Case Background
A Connecticut Superior Court jury returned verdict on January 23, 2026, in a premises liability case filed by Lina Orozco against multiple Defendants. The lawsuit arose from an incident at a residential property located at 1776 Noble Avenue in Bridgeport, Connecticut. The property belonged to Defendant Edward Earl James.
Cause
The Plaintiff alleged that she sustained injuries during an incident at the Defendant's premises. According to Court filings, the Plaintiff claimed that the property owner and other Defendants failed to maintain safe conditions on the property. The defense raised a special defense arguing that the injuries resulted from the intentional, criminal, or reckless conduct of co-Defendant Chaz James, which broke the chain of causation between any alleged negligence by Edward Earl James and the Plaintiff's injuries. The defense maintained that Chaz James's conduct was unknown and unforeseeable to Edward Earl James and constituted a conscious disregard of the Plaintiff's rights and safety.
Injury
The Plaintiff sustained traumatic facial injury during the incident. Medical records documented bleeding around the facial wound and a laceration with contusion under the left orbital rim. The Plaintiff experienced ongoing pain in the area of the facial wound, persistent headaches, and sleep disturbance. She also suffered both mental and physical pain and suffering as a result of the incident.
Damages Sought
The Plaintiff sought compensation for economic damages including medical expenses, as well as non-economic damages for pain and suffering. The specific amount demanded was not disclosed in the Court filings, but expert witnesses were prepared to testify regarding the costs of treatment, future medical care needs, and the extent of the Plaintiff's disability.
Key Arguments and Proceedings
Legal Representation
Plaintiff: Lina Orozco
· Counsel for Plaintiff: Joanna Ramirez Haddad, Esq.
· Experts for Plaintiff: Mausim Vahora | William Ostroff | Clifford Schwarts | Mark Melendez
Defendants: James Edward Earl (property owner) | Chaz James | Chad James | Patricia Bember
· Counsel for Defendant: Ron J. Houde, Jr.
Key Arguments or Remarks by Counsel
Plaintiff's counsel argued that the Defendants failed in their duty of care to maintain safe premises and that their negligence directly caused the Plaintiff's injuries. The defense counsel for Edward Earl James contended that any negligence on the part of the property owner was superseded by the intentional and criminal conduct of co-Defendant Chaz James, which they characterized as an extreme departure from ordinary care.
Claims
The Plaintiff brought premises liability claims against all Defendants. The complaint alleged that the property owner and others invited or permitted individuals onto the property and failed to ensure the safety of visitors. The Plaintiff contended that the Defendants' negligence resulted in her facial injuries and related medical conditions. The claims sought recovery for both economic losses such as medical bills and non-economic damages for pain, suffering, and diminished quality of life.
Defense
Defendant Edward Earl James denied negligence and raised a superseding cause defense. The defense argued that even if negligence existed, the intentional and criminal actions of Chaz James broke the chain of causation. According to the answer filed on January 20, 2026, the defense claimed that Chaz James engaged in conduct that created a risk of physical injury to others in violation of Connecticut General Statutes Section 53a-64. The defense emphasized that this conduct was unknown and unforeseeable to the property owner and represented a conscious disregard of the Plaintiff's safety.
Jury Verdict
On January 23, 2026, The jury found the verdict in favor of the Plaintiff, Lina Orozco, determining that she was entitled to a total of $21,700 in fair, just, and reasonable damages. This total award consisted of $3,700 in economic damages and $18,000 in non-economic damages.
While the jury found for the Plaintiff against most Defendants, they explicitly found in favor of the Defendant Edward Earl James, meaning he bears no financial responsibility for the judgment.
For the remaining parties, the jury allocated 100% of the negligence among three liable individuals: Chad James was found to be the most responsible at 66% fault ($14,322 in damages), followed by Chaz James at 33% fault ($7,161 in damages), and Patricia Bember at 1% fault ($217 in damages).
