Thursday, February 26, 2009

Nazari v. Ayrapetyan (Cal. Ct. App. - Feb. 26, 2009)

What partions of the following do you think come from a real case, and what parts come from an absurd law school hypothetical:

"On March 27, 2003, defendant invited plaintiff to his house for tea. In the backyard, defendant offered to pick an orange for plaintiff. Defendant stood on a stool to pick the fruit, but lost his balance while reaching too far and fell. Defendant landed on plaintiff, who was leaning over to serve himself tea. The force of defendant's 215 pounds pushed plaintiff's face into the tea service that defendant had placed on a rock. The fall pushed plaintiff's left eye and cheek into the cups and tray. Defendant acknowledged that he had lost his balance on the same stool a couple of times in the past. . . . After trial, the jury rendered a special verdict finding that defendant was negligent and that his negligence was a substantial factor in causing plaintiff's harm. The jury found plaintiff sustained a total of $75,802 in damages. . . . The jury also found that plaintiff was 30 percent negligent. After subtracting plaintiff's comparative negligence, the trial court awarded plaintiff $53,061.40. Plaintiff moved for a new trial. . . ."

Give up? It's all true. The oranges, the stool, the rock, the verdict, and even the 215 pounds.