendant health care facility, plaintiff claimed, decedent’s treating physician was finally notified of the situation. Decedent was admitted late in the day on a Friday, and his treating physician was notified on the following Monday. Plaintiff claimed that the treating physician ordered the heparin discontinued and decedent transported immediately to his own health care facility for emergency surgery. However, plaintiff claimed, by the time the surgery was performed, the damage caused to decedent’s spinal cord by the hematoma was irreversible, and decedent was permanently quadriplegic. Plaintiff claimed decedent died of causes related to the spinal cord injuries caused by the hematoma 16 months later.
Defendants all denied breaching the applicable standard of care. Defendant neurologist opined that irreversible quadriplegia might have occurred before defendant neurologist first saw decedent. Defendant physicians all claimed the damage might not have been reversible and the occurrence of the hematoma might not have been preventable even if decedent’s treating physician had been immediately available when it occurred. Defendant radiologist moved the court for a partial directed verdict excusing defendant radiologist from liability, and the court granted the motion during trial.

BREACH OF CONTRACT CLAIM
Case Type –BC; Breach of contract claim
Case Name – John M. Arias, MD vs. Consultant Radiologists, Incorporated; D. Michael Edson, MD; Karen A. Dittrich, MD; and Edgar J. Booth, MD
Case Number – 030928203
Court/Judge – 3rd District/Noel
Verdict/Settlement – Dismissal, 08/05
Amount – The court dismissed this case for plaintiff’s failure to prosecute.
Attorney(s) – Plaintiff – Carol Clawson of Clawson Burgess
Attorney(s) - Defense – None listed
Facts/Contentions – Plaintiff was an employee and shareholder in defendant company Consultant Radiologists, Incorporated (CRI). He stated that he held 60 shares in the company, and the other MD defendants each also held 60 shares in the company, with the exception of defendant Edson, who held 61. Plaintiff claimed he paid $35,000 for his shares when he was made a shareholder in 2000. Plaintiff claimed defendant CRI never paid dividends to its shareholders, but distributed its profits in the form of salaries and bonuses to its employees/shareholders.
Plaintiff claimed that when he joined the company, he and the company entered into an employment agreement, and when he became a shareholder, he and defendant CRI entered into a stock redemption agreement. Plaintiff claimed that under the terms of the stock redemption agreement, a shareholder was required to deliver notice to the other shareholders if he or she intended to sell his or her shares, and the company had 30 days after the purchase price of the stock was determined in which to purchase the stock. If the company did not purchase the stock, plaintiff claimed, the agreement specified that the stock was deemed to be offered to any of the other shareholders at the same price. Plaintiff claimed that under the terms of the agreement, the company and the other shareholders were required to do everything they lawfully could to purchase the shares of a departing shareholder, and plaintiff claimed that they did so for other departing shareholder physicians. Under the terms of the agreement, plaintiff claimed, the value of each share was determined to be its value as of January 1 of the year in which a triggering event occurred (defined as the event which made the valuation necessary).
Plaintiff claimed that in December of 2002, he delivered notice to the other shareholders and the company that he intended to leave defendant CRI to pursue other interests. Plaintiff claimed that in March of 2003, he met with the company accountant, who determined that plaintiff’s shares were worth a total of $80,000 based on a valuation dated January 1, 2003. However, plaintiff claimed, the triggering event–his delivery of notice that he intended to leave the company–occurred in the previous year, or 2002, and the price of the shares should therefore be their value on January 1, 2002, or $141,325.26. Plaintiff claimed that defendants breached the stock redemption agreement by refusing to purchase the shares at the correct price. Plaintiff further claimed that after he notified the company of his intent to resign and asked the company to purchase his shares, the company directors voted to pay the company’s director/shareholders substantial bonuses, impairing the company’s ability to pay plaintiff for his shares. Plaintiff also claimed that he had earned a bonus of $35,000 as of the date of his termination, but never received it.

