Wright & Greenhill shareholders, Catherine E. Marsolan and Craig Courville, successfully defended a client in a recent trial in the 261st District Court of Travis County, Texas. The lawsuit arose from an incident in which the Defendant’s vehicle rolled down his driveway, striking a brick planter in front of the Plaintiffs’ house across the street.
Plaintiffs’ argued that the brick of the damaged planter could not be matched and, thus, all of the brick on the house had to be replaced with something new. Plaintiffs’ later amended their demand to add sums for repairs to the interior of the house claiming that the impact with the planter somehow caused sheetrock to crack and moldings to separate inside the house.
The Defense argued that the brick planter did not match the rest of the house before it was damaged, as the treatment on the brick had worn away. Further, the Defense argued that the planter could have been rebuilt, the brick could have been made to match, and that Plaintiffs’ demand that the entire house be resurfaced was unreasonable and excessive.
At trial, Plaintiffs’ counsel argued that the Plaintiffs’ effort to match the brick was sufficient to establish that it could not be done, that the only way to make the Plaintiffs whole included approximately $150,000 in improvements to the house and that the Plaintiffs lost months of AirBnB rentals before they replaced the damaged planter.
The Defense argued that Plaintiffs failed to meet their burden of proof on both liability and the damages questions. The Defense presented testimony from a construction expert who explained how experienced and qualified masons could match the Plaintiffs’ brick. This witness also refuted the Plaintiffs’ claims that the cracking on the interior of their renthouse was due to the impact with the planter, pointing out that there was some evidence that the Plaintiffs’ renthouse was experiencing foundation movement.
After deliberating for less than three hours, the Travis County jury awarded less than 5% of the roughly $150,000 worth of damages requested by the Plaintiffs’ attorney during closing—and far less than the defense had previously offered to settle the case.
The majority of Catherine and Craig’s law practice revolves around defending individuals, businesses, and their employees in lawsuits alleging claims in fields that include but are not limited to personal injury, premises liability, property damage, commercial disputes, and numerous others.
Cause No. D-1-GN-22-006563; Kathleen Morton and Jason Morton v. Philip Poolok; in the 126th Judicial District, Travis County, Texas