|
One
of the strengths of the Law Offices of Kenneth Meleyco
is our broad range of cases that we handle. Few other
practices have this ability when it comes to catastrophic
injuries and deaths.
Areas
of Practice
- General
negligence involving premises liability, automobile
and truck cases
- Civil
rights violation
- Product
liability including automobile defects
- Legal
malpractice and malicious prosecution
AUTO
Knudtson
v Bates
A
thirty-year-old cement finisher, was on his way home
from the Bay Area and passing through San Joaquin County.
While traveling on Peltier Road (a two-lane farm road),
the Defendant crossed the center median and collided
head-on into his vehicle. Mr. Knudtson sustained fractures
throughout his body along with a closed head injury.
The brain injury prevents him from working. He will
need medical treatment for the rest of his life.
Pedraza
v Primavera Ag Services
Mr.
Pedraza, a Merced, California, farm laborer was being
driven to work in a farm labor van. While traveling
in very foggy weather conditions, the driver of the
van ran into a big rig that was crossing the highway,
killing Mr. Pedraza. On behalf of the wife and family,
a lawsuit was filed against the big rig company and
the driver of the farm labor van along with the employer.
We were able to establish that the driver of the farm
labor van was in fact an agent and employee of the farmer,
to obtain insurance in this matter.
Perez
v Federal Express
In Merced, CA, a Chevrolet Camaro,
operated by a sixty-five-year-old retired farm worker,
was stopped at a railroad crossing for an oncoming train.
There were two passengers riding in the back seat. A
Federal Express truck rear-ended the Camaro and shoved
it onto the railroad tracks--into the path of an oncoming
train. Because of the damage to the Camaro, the passenger
door was jammed shut. The two passengers were able to
escape. Mr. Perez, the driver did not. Unsuccessful
attempts were made to push the Camaro off the railroad
tracks. The train struck the Camaro, killing Mr. Perez.
We represented his family of thirteen sons and daughters
against Federal Express.
AUTO
v. BICYCLE
Valenzuela
v Farmers
This
case concerned a boy, who became a paraplegic due to
an accident when his bicycle was hit by an automobile.
We settled the paraplegic case for the son and then
proceeded to the Appellate Court seeking compensation
for the parents. The Court of Appeal after the San Joaquin
County Superior Court granted summary judgment on the
rights of the parents. We pursued an appeal, which reversed
the Court's decision allowing the parents to recover
future costs of taking care of their son.
AUTO
v. PEDESTRIAN
Gough
v Quinones
A
high school senior was jogging near his house in a rural
area in San Joaquin County when two dogs suddenly came
running out and startled him. He moved to the center
of the road and a driver coming down the road at a high
speed hit him. The young man was severely injured, which
affected his future athletic career.
BIG
RIG
Ibarra
v Worthington
On
a Saturday afternoon, Mr. Ibarra, age twenty-four, was
traveling on Interstate 5 in Stockton, California. He
was following his brother to go look at a speedboat
that was for sale. The Defendant's crane truck, which
was traveling far ahead of them, dropped a metal sand
pad. The sand pad is a piece of steel 24 x 24 inches
wide and is used to support the crane trucksą outriggers.
When the sand pad fell off the truck, it landed in the
middle of the freeway. Another vehicle failed to avoid
it and kicked it up where it went through the windshield
of Mr. Ibarra's vehicle. He sustained an open head injury
and severe brain damage. He was in the hospital for
approximately ninety days, half of which he was in a
coma. Mr. Ibarra will require assisted living for the
rest of his life.
Ray
v Scully
Late
one night, a fifty-four-year-old nurse was on her way
home traveling on Interstate 5 in San Joaquin County
in a small red Dodge Neon. She ran into another car,
which apparently ran out of gas and was stopped on the
freeway. Approximately ten seconds later, a big rig
driven by a driver employed by Scully ran over the car
and dragged it across the center median, killing the
Ms. Ray. We represented her three adult sons who lived
out of state. Experts hired by us proved in a re-enactment
of the accident scene that the Scully driver had ten
seconds to either stop his truck or to change to a different
lane.