MEDICAL MALPRACTICE CLAIM
Case Type –MM; Medical malpractice
Case Name – (Name of case withheld)
Case Number – 030928741
Court/Judge – 3rd District/Himonas
Verdict/Settlement – Dismissal, 08/05
Amount – The court dismissed this case for plaintiff’s failure to prosecute.
Injuries – Plaintiff suffered a permanent aggravation of her seizure disorder.
Attorney(s) – Plaintiff – Mark C. McLachlan of Mark C. McLachlan & Associates
Attorney(s) - Defense – None listed
Damages – Plaintiff claimed many thousands of dollars in past and future medical expenses, as well as unspecified past and future wage loss.
Facts/Contentions – Plaintiff was a patient of defendant physician and visited his outpatient clinic at defendant health care facility. Plaintiff claimed defendant physician had prescribed several drugs to help control plaintiff’s seizure disorder. Plaintiff stated that she had been asymptomatic, suffering no seizures, for several years at the time when she visited defendant physician and he recommended that plaintiff quit smoking. Plaintiff claimed defendant physician gave plaintiff some samples of Zyban to help her quit smoking.
Plaintiff claimed that after she started taking the Zyban, she began having seizures again. She said she reported this fact to defendant physician, but he reiterated his recommendation that plaintiff stop smoking and wrote her a prescription for Zyban, which plaintiff had filled by defendant pharmacist at defendant pharmacy. Plaintiff stated that she began experiencing multiple daily seizures, which are not controllable and continued through the date when she filed her complaint. Plaintiff claimed defendants knew or should have known that Zyban is contra-indicated for patients taking the anti-seizure medications plaintiff was taking. Plaintiff claimed that none of the defendants ever warned plaintiff of the risk posed by taking Zyban in combination with her anti-seizure medications and thus did not obtain plaintiff’s informed consent before treating her with the Zyban.

FRAUD/IDENTITY THEFT CLAIM
Case Type -- MF, MS; Fraud, miscellaneous (identity theft)
Case Name -- Gerald Worthy; and Marion Worthy vs. Cyberworks Institute, Incorporated
Case Number -- 010903981
Court/Judge -- 3rd District/Medley
Settlement/Verdict -- Verdict, 08/05
Amount -- The court entered judgment against defendant in the amount of $582,276, which included $43,569 in special damages; $100,000 in general damages; $2,000 in statutory damages for violation of the Telephone Fraud Prevention Act; and $436,707 in punitive damages.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff -- D. Miles Holman of Holman & Walker and L. Daniel Mims of Mobile, Alabama--Attorney Mims was admitted pro hac vice (a one-time admission to practice extended by a state so that an out-of-state attorney may pursue a specific case to seek judgment in that state).
Attorney(s) - Defense -- None listed
Facts/Contentions -- Plaintiffs, who are residents of Alabama, claimed they signed up for business training seminars marketed by defendant, who did business in Alabama and Utah. Plaintiffs claimed they were led to believe by defendant’s fraudulent misrepresentations that if plaintiffs signed up for the seminars, they would receive training and business opportunities that would benefit them, including the opportunity to hear featured speakers, receive Internet training, and take advantage of knowledgeable business counseling. Not only did the seminars not materialize, plaintiffs claimed, but defendant gave plaintiffs’ credit card information and other personal data to several other entities, with the result that over $40,000 was charged on plaintiffs’ credit cards without their consent. Plaintiffs claimed defendant conducted its fraudulent solicitations over the phone in violation of the Telephone Fraud Prevention Act and other laws restricting the activities of telemarketers. Plaintiffs claimed they sued defendant in an Alabama court with the help of attorney Mims, but that court dismissed the case for lack of jurisdiction, since defendant was ostensibly headquartered in Utah. Plaintiffs said they were unsuccessful in their attempts to serve defendant in Utah, since the people at defendant’s last known address said they had never heard of defendant; plaintiffs thus sought and were granted leave to accomplish service through alternate means.

