Case Background
Gerry Goodman filed a lawsuit against the City of Fresno following a motorcycle accident that happened on April 10, 2021. Goodman had been riding his motorcycle on Cherry Avenue in Fresno when he encountered a defect in the pavement. He claimed that this specific roadway defect caused him to lose control, leading to an accident that resulted in personal injuries and damage to his property. Goodman alleged that the City of Fresno owned and managed the roadway and had allowed it to remain in a dangerous state.
Cause
The primary cause of the legal action centered on a pavement defect on Cherry Avenue. Goodman argued that the City of Fresno had failed to maintain the road properly, creating a substantial risk for anyone using the area. He further contended that the city either knew about the hazard for a long enough time to fix it or that its employees had actually created the dangerous condition through their own negligence.
Injury
As a result of the accident, Goodman suffered injuries to his health, strength, and physical activity. The complaint stated that he experienced significant mental, physical, and emotional pain. Furthermore, he claimed that the injuries prevented him from attending to his usual job, which greatly impaired his ability to earn money both immediately after the crash and into the future.
Damages Sought
Goodman asked the Court for several types of financial compensation. He sought general damages for his pain and suffering, as well as special damages to cover all his medical expenses. Additionally, he requested reimbursement for his lost earnings and the loss of his future earning capacity. He also asked that the city pay for his legal costs and requested a trial by jury to decide the case.
Key Arguments and Proceedings
The legal battle moved through the Superior Court of California in Fresno County. After Goodman filed his initial complaint, the City of Fresno responded with a formal answer that denied nearly all of his allegations. The city argued that it was not responsible for Goodman's injuries and that he was not entitled to any of the money he was seeking.
Legal Representation
Plaintiff(s): Gerry Goodman.
· Counsel for Plaintiff(s): Robert F. Buzzard
Defendant(s): City of Fresno California.
· Counsel for Defendant(s): Jeremy J. Schroeder | Mandy L. Jeffcoach | Rina M. Gonzales
Key Arguments or Remarks by Counsel
The attorneys for both sides presented sharply different views of the accident during the proceedings.
Claims
Goodman’s legal team argued that the City of Fresno had a clear duty to keep its public roads safe for motorists. They claimed the pavement defect was a "dangerous condition" under California law and was the direct cause of Goodman’s motorcycle crash. They insisted that the city had enough time to discover and repair the defect but failed to act, making the city legally liable for the resulting harm.
Defense
The City of Fresno raised over thirty separate defenses to fight the lawsuit. Their main argument was that Goodman himself was to blame for the accident. They claimed he failed to use reasonable care while riding his motorcycle and that his own negligence was the sole cause of his injuries. The city also argued that the pavement condition was "open and obvious," meaning Goodman should have seen it and avoided it. Additionally, the city claimed it was immune from liability because its actions or lack thereof were a reasonable exercise of its authority.
Jury Verdict
The case eventually went before a jury, which reached a final decision on May 14, 2025. The jury had to answer a specific set of questions to determine if the city was at fault.
The jury first decided that the City of Fresno did indeed own or control the property where the accident occurred. However, the case came to an abrupt end when the jury moved to the next question. The jury concluded that the property was not in a dangerous condition at the time of Goodman's injury.
Because the jury found that no dangerous condition existed, they followed the Court's instructions to stop their deliberations immediately. They did not need to decide if the city had notice of a problem, if Goodman was also negligent, or if any money should be awarded for damages. The final verdict was in favor of the City of Fresno, meaning Gerry Goodman received no compensation for his claims.
Court documents are available upon request at [email protected]
