Alonzo v. The Branding Iron Restaurant CA5

Filed 10/2/15 Alonzo v. The Branding Iron Restaurant CA5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

GREG ALONZO, F068983 Plaintiff and Appellant, (Super. Ct. No. CV000966) v.

THE BRANDING IRON RESTAURANT, OPINION

Defendant and Respondent.

APPEAL from orders of the Superior Court of Merced County. Donald J. Proietti, Judge. Arata, Swingle, Sodhi & Van Egmond, Bradley J. Swingle, Dawn L. Cullum and Ameet S. Birring for Plaintiff and Appellant. Law Offices of John A. Biard, Shawn C. Moore and Steven R. Myers for Defendant and Respondent. -ooOoo-

While at The Branding Iron Restaurant (Branding Iron), appellant Greg Alonzo, punched another Branding Iron customer. Two Branding Iron employees intervened to break up the fight. During the melee, appellant was injured. Appellant sued the Branding Iron for personal injuries. Although the jury found the Branding Iron negligent, it also found that this negligence was not a substantial factor in causing appellant’s injuries. Appellant moved for judgment notwithstanding the verdict and a new trial. The trial court denied both motions. Appellant argues that the medical expert testimony mandates a verdict in his favor. According to appellant, this testimony conclusively established that appellant’s injuries were the result of the Branding Iron employees’ action because appellant was truthful and his injuries could only have occurred one way. However, there was considerable disparity in the testimony of the eyewitnesses. Further, there was evidence that supports the jury’s causation finding. Thus, the trial court’s ruling is supported by substantial evidence and will be affirmed. BACKGROUND Appellant and his wife, Misty Alonzo, attended a pre-reunion party for Misty’s1 high school reunion at the Branding Iron. The Branding Iron was not booked for this party. Rather, some of the reunion attendees informally gathered there. By late evening, the Branding Iron had two employees on duty, bartenders Jason Bakken and Shea Morgan. Neither employee had received training in preventing or stopping fights. At around 11:00 p.m., approximately 150 patrons were at the Branding Iron. It was very busy and the Branding Iron was understaffed.