Case Background
Praxedes Benitez lived in Los Angeles County. On November 8, 2020, she walked along a public sidewalk in Los Angeles. The sidewalk belonged to the City of Los Angeles. According to her complaint, the walkway was not properly inspected, maintained, or repaired. Benitez claimed the City and unnamed defendants shared responsibility for its condition.
Cause
While walking with due care, Benitez tripped and fell on the sidewalk. She alleged the surface was dangerous because of poor maintenance and neglect. She argued the City failed to perform inspections, make repairs, or warn pedestrians about the hazard. She further alleged the City’s employees created or ignored the condition. She maintained the City and Does 1 to 20 knew, or reasonably should have known, about the risk before her fall.
Injury
Benitez sustained serious injuries from the fall. She reported physical harm that required medical care. Her injuries disrupted her daily life, causing pain and limiting her ability to function normally.
Damages
Benitez sought compensation for hospital and medical expenses, wage loss, loss of earning capacity, and general damages. She also claimed non-economic losses, including pain and suffering. She asked the Court to determine the exact amount of her recovery according to proof.
Key Arguments and Proceedings
Legal Representation
Plaintiff: Praxedes Benitez
Counsel for Plaintiff: Raymond Perez
Defendants: 614 Garfield LLC | City of Los Angeles
Counsel for Defendants: Christina Patrizia Schmidt
Claims
Benitez asserted three causes of action. First, negligence under premises liability against the City of Los Angeles and Does 1 to 20. Second, willful failure to warn against Doe defendants, alleging deliberate neglect of known dangers. Third, dangerous condition of public property against the City and Does 1 to 20, claiming actual or constructive notice of the hazard. She requested compensatory damages, costs, and other relief deemed just and proper.
Defense
The City of Los Angeles denied all allegations in Praxedes Benitez’s complaint and asserted multiple defenses. The City argued that Benitez’s own negligence contributed to her injuries, and that third parties also bore responsibility. It further claimed she knowingly assumed the risk of injury.
The City raised additional defenses including the statute of limitations, failure to comply with the California Tort Claims Act, and failure to mitigate damages. It also invoked statutory immunities under the California Government Code and Streets & Highways Code, arguing it owed no liability for the alleged sidewalk condition. The City sought dismissal of the action, recovery of costs, and other relief deemed proper.
Settlement
On December 12, 2023, Praxedes Benitez and the City of Los Angeles reached a settlement resolving her premises liability lawsuit. The agreement provided Benitez with $160,000 in compensation in exchange for dismissal of the case and release of all claims, thereby concluding the litigation before the scheduled trial date.
Court Documents
Court documents are available for purchase upon request at [email protected]
