Grace v. Mansourian

240 Cal. App. 4th 523, 192 Cal. Rptr. 3d 551 (2015)

From our private database of 46,000+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Grace v. Mansourian

California Court of Appeal
240 Cal. App. 4th 523, 192 Cal. Rptr. 3d 551 (2015)

Facts

Following an automobile accident, Timothy Grace (plaintiff) prevailed on a negligence action against Levik Mansourian, who drove the other car, and Satina Mansourian, who owned it (defendants). Timothy alleged that Levik ran a red light, injuring Timothy and causing him to suffer injury to his ankle, back, and neck. Timothy filed a motion to recover costs of proof for the failure of the Mansourians to admit certain requests for admissions regarding negligence, causation, and damages. Specifically, Timothy asked the Mansourians to admit that Levik failed to stop at the red light; that such failure was negligent and the actual and legal cause of Timothy’s damages, which included pain, suffering, and emotional distress; and that Timothy was not negligent. Timothy also asked for an admission that because of the accident, Timothy required and received necessary medical treatment that was within the standard of care and that all medical bills were reasonable. The Mansourians denied all these requests and repeated the denials after retaining experts. However, the Mansourians offered no expert testimony or other evidence at trial as to liability other than Levik’s testimony that he did not believe that he ran a red light, despite eyewitness and expert evidence to the contrary, which they knew about before trial. The trial court denied Timothy’s motion, finding that the Mansourians had a reasonable basis to deny the requests. Timothy appealed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Thompson, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 742,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 742,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,000 briefs, keyed to 986 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 742,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,000 briefs - keyed to 986 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership