Domino’s/photo by Susan Montgomery/Shutterstock.comDomino's Blamed for Actions of Franchisee's Driver
A jury awarded nearly $9 million for a motorist's death after he was paralyzed in a crash while trying to avoid a Domino's driver.
August 05, 2019 at 01:57 PM
1 minute read
WRONGFUL DEATH
ORANGE CIRCUIT COURT
A jury found the Domino’s Pizza chain was liable for damages of nearly $9 million stemming from a motor-vehicle crash blamed on one of its delivery drivers.
The matter dates to Jan. 13, 2011, when Richard Wiederhold, 61, suffered a paralyzing injury in a truck accident. He died the following year. His estate blamed his death on a pizza delivery driver veering into Wiederhold’s path, causing him to crash into a tree.
The main defense strategy at trial was to divorce Domino’s from the franchisee that employed the driver, but the jury found the franchisee and the driver were agents of Domino’s. It awarded Wiederhold’s estate $8.98 million.
Case: Wiederhold v. Domino’s Pizza
Case No.: 2011-CA-001589-O
Plaintiffs attorneys: Alexandria Avera, Mark A. Avera and Benjamin J. Steinberg, Avera & Smith, Gainesville
Defense attorneys: Dinah Stein, Hicks, Porter, Ebenfeld & Stein, Miami; Richard S. Womble and Christine V. Zharova, Rissman, Barrett, Hurt, Donahue, McLain & Mangan, Orlando
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All
Second Circuit Ruling Expands VPPA Scope: What Organizations Need to Know
6 minute read
'They Got All Bent Out of Shape:' Parkland Lawyers Clash With Each Other
Courts of Appeal Conflicted Over Rule 1.442(c)(3) When Claims for Damages Involve a Husband and Wife
Families Settle Court Battle Over Who Owns Parkland Killer's Name, Likeness
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Largest Law Firms: Firm Leadership and Practice Areas
- 2Largest Law Firms: New Jersey and Firmwide Attorney Count
- 3Legal Speak at General Counsel Conference East 2024: Marc Mandel, Senior Vice President & General Counsel at EXOS
- 4Florida Seeks to Short-Circuit Tech Fight
- 5From Tires to Tracks: Goodyear Chief Risk Officer Joins Union Pacific as Legal Chief
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250
