Woman Sues Starbucks, Driver, Own Insurer, After Pedestrian Accident

A 72-year-old woman is now a millionaire after winning a nuclear verdict on the grounds of premises liability against Starbucks. She also won judgments from her own insurer and the driver who struck her. The woman claims that the layout of the Starbucks was responsible for her injury as she was forced to cross the drive-thru lane on her way out of the door. At that point, she was struck by a vehicle. She argued that the sight lines were obscured by a pillar and that an accident such as this was inevitable. She argued that the lack of a protected crosswalk area contributed to the dangerous situation. Starbucks was ordered to pay $9 million but is currently appealing the verdict.

Analyzing the allegations 

This isn’t necessarily a difficult case to win. The plaintiffs would argue that the obstruction inevitably resulted in an injury, would have researched the situation to determine if any previous injuries had occurred, near misses, or anything similar. Chances are good that something did happen there before, and the property owners neglected to take care of it. The difficulty then would not be in securing the verdict but ensuring that the defendant was held liable for punitive damages.

In a case like this, the plaintiff’s injuries included an ankle and foot injury. For a 72-year-old woman, which will take her off her feet for a while, she probably doesn’t have the ability to work. She won’t be able to live her typical quality of life. Still, $9 million is a lot of money. Most wrongful death lawsuits won’t pay out that much. To secure a verdict that large, you need to establish that the defendant had good reason to know that the dangerous situation was still present and did nothing to stop it.

Analyzing the defense 

The defense claimed that the pedestrian and the other driver were more at fault for the accident than the layout of the Starbucks. They ultimately lost this argument, and we can imagine how this happened. A personal injury attorney representing the plaintiff would simply take a video camera with them on their walk from the Starbucks to their vehicle. If the pillar obscures the view of the drive-thru in such a manner that the jury could see that it would obviously cause an accident under the right circumstances, the defense will lose this argument. If the plaintiffs can establish that previous injuries occurred, then Starbucks is likely to face arguments concerning punitive damages. Starbucks would have a duty of care to ensure that all known dangers are addressed. If you don’t, that’s how you lose $9 million to an ankle injury.

Talk to a Tampa Premises Liability Lawyer Today 

The Matassini Law Firm represents the interests of injured Tampa residents looking to recover damages. Call our Tampa personal injury lawyers today to schedule a free consultation and learn more about how we can help.

Source:

insurancejournal.com/news/southeast/2022/07/19/676379.htm