2201 E. Chapman Avenue
Fullerton, CA 92831
Stephanie Krajcir and her husband were spending their first day in a new house. Ms. Krajcir was in the kitchen, with the interior door closed, while her husband was unpacking the rest of the house. Ricky Flores, a DISH Installation Technician, showed up to install satellite television. Mr. Krajcir dealt with Flores, and testified that his wife did not know Flores was in the house. Mr. Kracir showed Mr. Flores a hatch located in the hallway, directly adjacent to the closed kitchen door. Flores went down the opened hatchway, which contained a ladder to the cement floor approximately nine feet below the level of the house floor. When Flores came back up, he saw that Mr. Krajcir had left the hallway, so he went to look for Mr. Krajcir. He did not close the hatch when he left the opening. He found Mr. Krajcir outside the house. While the two were talking, Stephanie Krajcir opened the kitchen door while holding some boxes, and walked into the open hatchway. She fell to the basement area, fracturing two transverse processes in her back, and injuring her back, neck, and shoulder. She claimed to still be having pain two years after the accident, preventing her from resuming an active life.
Stephanie Krajcir fractured the transverse processes in the L1 and L2 vertebrae, and had soft tissue complaints in her neck, back, knees, ankles, and left shoulder. She incurred $27,000 in medical bills, and claimed to need another $5,500 in future medical treatment for her frozen shoulder.
Ms. Krajcir made a sympathetic witness. She testified that she did not know Mr. Flores was in the house, and that she did not know there was a trap door in the hallway, as it was her first day in the new house. The fractured transverse processes represented a real injury that the jury would relate to, rather than vague “whiplash” complaints. She testified that she had constant pain in her neck, pain in her knees and back, and that she had ongoing shoulder complaints, diagnosed as “frozen shoulder”. The first impression of people hearing about how the hatch was left open by a DISH installer invariably blamed the installer.
As with all of our cases, our first efforts were to determine the severity of any injuries, determine the facts surrounding liability, and present the client with this information so that a plan tailored to this situation could be implemented. In this way, the client has an early idea of what the damages and liability picture is, before defense costs become a driving factor in the litigation.
Here, we had Ms. Krajcir examined by a well credentialed orthopedic surgeon, who was of the opinion that she did not have frozen shoulder, and there was no basis for ongoing complaints of any kind.
We located and interviewed the DISH installer who went back to the house to complete the installation a few days later. This former employee has very damaging testimony, including that Mrs. Krajcir was moving about the house, that she said it was all her fault for not looking where she was going, and asking if she should sue DISH. Mr. Krajcir asked if there was any way to parlay this into “free television”. As a former employee, this installer was essentially an independent witness, and was very helpful.
We also zeroed in on the Krajcir’s insistence that the DISH installer never met Mrs. Krajcir before the fall. The DISH installer testified at deposition that he met her before starting his work, but Mr. And Mrs. Krajcir insisted that he never met her. Accordingly, they painted a picture where only Mr. Krajcir knew that both the installer and Mrs. Krajci were both in the house, and he admitted that he didn’t tell either about the other, even though he admitted knowing she was in the kitchen when they opened the trap door right outside the kitchen.
Plaintiff’s attorney argued that 100% of the fault for this accident was with the installer, and asked the jury to award $395,000.
We argued that the Krajcirs shared blame for the accident. We presented evidence that Mr. Krajcir was the only person in the house with all of the information needed to prevent the fall. Despite this, he never told his wife the installer was present, even though they were opening a trap door inches from the closed door to the kitchen. He also didn’t tell the installer his wife was in the kitchen. He repeatedly said it was not his responsibility, it was the installer’s responsibility.
We argued that Mrs. Krajcir, on “move in day”, had a greater duty to watch where she was going than someone who is at a home they have lived in for years. Boxes, hand trucks, and any number of other obstacles were potentially in her path, but she claimed to have stacked boxes directly in front of her face so that she could not see where she was going.
We also presented evidence that Mrs. Krajcir should have healed within 12-15 weeks, and that she was not suffering from frozen shoulder.
The jury agreed, and allocated 40% of the fault for this accident to Mr. Krajcir, 30% to Mrs. Krajcir for not being careful, and 30% to the installer.
The entire award was $42,508.99, but because of the liability allocation, the share paid by defendants was only $12,752.70.