LEGAL MALPRACTICE CLAIM
Case Type – LM, NE; Legal malpractice/negligence claim
Case Name – (Name of case withheld)
Case Number – 050909746
Court/Judge – 3rd District/Frederick
Verdict/Settlement – Dismissal, 06/05
Amount – Plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed this complaint.
Attorney(s) - Plaintiff(s) – Edward P. Moriarity, Jeffrey D. Gooch and Ryan M. Springer of Moriarity, Gooch, Badaruddin & Booke
Attorney(s) - Defense – None listed
Facts/Contentions – Plaintiffs, who are husband and wife, worked for the same company that employed the husband’s father for 30 years. Plaintiff husband worked as assistant shop foreman and service manager, and 90 to 95 percent of his job consisted of office work.
Plaintiff husband sought medical care and was hospitalized after his leg turned black and began to swell. In the course of the treatment he received, he was diagnosed with AIDS. He said he called his boss at work and told him that he had AIDS but wanted very much to return to work as son as he could; plaintiff husband said his boss told him the company wanted him to come back. Plaintiff husband was off work four about four months while he received treatment, and when he returned, he was in a wheelchair.
Plaintiffs claimed that shortly after plaintiff husband returned to the company, the shop foreman and the company president told plaintiff wife that plaintiff husband was no longer wanted at the company because the fact that he had AIDS and was using a wheelchair made “everyone” uncomfortable. Plaintiff wife claimed the shop foreman and the company president told plaintiff wife she had to tell her husband what they had told her, and her husband was devastated by the news. Plaintiff husband was fired the following day. Plaintiffs claimed the company vice president admitted verbally that the company should not terminate plaintiff husband for having AIDS or using a wheelchair “because that would be discrimination.”
Plaintiffs claimed that when plaintiff husband applied for unemployment benefits after being terminated, the company denied that it had fired him. Plaintiff wife claimed the company officers called her into the head office and threatened to “come down hard” on her if her husband did not withdraw his claim for unemployment benefits. Plaintiff wife said she was frightened by this threat and quit because of it.
Plaintiffs retained a lawyer and filed suit in federal court against the company for discrimination, wrongful discharge of plaintiff husband and constructive discharge of plaintiff wife. Plaintiffs maintained the suit for two years in spite of several motions to dismiss filed by the company. At the end of that time the company filed for bankruptcy, and plaintiffs’ suit was automatically stayed. Plaintiffs said they retained defendant attorney and his employer, defendant law firm, at the time to help them preserve their interests and represent them as creditors in the company’s bankruptcy action.
Plaintiffs claimed their attorney in the wrongful discharge suit against the company sent defendant attorney/firm three letters asking what plaintiffs needed to do to preserve their interests in the bankruptcy action, but defendant attorney/firm did not respond to any of the letters. Plaintiffs claimed defendant attorney finally wrote a letter to the wrongful discharge attorney stating that the Unsecured Creditors’ Committee and the company’s largest creditor had prepared a reorganization plan which would liquidate all the assets of the company. Plaintiffs claimed defendant attorney said in the letter that he did not know whether plaintiffs would receive any money pursuant to the reorganization plan. Plaintiffs claimed that after receiving this letter, their wrongful discharge attorney sent defendant attorney/firm two more letters asking what plaintiffs could do to perfect their claims. After receiving the second letter, plaintiffs claimed, defendant attorney replied that the deadline for proof of claims had been set and had expired a year and five months earlier, and it was very unlikely that plaintiffs would be allowed to prove their claim so long after the deadline had expired. Plaintiffs claimed that when their wrongful discharge attorney first wrote defendant attorney/firm, the deadline had not yet been set or expired.
Plaintiffs claimed defendant attorney breached the duty of care he owed plaintiffs and also breached his fiduciary duty to plaintiffs inasmuch as plaintiffs would have prevailed in their claim against the company if defendant attorney had acted in their best interests as he agreed to when he agreed to represent them in the bankruptcy proceedings. Plaintiffs named defendant law firm under the doctrine of respondeat superior, which holds that an employer is responsible for damages caused by the negligence of its employee if the employee was in the course and scope of his/her employment with that employer at the time when the employee caused the damages. Plaintiffs claimed defendant law firm was responsible for the negligence and legal malpractice of its employee, defendant attorney.

