legal news


Register | Forgot Password

Reese v. Arnicar CA4/1
Defendant and Respondent.
Plaintiff and appellant Susan Reese sued defendant and respondent Christopher Arnicar for personal injuries, after she was hit by a branch of a tree falling from his property. Arnicar cross-complained against a worker on his property that day, Stevin Delao and his sole proprietorship 4S Ranch Handyman, seeking equitable indemnity and other relief. The matter went to jury trial on those two pleadings, while Delao's own cross-complaint raising separate contractual indemnity issues was severed for later trial.
The jury returned a special verdict that found Reese had incurred $96,167 in economic damages and $245,000 in noneconomic damages. On comparative fault issues, the special verdict decided that Arnicar was 75 percent responsible for Reese's harm, while Delao, "as property manager associate for Russ Eskilson Real Estate," was 25 percent responsible for her injuries.

Search thread for
Download thread as



Quick Reply

Your Name:
Your Comment:

smiling face wink grin cool nod sticking out tongue raised eyebrow confused shocked shaking head disapproval rolling eyes sad mad

Click an emoji to insert it into your message. You may use BB Codes in your message.
Spam Prevention:

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2025 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2025 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale