CVN screenshot of plaintiff attorney Nick Rowley (standing) delivering his opening statement
Los Angeles, CA - A California state court jury found Starbucks liable on Wednesday for severe burns a Postmates driver suffered while picking up a drive-through order, and the full trial was webcast gavel-to-gavel by Courtroom View Network.
The jury found Starbucks entirely responsible for plaintiff Michael Garcia’s injuries, assigning him no liability in the first phase of the bifurcated trial after 40 minutes of deliberation and setting up a second phase to determine damages next week to compensate for burns to his thighs and genitals.
In a brief liability phase that only lasted two days, Garcia’s attorney Nick Rowley of Trial Lawyers for Justice told the Los Angeles County jury that the barista working the window failed to properly secure one of the hot drinks in the takeout container, however Starbucks unsuccessfully maintained the spill only occurred after Garcia had total physical control of the beverages.
Sign up today for a monthly or annual subscription to CVN’s trial video library and get unlimited on-demand access to last week’s liability phase, the upcoming damages phase, and hundreds more trials featuring many of the best plaintiff and defense attorneys in the country.
Rowley delivered a “hands on” opening statement with Garcia seated directly next to him, at times interacting with Garcia to recreate the act of handing a tray of drinks through a car window.
Rowley told jurors Starbucks had a documented corporate policy that drinks must be fully secured in a tray, and he said surveillance video from inside the drive-through clearly showed one of the three cups not fully placed in the container.
He also rejected arguments from Starbucks that having an unrestrained dog in the car contributed to Garcia’s injuries, stressing it wasn’t in violation of any local ordinance and that it shouldn’t affect how a Starbucks employee does their job.
“This young man did nothing to cause this to happen,” Rowley insisted. “Nothing at all.”
Representing Starbucks, Stephen Pelletier of Price Pelletier LLP disputed Rowley’s characterizing of the surveillance video, instead telling jurors that an accident reconstruction expert determined Garcia was in full control of the drinks when they spilled.
He argued Garcia had made similar orders countless times before, knew he would be holding scalding hot beverages, and should have taken the same care that he supposedly used every time prior.
Pelletier defended the training Starbucks employees undergo, and he said their actions that day all complied with those standards.
“In this case, the handoff was successful and it must be evaluated from the point where the drinks are moved from the counter all the way to point where the drink spilled,” Pelletier explained.
The trial is taking place before Judge Frederick Shaller.
The case is captioned Michael Garcia v. Starbucks Corporation, case number 20STCV10214 in Los Angeles County Superior Court.
E-mail David Siegel at dsiegel@cvn.com
