Petrossi v. Mikolich CA5

Filed 4/2/13 Petrossi v. Mikolich 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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       EDWARD PETROSSI, F064854 Plaintiff and Appellant, (Super. Ct. No. 659547) v.

KELLY SPURLOCK MIKOLICH et al., OPINION Defendants and Respondents.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Stanislaus County. William A. Mayhew, Judge. Edward Petrossi, in pro. per., for Plaintiff and Appellant. Susana Alcala Wood, City Attorney, and James F. Wilson, Deputy City Attorney, for Defendants and Respondents. -ooOoo- This is an appeal from a judgment for defendants and respondents, Kelly Mikolich and David Perine, entered after a jury returned a unanimous verdict in their favor in a personal injury action. Plaintiff and appellant, Edward Petrossi, contends the trial court erred in admitting and excluding certain evidence and that the trial judge failed to

disclose that he was incapacitated by illness during the trial. There is no merit to plaintiff’s contentions. We affirm the judgment. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY Plaintiff sued defendants for personal injury seeking compensatory and punitive damages. The matter went to trial on plaintiff’s first amended complaint. The evidence apparently credited by the jury disclosed that defendants, both Modesto police officers, were dispatched to an apartment building to investigate a report of a man sitting outside in his pajamas talking to himself. In response to questioning from Mikolich, plaintiff said he had stopped taking his medication and was contemplating harming himself. Mikolich handcuffed plaintiff and both officers helped plaintiff to his feet. They escorted him to Mikolich’s patrol car. He got in the back seat and Mikolich fastened his seatbelt. She drove at normal speeds to a local mental health hospital, where she filled out the forms to admit plaintiff for a 72-hour evaluation. (See Welfare & Inst. Code, § 5150 et seq.) The hospital took custody of plaintiff and the officers returned to their normal duties about 40 minutes after the original dispatch. Plaintiff testified he was sitting on the lawn meditating when the officers snuck up behind him. Without any conversation, they handcuffed him and placed him in Mikolich’s patrol car, not fastening his seatbelt. Mikolich turned on her siren and drove fast and erratically, turning hard at various points so plaintiff was thrown around in the rear of the car. When she stopped in a parking lot, Perine opened the door and pulled plaintiff out by his feet. Perine used his foot to hold plaintiff’s head to the pavement while two or three unknown persons kicked plaintiff to unconsciousness. Plaintiff drifted in and out of consciousness, but awoke to find himself confined at the mental hospital. He was released later that day. He testified he suffered bruising and permanent, disabling injury to his back and neck. A nursing supervisor, relying on the medical records of the mental hospital, testified that plaintiff did not appear to be injured when admitted to the facility.