Chude

Chude v. Jack in the Box Inc.

Good Law
109 Cal. Rptr. 3d 773·185 Cal. App. 4th 37·2010 Cal. App. LEXIS 776
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 21, 2010B212874California3,249 words

Opinion

Opinion

Aldrich, J.

INTRODUCTION

Plaintiff, Teckla Chude, an uninsured driver, suffered second-degree bums when she spilled the coffee she had just purchased at the drive-through window of defendant Jack in the Box Inc. (JIB). Her negligence action was resolved after the trial court granted JIB’s motion for summary adjudication of Chude’s claim for noneconomic damages. The court relied on Proposition 213, Civil Code section 3333.4, which bars uninsured motorists and convicted drunk drivers from recovering noneconomic damages in certain cases. At issue in Chude’s appeal is whether section 3333.4 precludes Chude from recovering an award of noneconomic damages. We hold that it does and affirm the judgment.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

The following facts are undisputed: Chude drove to the JIB on Cesar Chavez Boulevard in Los Angeles in her own car. Arriving at the drive-through menu board, Chude stopped her car and placed an order for a breakfast sandwich and a cup of hot coffee. She then drove into the drive-through lane and pulled up to the drive-through window. Chude remained seated in the driver’s seat of her car, in her seatbelt, with the engine running, the transmission in…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.