Sherman

Sherman v. Kinetic Concepts, Inc.

Bad Law
1998 Cal. App. LEXIS 946·67 Cal. App. 4th 1152·79 Cal. Rptr. 2d 641·98 Daily Journal DAR 11781·98 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 8493
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 17, 1998G018314California4,238 words

Opinion

Opinion

Sonenshine, J.

Robert and Janice Sherman appeal from a judgment following a jury trial of their product liability/negligence action against Kinetic Concepts, Inc. (KCI). Sherman contends the court should have granted a new trial and imposed sanctions against KCI for litigation improprieties, including its failure to disclose certain evidence during discovery.

We agree. As we will explain, throughout the litigation, KCI failed to produce and concealed the existence of crucial documents relating to material issues in the Shermans’ lawsuit. Compounding that inexcusable dereliction of its discovery obligations, at trial KCI created the false impression its product rarely malfunctioned and then with only transient, inconsequential effects on the consumer. In truth, the dozens of undisclosed incident reports told a far different story about both the frequency and gravity of the problem. To the Shermans’ prejudice, the jury never had a chance to evaluate liability against the backdrop of the big picture.

Fortuitously learning of the evidence just after the verdict, the Shermans moved for a new trial. The court denied them relief. It further concluded it was without jurisdiction to award them…

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.