More In This Category
View Transcript
That was the Gilmet v. City of Los Angeles case and I think we made our name on that case. That involved an intersection in a part of LA where two neighbors were trying to use the road, one neighbors trying to make a left-hand turn, take his grandkids to school. Another neighbor is trying to ride his motorcycle to work. But the problem with that road is the two couldn’t see each other because of cars that were parked on the side and the city knew it. And so, the inevitable happened and there was a collision and the motorcyclist died. And what we learned by talking to those neighbors is they’d had this problem for a long time and it was really an accident waiting to happen. And what was more is they told the city about it but the city didn’t do anything about it. And so, we took that case and we didn’t think it was either neighbor’s fault and the jury agreed with us and gave us a full verdict against the City of Los Angeles. And that just shows the power of what a jury will do with a righteous case whether it’s against an individual or even someone as power as the City of Los Angeles, it’s a level playing field. And that was it was great to be a part of that case.
Los Angeles, CA personal injury attorney Thomas Johnston talks about a case he worked on involving a dangerous intersection that played a role in a tragic motorcycle death. He explains that the case that gained us significant recognition was the Gilmet v. City of Los Angeles case. It revolved around an intersection in a particular area of LA where two neighbors found themselves in a challenging situation. One neighbor was attempting to make a left turn to take his grandkids to school, while the other neighbor was riding his motorcycle to work. However, due to cars parked on the side of the road, their visibility was severely compromised, and unfortunately, a collision occurred, resulting in the motorcyclist’s tragic death.
Upon speaking with these neighbors, we discovered that they had been facing this issue for an extended period, and it was a foreseeable accident waiting to happen. To make matters worse, they had informed the city about the problem, but no action was taken. Taking on this case, we firmly believed that neither neighbor was at fault, and the jury shared our perspective. They rendered a comprehensive verdict against the City of Los Angeles, demonstrating the immense power a jury holds when presented with a justifiable case. It reaffirmed that whether the defendant is an individual or an entity as influential as the City of Los Angeles, the justice system provides a level playing field. It was truly rewarding to be part of this case and witness the impact it had.