On April 21, 2019, plaintiffs’ decedent Edith Rubaloff was walking along Valerio Avenue, in Ojai. When she reached the intersection with Maricopa Highway, also known as State Route 33, she entered a crosswalk. While she was crossing CA-33, she was struck by a vehicle driven by Esther Holland. Rubaloff suffered and died a short time later at a hospital. Rubaloff’s husband, Wayne "Jay" Stewart, son, John Manning, and daughter-in-law, Susan Manning, sued Holland; the owner of the roadways, the People of the State of California, acting by and through the Department of Transportation (Caltrans); and the believed controllers of the intersection, the city of Ojai and Ventura County. The lawsuit alleged that Holland was negligent in the operation of her vehicle. The lawsuit also alleged that the intersection constituted a dangerous condition of public property and that the city, county and state were liable for the hazardous condition. It was ultimately determined the city controlled the intersection. As a result, the county was dismissed from the case. The matter then continued against the remaining defendants. Plaintiffs’ counsel contended that Holland was driving down Maricopa Highway with the setting sun in her eyes when she struck Rubaloff in the crosswalk. Counsel asserted that Holland was negligent for operating her vehicle in an unsafe manner for the conditions at the time and that Holland’s negligence caused her to collide with Rubaloff. Plaintiffs’ counsel contended that the city had been aware of the dangers of crossing Maricopa Highway for decades prior to the subject accident, even since 1986, when a local doctor’s son was killed while crossing the highway. Counsel contended that, after the 1986 accident, citizens continued to express the dangers of pedestrian usage of the highway at various city council meetings, and demanded action for the unsafe conditions. Plaintiffs’ counsel noted that the city even acknowledged the urgent need for safety improvements in 2016 and that as a result, the city received grant money from the state to aid in helping remedy the dangerous crosswalk conditions, including the installation of controlled pedestrian crossings with flashing beacons. However, counsel contended that those safety measures were not installed until after the subject accident. Specifically, at the time of the 2019 accident, the city was in the process of installing pedestrian-activated flashing lights at the subject crosswalk. Thus, plaintiffs’ counsel asserted that at the time of the accident, the subject crosswalk did not have any signals or lights to help pedestrians to cross the busy four-lane highway. Holland’s counsel contended that during the post-accident investigation, Holland informed the investigating officer that she was not able to see Rubaloff in the roadway due to the bright setting sun and the crosswalk being shadowed by a large tree. Counsel also contended that, based upon the investigating officer’s observations at the scene of the accident, the officer commented that Holland’s explanation concerning why she did not see Rubaloff in the crosswalk until it was too late to stop “made perfect sense.” Holland’s counsel added that the investigating officer noted that he was “almost hit by several vehicles” while he was trying to stop traffic at the scene of the accident and that the motorists also informed the investigating officer that they could not see the officer because of the bright sun and the shadows., Rubaloff suffered  and was treated at the scene by emergency personnel. She was then transported by ambulance to a local hospital, where her treatment continued, but she ultimately passed away from her shortly after arriving at the hospital. Rubaloff was survived by a husband, a son and a daughter-in-law. Rubaloff’s family sought recovery of wrongful death damages for the loss of Rubaloff.