CVN screenshot of defense attorney Scott Schnebbe delivering his closing argument
San Diego, CA - A California state court jury has returned a defense verdict in a premises liability lawsuit filed by a woman claiming a fall on a wet floor near a fast food restaurant’s soda machine caused her serious back injury, and the full trial was recorded gavel-to-gavel by Courtroom View Network.
The San Diego County jury delivered their verdict on August 18 following a five-day trial. They found El Pollo Grill Inc. not liable for injuries plaintiff Rosalva Arellano allegedly sustained in a fall in 2024 that her attorneys blamed on El Pollo staff failing to regularly inspect the premises and frequently filling their own personal cups without lids from the soda station.
She sought over $711,000 for a ruptured disc in her back that will eventually require invasive fusion surgery, however attorneys for El Pollo successfully argued no clear evidence existed to prove the actual cause of Arellano’s fall, which they suggested could have been caused by her own flip-flop shoes.
Subscribers to CVN’s online trial video library get unlimited on-demand access to the full trial, including all witness testimony and hundreds more trials featuring many of the top plaintiff and defense civil trial attorneys practicing today. Sign up for a CVN account today and get a virtual front row seat to courtrooms around the country. It’s like Netflix for trial lawyers.
Defense attorney Wallace “Wally” Sweet of the Law Offices of Scott C Stratman, which partners with Farmers Insurance, told CVN after the trial that while he declined to comment on the verdict he had a positive experience with a trial being webcast gavel-to-gavel for the first time.
“The only thing I would want to tell anyone who followed it is that the CVN process was seamless for us,” Sweet said.
“I was hesitant at first because it felt like an unnecessary complication, but now I would agree to your organization being involved in any trial going forward,” he added.
Sweet acknowledged the reality that defense attorneys are often skeptical about media coverage of a trial, but he urged his colleagues not to immediately take that position if CVN petitions a court to similarly cover one of their trials.
“I honestly thought it was very well run from CVN and would encourage others to agree and cooperate if given the chance,” Sweet said.
Attorneys for the plaintiff at San Diego Injury Law Center did not respond to a request for comment.
CVN screenshot of plaintiff attorney Matthew Majd delivering his closing argument
Attorney Matthew Majd told jurors during his closing on behalf of Arellano the fall was a direct result of El Pollo’s supposedly lax and unwritten cleaning policies along with staff frequently refilling lidless cups at the soda machine.
“This happened because the restaurant created an unsafe condition and failed to reasonably inspect its own premises,” he told the jury. “This fall caused her real lasting harm.”
He presented surveillance video that showed an employee filling a lidless cup shortly before Arellano’s fall, and he noted a store manager testified this happened up to 20 times a day and was even encouraged.
Majd argued Arellano’s quality of life is substantially reduced by her back injury, forcing her to give up a social services job and dramatically scale back her caregiving activities for family members.
However defense attorney Scott Schnebbe, also of Law Offices of Scott C Stratman, told jurors the plaintiff’s case was largely based on speculation versus admitted evidence.
“We have no idea what caused this slip and fall,” Schnebbe said during his closing. “Speculation is not evidence.“
He maintained nobody testified as to when the liquid supposedly spilled on the floor or even where it came from, noting that Arellano had a cup with liquid in her hand at the time she fell and adding that Arellano characterized the liquid as “minor droplets” on the floor.
“Is it possible those minor droplets that she discovered after she fell came from her own drink that she was holding,” Schnebbe asked. “Again that’s for you the jury to decide.”
He urged jurors to reject theories about the spill coming from employees refilling their drinks, describing it as a common practice that shouldn’t play a role in the jury’s deliberations without direct evidence the liquid on the ground came from an employee’s cup.
“Has there been any evidence that any one of them has ever spilled something on the floor causing a slip and fall? The answer is no,” Schnebbe emphasized. “With all due respect you cannot make your verdict in this case based on speculation and assumptions.”
The trial took place before Judge Kevin Enright.
The case is captioned Rosalva Arellano v. El Pollo Grill Inc., case number 25CU001508C in San Diego County Superior Court
Email David Siegel at dsiegel@cvn.com