WRONGFUL DEATH CLAIM
Case Type – WD, WA, BA, PA, OC; Work-related wrongful death claim, bicycle/bus accident, ongoing case
Case Name – Rose Merritt; and James Mahana, individually and on behalf of the estate of Joeie Mahana, vs. Utah Transit Authority (UTA); Richard J. Fasy; Utah State Department of Transportation (UDOT); Murray City Corporation; and Black Corporation
Case Number – 050911884
Court/Judge – 3rd District/Hanson
Verdict/Settlement –.Settlement, 09/05
Amount – Plaintiff and defendant UTA settled for an undisclosed amount. That suit against the other defendants is ongoing
Injuries – Joeie Mahana died of the injuries he received in the accident. He suffered blunt-trauma head injuries, scalp lacerations, multiple skull fractures, superficial cortical lacerations, a subarachnoid hemorrhage and blunt trauma to the thorax.
Attorney(s) – Plaintiff – George T. Waddoups of Robert J. DeBry & Associates
Attorney(s) - Defense – For defendants UTA and Fasy:Jennifer Rigby, UTA corporate counsel; for defendant UDOT: Mark L. Shurtliff and Joel A. Ferre of the Utah Attorney General’s Office; for defendant Salt Lake County: David E. Yocom, Don Hansen and Melanie Mitchell of the Salt Lake County District Attorney’s Office; for defendant Murray City: Dennis C. Ferguson of Williams & Hunt
Damages – Plaintiffs claimed past medical and funeral expenses of approximately $15,000, as well as unspecified damages for the loss of the love, society and companionship of decedent.
Facts/Contentions – Plaintiffs are the parents of decedent Joeie Mahana, who was 13 years old when he was killed in this accident. Plaintiffs claimed decedent was riding his bicycle on the east side of 900 East north of the 5700 South intersection, where the side of the road had been allowed to deteriorate over several years and water had collected because there was no water main or guttering present. South of the intersection, on the east side of 900 East, there was a bus stop. There were no sidewalks, curbs or gutters along the side of the road. Plaintiffs claimed there was not enough shoulder or asphalt east of the white fog line along the side of the road to allow buses to stop to let passengers enter or exit at the bus stop without part of the bus remaining the northbound traffic lane of 900 East. Plaintiffs claimed a bus owned and operated by defendant UTA and driven by defendant Fasy pulled away from the bus stop, crossed the 5700 South intersection and struck decedent’s bicycle, injuring him fatally. Plaintiffs claimed defendant Fasy failed to sound his horn when pulling away from the bus stop, failed to maintain a proper lookout and pulled out of the bus stop with part of the bus still east of the fog line. Plaintiffs further claimed defendant Fasy was conversing with passengers on the bus at the time when the bus struck decedent. Plaintiffs claimed that earlier in the route, defendant Fasy failed to pay attention to passengers’ signals for him to stop, with the result that the passengers had to ask defendant Fasy verbally to stop to let them exit the bus. Plaintiffs claimed defendant Fasy was in the course and scope of his employment with defendant UTA at the time of the accident; plaintiffs therefore named defendant UTA under the doctrine of respondeat superior, which holds that an employer is liable for damages caused by that employer’s employee if the employee was in the course and scope of his or her employment with that employer at the time when the employee caused the damages. Plaintiffs named defendant Black Corporation as the manufacturer of the bus that struck decedent. Plaintiffs named defendants UDOT, Salt Lake County and Murray City as being responsible for the maintenance and upkeep of the road where the accident occurred and allowing the road to deteriorate.
Defendant Salt Lake County denied negligence and claimed it was not responsible for maintaining the road where the accident occurred.
Defendant Murray City contended that because plaintiffs failed to comply with governmental notice-of-claim requirements, plaintiffs’ claim against defendant Murray City was therefore barred. Defendant Murray City also denied that it had a duty to maintain or repair the road in question. Defendant Murray City claimed a city water main was installed along the south side of 5700 South after this accident. Defendant UDOT denied that the road had been allowed to deteriorate and also denied that the road had not been repaired or maintained prior to decedent’s death.

Miscellaneous

Text