CIVIL
RIGHTS
Beeby
v City of Manteca -- (pending)
On July 21, 1997, the Manteca
Police Department was called to a small apartment, to
check out suspicious characters. Two of the three people
came out of the apartment at the request of the Manteca
Police, the third, Mr. Beeby failed to do so. The Manteca
Police were unable to get Beeby to come out of the apartment,
and proceeded into the apartment. When the officers
were inside, they thought that Beeby was pulling out
a shotgun. They left the apartment. After a period of
approximately ten seconds, Beeby appeared at the doorway
of his apartment and in broad daylight, the police officers
opened fire and killed him. The case is pending in Sacramento
Federal Court and is set for trial. We represent the
parents of Mr. Beeby.
DISCRIMINATION
Olivarez
v Stockton Savings and Loan
Stockton
Savings and Loan repossessed a large office building
located in downtown Stockton. They evicted a Hispanic
tenant, stating she had the wrong type of insurance.
However, she had the same type of insurance for many
years. Suit was filed in Sacramento Federal Court for
discrimination.
ELDER
ABUSE
Gaines
v C.C.K. Health Care
A
sixty-year-old man with mental disabilities was being
cared for in a convalescent home. When his mother and
his two sisters went to visit him, they discovered a
plastic bag around his foot. The nurses' aides told
them that the plastic bag was there to keep the smell
down. When the family removed the bag, it was discovered
that the wound in the heel was infested with maggots.
Eventually, the lack of treatment by the facility caused
the need to amputate the foot and subsequent death.
Our firm represented the family against the care facility
for nursing care abuse.
EMPLOYMENT
INJURY
Garibay
v Tutor-Saliba Corporation
This
is a third party case for a worker who was on a platform
at the Oakland Coliseum when it was being remodeled.
The worker fell backwards onto rebar because the Defendant
had failed to place guardrails on the platform. Suit
was filed in Alameda County Superior Court against the
general contractor who failed to follow OSHA regulations
requiring guardrails.
Robertson v Shorey
The
owner of a contruction cement firm was injured in Stockton,
CA, when, while he was checking on the status of some
work, the scaffolding on which he was elevated collapsed.
We represented the cement firm owner against the company
that set up the defective scaffolding.
Sanchez v Bay Area Builders
We
represented a thirty-five-year-old tile setter who was
working on a construction team at a Jack-in-the-Box
restaurant in Hayward, California. When scaffolding
collapsed, he received severe injuries which ultimately
resulted in the amputation of his right leg below the
knee. We represented him and his wife against the general
contractor who was responsible for the collapse of the
scaffolding.
INTENTIONAL
INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS
Whittle
v KOVR-TV
One evening, in a suburban area
north of Sacramento, California, an emotionally distraught
mother shot her two children while they were sleeping
and then killed herself. The father came home, reported
the incident to the police department and then went
out and sat on the front lawn. The police arrived, and
the house was separated apart from the neighboring homes
with yellow tape.
In
the house next door lived two children, five and seven,
who were being baby-sat by a thirteen-year-old girl.
The parents of the children with the baby-sitter were
unable to get to the house because it had been roped
off. Shortly after the shootings, a news reporter working
for Channel 13, KOVR-TV arrived on the scene and went
to the house the children and baby-sitter occupied.
The reporter discovered that the children, who had been
watching a movie, were unaware of any of the events
that had transpired next door. With the cameras rolling,
the reporter then informed them that the children in
the house next door had been killed by their mother
and then asked them for their opinions.
We
represented the children and their parents after a number
of law firms in Sacramento had turned the case down.
The case went up to the Court of Appeal in Sacramento
for a landmark decision that upheld the rights of the
children and their parents to sue the television reporters
for intentional infliction of emotional distress. The
court agreed that it could be argued that the only reason
to tell the children of this event next door was to
get an emotional reaction to put on the eleven o'clock
news.
MOLESTATION
J. R. v Ross
We
represented a young boy who had been repeatedly molested
by his baby-sitter. We filed suit against the father
of the molester on the grounds that he negligently allowed
his son to continue babysitting, after he noticed that
his son had a propensity to molest young boys. The case
proceeded to trial and was successful in obtaining the
homeowners insurance information so as to obtain compensation
after a substantial verdict in a trial against the homeowners
insurance company.
MOTORCYCLE
Cartner
v Rashid
Mr.
Catner was fifty years old and a long-term Harley Davidson
motorcycle rider. He was traveling on Highway 99 one
morning and was rear-ended and thrown off his motorcycle
in stop-and-go traffic. Another vehicle then rode over
him. The case settled for the insurance policy limits.
Meleyco Law Firm represented the three surviving sons
of Plaintiff.
