Keri Bernard Ligerman has filed a premises liability complaint against Stanley Black, following an incident where she fell on the driveway of his home. The complaint was filed in the Superior Court of Los Angeles County on May 2021. However, after a series of legal proceedings, the trial court granted summary judgment in favor of Black, leading Ligerman to appeal the decision.
The case revolves around an incident that occurred on May 18, 2019, when Ligerman attended a charity event at Black's residence. According to the facts presented, Ligerman parked her car on Black's driveway and while walking towards her cousin, she tripped and fell. The driveway, made of concrete stamped in a cobblestone pattern since 1984, was dry and clear at the time of the fall. Ligerman alleged that her sandal got wedged between the cobblestone impressions causing her to trip.
Ligerman’s lawsuit claimed that Black and his employees were negligent in maintaining the driveway and failed to protect her from what she described as "a known danger." She cited previous incidents including one where her daughter had also fallen on the same driveway while wearing heels between 2010 and 2015. Despite this claim, there were no other reported falls or complaints about the driveway from over 200 guests who attended more than 120 events at Black's home since its installation.
In response to Ligerman’s claims, Black moved for summary judgment arguing that any defect in the driveway was trivial and not dangerous. He further asserted that he had no notice of any hazardous condition. The trial court agreed with Black’s position stating that he had successfully demonstrated there was no dangerous condition present and shifted the burden back to Ligerman to prove otherwise. However, after reviewing evidence including expert testimonies and photographs of the driveway, the court concluded that any defects were indeed trivial as a matter of law.
Ligerman's expert witness provided measurements indicating height differentials within acceptable ranges deemed trivial by precedent cases. The court also noted that additional factors such as weather conditions being clear and sunny at the time did not indicate an increased risk. Furthermore, photographs submitted by Ligerman’s attorney were excluded due to lack of authentication.
On appeal, Ligerman argued that there were still triable issues regarding whether a defect existed in Black’s driveway and if he had notice of it. Nonetheless, both parties' arguments led back to whether any alleged defect could be considered significant enough under California law which applies principles like premises liability and trivial defect doctrine.
Ligerman sought damages for negligence but faced significant challenges proving causation without admissible evidence showing a substantial defect or prior knowledge by Black about potential hazards posed by his driveway. The appellate court ultimately affirmed the trial court's decision granting summary judgment in favor of Stanley Black.
The attorneys representing Keri Bernard Ligerman were from Ferguson Case Orr Paterson with Joshua S. Hopstone leading while Olson Law Group represented Stanley Black with Sonali Olson and Sherri E. Matta as counsel. Judge Jill T. Feeney presided over this case under Case ID: B329347.