Diaz v. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority
Filed July 20, 2009
Cite as 2009 SOS 4416

Principle of Res Ipsa Loquitor Applies

Eduvigis Diaz (Diaz) boarded a Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) bus driven by Omar Forero. As it approached the intersection of Van Nuys Boulevard and Roscoe Boulevard, the bus braked suddenly but still rear ended the car driven by Cindy Artero (Artero). The impact caused Diaz to fall off her seat and hit her head causing her injuries.

Diaz sued MTA and Forero alleging that her injuries were caused by Forero’s negligence. MTA and Forero claimed, on the other hand, the latter had acted reasonably and had done everything right but was unable to avoid hitting Artero’s car under the circumstances.

Diaz requested the trial court to instruct the jury that the accident itself created a presumption of Forero’s negligence so that the burden would shift to MTA and Forero. But the trial court refused. In fact, the jury, in a special verdict, found MTA and Forero not negligent. Further, the trial court denied Diaz’s motions for a new trial and for judgment despite the verdict.

In reversing the district court’s decision, the California Court of Appeal ruled that trial court erred in refusing Diaz’s request to instruct jury that the bus accident itself created a presumption of Forero’s negligence.

The fact that MTA and Forero both blamed Artero did not negate applicability of res ipsa loquitur instruction in a case involving injuries sustained by Diaz as a passenger of MTA bus. Further, the appellate court found that instructional error was prejudicial where parties offered markedly different accounts of accident and who was at fault. Here the question of negligence was a close one permitting party benefiting from presumption of negligence to enjoy an advantage at trial.

Considering the above discussion, the judgment is reversed and remanded to the district court for further proceedings.