Case Background
Gerard Dunn, a resident of Los Angeles County, had visited a local Home Depot store on April 1, 2022, for a routine shopping trip. While he was browsing the aisles, a heavy product or piece of equipment fell from a shelf and struck him. This incident led Mr. Dunn to file a lawsuit against Home Depot U.S.A., Inc., alleging that the company’s failure to maintain a safe environment caused his injuries. He claimed that the retailer had not properly secured the items on its shelves, creating a dangerous situation for anyone walking through the store.
Cause
The primary cause of the accident was the improper shelving and storage of heavy materials. Mr. Dunn’s legal team argued that Home Depot had failed to adequately design, install, or inspect the displays where the products were kept. Because the store regularly stocks heavy items in areas where customers shop, the lawsuit claimed it was foreseeable that unsecured merchandise could fall and cause harm.
Injury
As a result of the falling material, Mr. Dunn suffered significant physical and mental injuries. The impact hurt his health and strength, leading to ongoing physical pain and mental suffering. These injuries required extensive medical treatment, including care from physicians and surgeons, and the lawsuit indicated that Mr. Dunn would likely need medical assistance for an indefinite period in the future.
Damages Sought
Mr. Dunn sought several types of compensation for the harm he endured. He requested general damages for his pain and suffering, as well as reimbursement for his hospital and medical expenses. Additionally, he sought to recover lost earnings and compensation for his reduced ability to earn money in the future due to his injuries. He also asked for the costs of the lawsuit and any interest allowed by law.
Key Arguments and Proceedings
The trial took place in November 2025 at the Santa Monica Courthouse, with Judge Michael Levanas presiding over the case. A jury of twelve people and three alternates listened to the evidence presented by both sides over several weeks.
Legal Representation
Plaintiff(s): Gerard Dunn
· Counsel for Plaintiff: Alan Van Gelder | Christian Nickerson
Defendant(s): Home Depot U.S.A., Inc.
· Counsel for Defendants: Joshua S. Goodman | Marie B. Maurice
Key Arguments or Remarks by Counsel
Mr. Dunn’s lawyers focused on the store's responsibility to keep its customers safe. They argued that Home Depot breached its duty of care by allowing a hazardous condition to exist on its shelves. They presented evidence to show that the company knew, or should have known, that poorly secured merchandise posed a risk to shoppers.
Claims
The central claim in the case was negligence. Mr. Dunn’s team asserted that Home Depot and its employees were responsible for the maintenance, supervision, and inspection of the store’s displays. They argued that the company’s failure to perform these duties directly led to the accident.
Defense
Home Depot denied all allegations of negligence. The company’s defense team argued that it had exercised due care and that the incident might have been caused by a minor or trivial risk that did not qualify as a "dangerous condition". They also suggested that if any hazard existed, it was "open and obvious," meaning Mr. Dunn should have been able to avoid it. Furthermore, the defense claimed that Mr. Dunn might have been partially at fault for his own injuries and that the damages he claimed were speculative.
Jury Verdict
After deliberating, the jury reached a unanimous decision on November 26, 2025. They found that Home Depot U.S.A., Inc. was indeed negligent and that this negligence was a substantial factor in causing harm to Mr. Dunn. The jury decided that Mr. Dunn was not at fault for the accident and awarded him a total of $4,194,000.00 in damages.
The compensation was broken down into four specific categories. For the financial losses Mr. Dunn had already suffered, the jury awarded $269,000.00 for past loss of earnings. To address his past physical pain and mental suffering, they granted $1,500,000.00. Looking toward the future, the jury provided $575,000.00 for his future loss of earning capacity and $1,850,000.00 for future noneconomic damages, including ongoing pain and mental suffering.
The Court officially entered the judgment on December 26, 2025, ordering Home Depot to pay the full amount plus a 10% annual interest rate until the debt is settled. Mr. Dunn was also awarded the costs he spent to bring the case to trial.
Court documents are available upon request at [email protected]
