Wins

A bus passenger was injured when she slipped and fell on a bus operated by GMSR’s client, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA).  The passenger sued the MTA, alleging that the bus driver had negligently caused her to fall by accelerating prematurely.

After a jury rejected her claims, the passenger appealed.  She argued that the trial court: (1) failed to instruct the jury that the general duty of care only applied to plaintiff and not to the MTA—a common-carrier subject to a heightened standard of care; (2) improperly instructed the jury regarding dangerous-condition-of-public-property principles even though she had withdrawn that claim; (3) improperly excluded an after-incident report; and (4) wrongly excluded, as unnecessary, the testimony of plaintiff’s safety expert, Brad Avrit.

The Court of Appeal affirmed.  Agreeing with GMSR, it held that the duty-of-care instructions were correct, the passenger failed to prove that the dangerous-condition instructions constituted reversible error, and the trial court did not abuse its discretion by excluding the after-incident report or safety expert’s testimony.

Click here to read the Court of Appeal opinion:  Cervantes v. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Nov. 25, 2024, B322192) 2024 WL 4879655 [Second District, Division Five].