Case Background
The legal proceedings began on October 17, 2019, when Dorinda Barnes initiated a civil lawsuit within the unlimited civil jurisdiction of the Superior Court of California for the County of Santa Cruz. Filed under case number 19CV03152, the litigation originally named Whole Foods Market, Inc. and 25 unidentified "Doe" Defendants. In November 2019, Barnes discovered the proper entity name and filed an amendment to substitute Whole Foods Market California, Inc. as the primary Defendant.
The case remained in the judicial system for several years before reaching its final stages in late 2025 and early 2026. A trial calendar call took place on December 31, 2025, setting the stage for a jury trial that officially commenced on January 12, 2026. The proceedings were held in Department 5 before the Honorable Syda K. Cogliati, where a jury of twelve individuals was impaneled to hear testimony and review evidence regarding the incident.
Cause
The lawsuit originated from a specific incident involving the use and maintenance of the Capitola Whole Foods Market store. Barnes alleged that the company and one of its employees, Jacqueline Lequigan, acted negligently. The core of the legal claim was that this negligence served as a substantial factor in creating an unsafe environment that led to the Plaintiff’s harm.
Injury
While the provided documents do not detail specific physical diagnoses, the litigation focused on the "harm" Barnes suffered as a direct result of the store's alleged failure to exercise ordinary care. The defense countered this by claiming that any injuries were actually the proximate cause of conditions or occurrences that happened either before or after the store incident, for which the company bore no responsibility.
Damages Sought
Barnes sought financial compensation for her losses through the unlimited civil jurisdiction of the Court. Her claims for damages included past non-economic losses and future non-economic losses. These types of damages typically cover intangible suffering such as physical pain, mental anguish, and emotional distress rather than specific medical bills or lost wages.
Key Arguments and Proceedings
The litigation moved forward into a formal trial phase several years after the initial filing. On December 31, 2025, the Court held a trial calendar call to finalize the schedule. The jury trial officially commenced on January 12, 2026, in Department 5 of the Santa Cruz Superior Court, with the Honorable Syda K. Cogliati presiding. During the proceedings, a jury of twelve individuals was impaneled and sworn to hear the evidence. The trial involved the swearing in and testimony of various witnesses as both sides presented their versions of the events at the Capitola store.
Legal Representation
Plaintiff(s): Dorinda Barnes
· Counsel for Plaintiff(s): William E. Lombardini | Robert Bohn, Jr.
Defendant(s): Whole Foods Market California, Inc.
· Counsel for Defendant(s): J.T. Wells Blaxter | Erin W. Keefe | Brian R. Blackman | David P. Adams
Key Arguments or Remarks by Counsel
The attorneys for both parties presented closing arguments after the evidence had been introduced. The Plaintiff’s side focused on the responsibility of the grocery store to keep its premises safe for shoppers. Conversely, the defense team argued that the company had met its legal obligations and that the Plaintiff had failed to prove the store was at fault for her situation.
Claims
Barnes based her lawsuit on the theory of negligence. She argued that Whole Foods Market California, Inc. acted carelessly in how it used or maintained the Capitola store location. Additionally, she claimed that a specific employee, Jacqueline Lequigan, had also been negligent in the performance of her duties. Barnes contended that this combined carelessness was the direct and substantial factor that caused her harm.
Defense
Whole Foods Market California, Inc. filed a vigorous defense, starting with a general denial of every allegation in the complaint. The company raised several affirmative defenses to shield itself from liability. First, it argued that the complaint failed to state a valid legal claim. The defense further asserted that if any negligence had occurred, it was actually the fault of Barnes herself or other third parties not involved in the lawsuit.
They also argued that Barnes had a legal duty to mitigate her damages and had failed to do so. Another significant part of the defense was the argument of comparative negligence; the company claimed that Barnes had not used ordinary care for her own safety, which should either bar her from recovering any money or at least reduce the amount significantly. Finally, they maintained that even if they were found liable for non-economic damages, their financial responsibility should be limited strictly to their proportionate percentage of fault.
Jury Verdict
The jury concluded its deliberations and returned a unanimous verdict on January 30, 2026. The jurors were asked to answer a series of specific questions to determine liability. Regarding the first issue, the jury found that Whole Foods Market California, Inc. was not negligent in the use or maintenance of the Capitola store. On the second issue, the jury found that the employee, Jacqueline Lequigan, was also not negligent.
Because the jury answered "no" to both questions regarding negligence, they followed the Court’s instructions to stop and answer no further questions regarding substantial factors or damages. The presiding juror signed the verdict form, confirming that the store and its employee were not at fault for the incident.
Following the jury’s decision, the Court issued a formal "Judgment on Jury Verdict" on February 18, 2026. Judge Syda K. Cogliati decreed that judgment be entered entirely in favor of Whole Foods Market California, Inc. The Court ordered that Dorinda Barnes would take nothing from the lawsuit. Additionally, the Court ruled that as the prevailing party, Whole Foods was entitled to recover its legal costs from the Plaintiff.
Court Documents
