$1.5 millionVerdict

$1.5 Million Verdict Against BCI Coca-Cola After Tucson Grocery Store Slip and Fall

Verdict · Pima County Superior Court (affirmed Arizona Court of Appeals 2011; Arizona Supreme Court 2014) · 2009

Won by Hollingsworth Kelly Law.

A Tucson jury awarded $1.5 million to a woman who slipped on water leaking from a BCI Coca-Cola refrigerator at a grocery store, after the bottling company rejected a $150,000 settlement offer.

What happened

Marisol Metzler was shopping at a Tucson grocery store when she slipped and fell on water that had leaked from a soft-drink display refrigerator owned and maintained by BCI Coca-Cola Bottling Co. of Los Angeles. The fall left her with a herniated lumbosacral disk at L-5, S-1, an injury serious enough to require surgery and ongoing chiropractic care.

The refrigerator had a documented leak history. BCI's own service records showed the unit had leaked at least four times in the two years before the accident, yet the company never replaced it. BCI also argued at trial that the grocery store, not BCI, bore responsibility for the hazard.

Before trial, Metzler's attorneys at Hollingsworth Kelly -- Louis Hollingsworth, Michael F. Kelly, and John F. Kelly -- submitted a $150,000 offer of judgment to resolve the case. BCI rejected it. The case proceeded to a Pima County jury in 2009.

The jury returned a verdict of $1.5 million in Metzler's favor. Because the verdict far exceeded BCI's rejected offer, the trial court entered a final judgment of $1,855,398.86, adding $347,672.16 in prejudgment interest as a sanction under Arizona Rule 68(g). BCI moved for a new trial on liability, which the trial court initially granted, but the Arizona Court of Appeals reversed that ruling in 2011 and reinstated the verdict.

Further appeals followed over the proper rate for calculating the prejudgment interest. The Arizona Supreme Court resolved the question in 2014, holding that the applicable rate was 4.25 percent under A.R.S. section 44-1201(B) rather than the 10 percent rate the trial court had applied. The $1.5 million jury award itself was not disturbed.

Sources

This account is drawn from contemporaneous public reporting and the court record.