NUISANCE
and PERSONAL RIGHTS
Coffey
v Linacia
In the Downtown Stockton area,
a large commercial building had been constructed. We
represented a family who had lived in the nearby residential
area for quite some time prior to the construction.
The owners of the commercial building placed three large
air compressors on the property line to cool the building
down. We sued the owners of the commercial building
for nuisance. Eventually during the pendency of the
case, the owners moved the air conditioning compressors
to a different underground location.
PREMISES
LIABILITY
Shepard
v Gold Hanger
A
woman was shopping with her nephew at a store in the
Weberstown Mall in Stockton, California, when a cabinet
fell over backwards and struck her in the neck. Initially,
it was thought she had soft tissue injuries, but it
was found she had a herniated disk. She had surgery
by a Stockton neurologist, but after that surgery failed,
she had to have a plate placed in her neck. In 1994,
we took this case to court in San Joaquin County and
obtained a verdict of $965,000.00 against the store
for a poorly designed cabinet.
PRODUCTS
LIABILITY
Abed
v S.R. Smith
A
family purchased a north Stockton home and on the second
day of ownership, began using the pool slide that came
with the home. As the mother, age thirty, was using
the pool slide, it broke while she was on her way down,
causing severe lacerations to her foot. The lacerations
never completely healed because of infections, even
after a necessary hospital stay. Meleyco Law Firm was
able to show that the pool slide was one of the few
that had been manufactured with plastic that was too
thin. The manufacturer was aware of this but had failed
to initiate a recall.
Cassandra
v. Ford
A
farm labor contractor was struck head-on by a drunk
driver on his way to work. He had been trapped in the
truck because of the impact. We represented the family
(mother and two adult daughters) who sued Ford Motor
Company because after the impact, the vehicle caught
on fire. Ford had failed to prevent the vehicle from
catching on fire by employing a simple method.
Geigle
v. J. Robinson Leasing
We
represented the family of a woman truck driver who was
killed when the transfer truck she was driving inadvertently
started up and crushed her between the truck and trailer.
Experts found there were no safety devices in place
to prevent this from happening.
Giusti
v Far West
An
auto mechanic was injured on his way home from work
riding a bicycle down a residential street. He failed
to see the sign owned by the defendants and ran into
it. The sign did not have sand bags to hold it up, plus
it was too tall, and had fallen into the street. The
sign was lying in the shade of a tree, and the experts
hired determined that no one could have seen the fallen
sign within stopping distance. Mr. Giusti was unable
to work as a mechanic as a result of the injuries.
Miller
v Nalco Chemical
A
forty-year-old single father had worked at a tomato
packing company as a mechanic for fifteen years, was
walking by some pipes that had been installed by Nalco
Chemical Company. Nalco is the largest chemical company
in the world. While he was closely inspecting the pipes,
a fitting burst. He was sprayed with toxic chemicals
that affected his ability to have sexual intercourse
and limited his walking ability. After three weeks at
trial the case settled in San Joaquin County Superior
Court.
Stewart
v General Tire
In
Martinez, California, a defective tire on a small sport
utility vehicle blew out. The driver lost control of
the vehicle as a result. The passenger's back was broken.
TEACHER
RESPONSIBILITY
Davis
v Lodi Academy
An
eleven-year-old boy was taken by a private high school
coach at his school to the gymnasium. At the gymnasium,
there was a high wire which children were allowed to
go up and go across. Because the belt's safety mechanism
was improperly attached, he fell approximately twelve
feet onto a mat, after taking just a couple of steps
out onto the high wire. The case went to jury trial
in San Joaquin County Superior Court and the jury awarded
the boy compensation for sustained injuries. The Court
found that the uninsured gymnasium was the agent of
the private high school for insurance purposes.
UNINSURED
MOTORIST
Brais
v CSAA #3C3E15
Late
one night in Stockton, California, Mr. Brais (fifty
years old) was driving home alone when his car was impacted
by a vehicle that was being chased by the California
Highway Patrol. He sustained fractures and closed-head
injuries. His family noticed a change in his attitude
and his outlook on life after getting out of the hospital.
As the driver of the car that ran into him was uninsured,
this suit was brought against his uninsured motorist
provisions of his automobile policy with California
State Automobile Association ("CSAA"). Eventually, after
receiving the reports from doctors and having a number
of hearings in court, CSAA was disallowed from expanding
their rights already under the policy. CSAA paid the
policy limits.
|
