Case details

Laborer: Truck rental company rented truck with brake issues





Result type

Not present

ankle, fracture
On June 27, 2015, plaintiff Manuel Sanchez, 42, a laborer, was loading furniture into a truck that had been rented to his employer, Revelry Inc. As Sanchez and co-workers were placing a large table into the truck, which was parked at the top of a steep slope, the truck lurched forward and started to slowly roll down the hill. The other workers jumped to safety, but Sanchez, who was farthest into the truck, was not able to get to the rear of the vehicle until it was moving. He was forced to jump from the truck as it was careering toward a retention wall. He injured his right foot, ankle and heel. Sanchez sued the truck rental company, Silverco Enterprises Inc. Sanchez alleged that Silverco failed to properly maintain the truck, creating a dangerous condition, and was negligent for renting out a defective vehicle. Silverco impleaded Revelry, alleging that Revelry’s employees were negligent for failing to set the truck’s parking brake. Sanchez’s counsel contended that the parking brake had been set but that it failed. Counsel also contended that the truck had a history of brake failure, but that Silverco provided the vehicle without resolving the brake issue. Silverco’s counsel contended that all of the maintenance records showed that the truck was well maintained and that, post-incident, the brakes were in working order. He argued that if there was any negligence on any party, it was on Revelry for failing to properly set the brake., Sanchez sustained fractures to the right foot, including a talus fracture, a navicular fracture, and a calcaneal fracture. He was taken by ambulance and brought to Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, in Los Angeles. The fractures ultimately required open reduction and internal fixation surgery on Nov. 13, 2015. The hardware became infected, and he had to undergo hardware removal on Dec. 14, 2015. Sanchez then underwent fusion of the talonavicular joint on Aug. 11, 2016, and another fusion of the midtarsal joint on Jan. 20, 2017. Sanchez was able to continue working between his surgeries, and he is currently working in a similar capacity. However, he claimed that his treatment caused him severe limitation of the range of motion in his right foot. While his condition improved with rehabilitation, and he is now independent, he claimed that he still experiences limitations in the foot with pain after significant use. The entirety of Sanchez’s medical treatment took place through his workers’ compensation provider. The total bill for treatment and indemnity exceeded $250,000, but the workers’ compensation lien was negotiated at $124,000. Sanchez also sought recovery of damages for past and future pain and suffering.
Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Los Angeles, CA

Recommended Experts


Get a FREE consultation for your case