$460K Settlement in LAPD Crash Injury Case
Table of Contents
Case Background
A civil lawsuit arising from a severe traffic accident concluded swiftly with a substantial settlement, thereby averting a potentially lengthy and contentious trial. Plaintiff Rosa Becerra had sought justice and financial recovery from the City of Los Angeles, the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD), and City employee Yesenia Emestica for injuries she sustained in a collision in May 2021. Ms. Becerra initiated the legal action by filing her complaint in the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, in March 2023, setting the stage for a dispute that ultimately resolved through negotiation.
Cause
The litigation centred on a traffic collision that Ms. Becerra asserted had resulted directly from the negligence of a municipal employee. She contended that Yesenia Emestica, while operating a vehicle and acting within her employment capacity for the City and the LAPD, had driven carelessly and unsafely, causing the crash at a busy intersection. The lawsuit had directly targeted the City, maintaining that it bore legal responsibility for its employee's actions under established principles of agency and liability.
Injury
Ms. Becerra sustained serious personal injuries in the crash. She had received extensive medical attention and care, and the injuries had caused her significant physical pain and emotional distress. Beyond the immediate physical harm, Ms. Becerra's injuries prevented her from returning to work, which resulted in a major loss of income. She sought compensation for all of her past and future medical expenses and for the wages and earning capacity that the collision had stripped from her.
Damages Sought
The Plaintiff had demanded comprehensive financial compensation to cover the full extent of her damages. She had requested general damages to account for her pain and suffering, which she intended to prove fully at trial. Crucially, she also sought specific damages for all past and future medical costs, as well as compensation for her lost earnings and the future impairment of her earning capacity. Finally, the lawsuit had demanded that the Defendants pay all of her attorney fees and Court costs incurred during the litigation.
Key Arguments and Proceedings
The City of Los Angeles quickly responded to Ms. Becerra's complaint, setting up the key disputes that defined the case until the settlement. Both parties then engaged in the initial phases of information exchange before deciding to negotiate a resolution.
Legal Representation
Plaintiff(s): Rosa Becerra
· Counsel for Plaintiff(s): Mitchell P. Beck
Defendant(s): Yesenia Emestica; City of Los Angeles | Los Angeles Police Department | DOES 1 through 100, Inclusive
· Counsel for Defendant(s): Hydee Feldstein Soto | Scott Marcus | Anthony M. Miera | Vi Thomas | Stepanyan Ruzan
Key Arguments or Remarks by Counsel
Claims
Ms. Becerra's legal team maintained that the City and its employee were directly responsible for her injuries because of their negligence. They asserted that Emestica had violated her duty to operate her vehicle safely and that, because the incident had occurred while Emestica worked for the City, the City was legally liable for all damages under the concept of respondeat superior. The claims sought to hold the Defendants fully accountable for the significant, life-altering consequences of their carelessness.
Defense
The City of Los Angeles and its legal team forcefully contested all allegations of negligence in their Answer to the Complaint. They immediately argued that the Los Angeles Police Department was an entity that could not legally be sued, demanding its removal from the case. While the City acknowledged that the traffic accident had occurred, the defense strongly asserted that they had upheld all standards of care and had not acted negligently toward Ms. Becerra. Furthermore, the defense had submitted several affirmative defenses, which included claims that the Plaintiff herself had contributed to the cause of the accident or that her injuries had resulted from pre-existing conditions, aiming to minimize or eliminate the City's financial responsibility.
Settlement
The complex case concluded not with a jury verdict, but with a significant settlement that resolved all claims Ms. Becerra had brought against the City and its employee.
After extensive negotiation, the parties reached an agreement that brought finality to the litigation. The City of Los Angeles had officially approved a settlement amount of $460,000. The City Council formalized the pay-out, which successfully concluded Ms. Becerra's personal injury lawsuit. The final settlement funds were transferred to the Plaintiff and her legal representation, legally terminating the entire dispute. The parties filed the official Notice of Settlement of Entire Case with the Court on July 31, 2024, confirming that the contentious legal action had been fully resolved.
Court documents are available upon request at jurimatic@exlitem.com