Winners, losers a matter of degrees with city’s juries
By DAVE DANFORTH Daily Press Staff Writer
A Santa Monica jury Friday couldn’t decide if a “phantom car” caused a 1999 accident.
But even if it had, the verdict underscored the belief held by many plaintiff’s attorneys that local juries are thrifty and scoff at large awards Jurors — many of whom wondered how a lawsuit over a $637 repair bill could result in a request for about $28,000 in damages — awarded the plaintiffs, a long-time Santa Monica family, only about 10 percent of what they asked for.
David and Michael Turner were rear-ended in slowing traffic on the Santa Monica Freeway on November 13, 1999. Several months after the mishap, they learned that the couple who hit them, David and Branislava Warner of Santa Barbara, contended they’d been rear-ended themselves and had been pushed into the Turner car.
The third car, which had rear ended them, had sped off in a classic hit-and-run, the Warners said.
Thus began the case of the “phantom car,” in which jurors were asked if they believed the mysterious fleeing car caused the accident.
David Turner was represented by and his daughter, Cheryl, a litigation attorney and Michael’s sister. She assured curious jurors that there was nothing “sinister” in the arrangement. Her father, 64 and an insurance broker, needed a lawyer after the Warner’s insurance company turned down their claim, so he hired his daughter.
“I guess we still won,” — said Cheryl Turner, attorney for the plaintiffs
The Turners took their case before Superior Court Judge Diana Wheatley and a jury. Cheryl Turner insisted that even if jurors accepted the phantom car theory, that the Warners were still speeding and tailgating before their car struck the Turner’s Acura Legend, which had logged 187,000 miles. Scott MacDonald, the Warners’ lawyer, argued that the only plausible explanation for the fact that the Turners had been hit twice was that the Warner car behind them was itself rear-ended and shoved ahead.
“This was a minor accident,” MacDonald said. “It was a tap.”
He called an expert witness who likened the jolt felt by the Turners to the sensation of stepping off a curb, or getting slapped on the back or jostled in a crowd. He produced photos showing that the Warner car had minor damage. With little damage visible to the rear of the car, the Turners disputed the validity of the photo.
The battle, which began over a $636.52 repair estimate, was on.
Cheryl Turner argued that the story was concocted by the Warners and that there never was a phantom car. But just in case the jurors believed the Warners, she insisted that even if there was a third car, the Warners were still negligent. She produced a doctor’s bill for $3,298 and said her father was bedridden for over a month after the collision.
MacDonald disputed that claim. The investigating officer didn’t even classify the mishap as a “moderate” accident, he noted. It wouldn’t have happened had his clients not been rear-ended.
The jury initially split 6-6 over the phantom question, with a quorum of nine needed for a verdict. But, jurors said, they felt sympathetic to the Turners, but not very.
Their eventual award, on a 10-2 vote, imposed a drastic haircut on the Turners. Where David Turner had asked for $15,000-$17,000, he received $1,745. His son, who requested $11,000-$12,500 in damages, was limited to $1,100 by the jury.
Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on July 28, 2003. Read the original PDF.