Date: 01-11-2013

Case Style: Gabriela Sanchez v. Scott Durham

Case Number: CJ-2011-1740

Judge: Rebecca B. Nightingale

Court: District Court, Tulsa County, Oklahoma

Plaintiff's Attorney: Bret A. Unterschuetz

Defendant's Attorney: William Vanburkleo

Description: Gabriela Sanchez and Gustavo Garza sued Scott Durham on auto negligence theories claiming to have been injured or harmed as a direct result of a car wreck allegedly caused by Durham.

Statement of the case read to the jury by Judge Nightingale before they began deliberations:

The parties to this case are Gabriela Sanchez and Gustavo Garza, the “Plaintiffs”, and Scott Durham, the “Defendant”. The parties admit that on October 15, 2010, Plaintiff Sanchez was operating a vehicle owned by Plaintiff Garza which was involved in a collision with a vehicle operated by Defendant. This incident occurred on State Highway 266 near its intersection with County Road E540.

Plaintiff Sanchez claims that she sustained injuries which were directly caused by the negligence of Defendant. Plaintiff Garza claims that he has incurred property damage which was directly caused by the negligence of Defendant.

Defendant Scott Durham denies that he was guilty of negligence fld claims that Plaintiff Sanchez was contributorily negligent.

Plaintiff Gabriela Sanchez denies the claims of the Defendant These are the issues you are to determine.


Court minute from jury trial on December 4, 2012:

DATE: 12-4-12 PRESENT AND PRESIDING: HONORABLE REBECCA BRETT NIGHTINGALE DISTRICT JUDGE; ROBIN QUICK COURT REPORTER; RANDY HUNTER BAILIFF; TRACI ANN TURNER MINUTE CLERK. CASE NO.CJ-11-1740. GABRIELA SANCHEZ VS. SCOTT DURHAM. CASE CALLED FOR JURY TRIAL. BOTH SIDES PRESENT IN OPEN COURT AND ANNOUNCE READY FOR TRIAL. PLAINTIFF PRESENT AND REPRESENTED BY BRET UNTERSCHUETZ. DEFENDANT PRESENT AND REPRESENTED BY WILLIAM VANBURKLEO. THE JURORS ARE CALLED AND SWORN TO THEIR QUALIFICATIONS. THE JURY IS IMPANELED AND EXAMINED FOR CAUSE. ONE JUROR EXCUSED FOR CAUSE. JURORS ARE ACCEPTED AND SWORN TO TRY THE CAUSE. OPENING STATEMENTS ARE MADE. 3 WITNESSES SWORN. RULE WAS INVOKED. REPORTER ROBIN QUICK. PLAINTIFF PRESENTS EVIDENCE AND RESTS. DEFENDANT DEMURRED AND IS OVERRULED. DEFENDANT PRESENTS EVIDENCE AND RESTS. PLAINTIFF REQUESTED A DIRECTED VERDICT AND IS OVERRULED. THE JURY IS INSTRUCTED AS TO THE LAW. CLOSING ARGUMENTS ARE MADE. THE SWEARING OF THE BAILIFF IS WAIVED AND AT 11:50 AM THE JURY RETIRES FOR DELIBERATION IN CUSTODY OF THE BAILIFF. AT 12:30 PM THE JURY RETURNS INTO OPEN COURT WITH THEIR VERDICT WHICH IS READ IN OPEN COURT, ORDERED RECORDED AND FILED, AND IS, TO WIT: "WE, THE JURY, IMPANELED AND SWORN IN THE ABOVE ENTITLED CAUSE, DO, UPON OUR OATHS, FIND THE ISSUES IN FAVOR OF THE DEFENDANT". SIGNED JURY FOREPERSON.

Outcome: Defendant's verdict.

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:

Comments: