Indexes
November 21st, 2009
November 20th, 2009
November 19th, 2009
November 18th, 2009
November 17th, 2009
November 16th, 2009
November 14th, 2009
The following stories have received the most reader comments during the last 7 days.
- The country's mess is our fault (165)
- Obama is not a moderate (130)
- Sarah Palin's book hits the shelves: Locals react (70)
- Lodi City Council plans to cap number of taco trucks at 22 (48)
- The haves should help the have-nots (30)
- Public health care is a Christian option (29)
- Tokay in, traveling to unbeaten No. 3 Grant for football playoffs (25)
- Government-run health care is a bad idea (17)
- Young woman fatally shot at Acampo home (17)
- Sierra Adventure store to close after four years in Downtown Lodi (16)
ADVERTISEMENT
Jury sides with Caltrans in Highway 12 crash case
A San Joaquin County jury ruled today that the California Department of Transportation was not responsible for a Highway 12 crash that left a college student with permanent medical problems.
The verdict means that Alicia Schmid, 21, will not get any money from the state to help pay for a number of broken bones and other injuries from the August. 2006 head-on crash.
Schmid's attorney had alleged that Caltrans knew since 1996 that the two-lane road needed more safety to prevent collisions caused by drivers who veer over the center line.
Nobody disputed that the other driver, Marisela Aguiniga, caused the crash by falling asleep at the wheel and drifting into Schmid's lane near Tower Park.
The lawsuit, in which Aguiniga was also named, sought more than $5.5 million for continuing medical care, which will include hip replacements for Schmid, who still walks with a cane. Her attorney had also asked for $6 million to $12 million in punitive damages.
Her mother said this afternoon that Schmid will be OK, and that they accomplished their main purpose — to bring more attention to Highway 12.
For more on this story, see Friday's News-Sentinel.
Contact reporter Layla Bohm at layla@lodinews.com.
Search for Ads 
Today’s Print Ads 
RSS Feeds
Reader Feedback
Robb wrote on Nov 17, 2008 4:31 PM:
Yea.., ok... "
deblaw wrote on Nov 14, 2008 7:33 AM:
So your theory is, that CalTrans should pay your 12M because the driver of the other vehicle was an illegal?
Why?? "
Lodian wrote on Nov 14, 2008 1:11 AM:
Lodian wrote on Nov 14, 2008 12:57 AM:
educator wrote on Nov 13, 2008 9:10 PM:
Cogito wrote on Nov 13, 2008 8:38 PM:
T & C wrote on Nov 13, 2008 8:00 PM:
T & C wrote on Nov 13, 2008 7:57 PM:
LodiEye wrote on Nov 13, 2008 7:27 PM:
LodiEye wrote on Nov 13, 2008 7:26 PM:
What the road needs is a concrete barrier, like on 120 and 17. There also needs to be a truck scale on there just west of I5. Lets stop the overweight trucks which wrecks the roadbed even more. Would be a good source of income for the county. "
czmtnw wrote on Nov 13, 2008 5:40 PM:
IF THE JURY WERE TO HAVE BEEN TOLD THAT THE DUMB BI**H WAS ILLEGAL AND UNLICENSED AND UNINSURED THEN THE CASE WOULD HAVE BEEN OPEN AND SHUT.
SO IT'S THE OTHER WAY AROUND.
I SEE SOMETHING THAT THE JURY DID NOT.
CASE CLOSED.
AND IT'S AMAZING HOW YOU NEGLECT TO ANSWER OR RESPOND TO ANYTHING I'VE BEEN SAYING. MAYBE YOU AND CAL-TRANS HAVE SOMETHING IN COMMON!
GO CONTINUE TO PAY YOUR TAX DOLLARS TO THE ILLEGAL MEXICANS WHO GET EVERYTHING HANDED TO THEM. GIVE THEM TO THE BITCH THAT RUINED ALICIA'S LIFE. AT 18. "
czmtnw wrote on Nov 13, 2008 5:34 PM:
and the truth finally comes out of you as well. So you are okay with your tax dollars going in her favor, as long as it's a "reasonable" amount in your eyes?
OKAY, WHAT DO YOU CONSIDER A "REASONABLE" AMOUNT? do you even have any idea what she is going to have to pay for her medical expenses for the rest of her life? Or the medical expenses she's already incurred that has put her into debt? YOU DON'T. YOU DO NOT HAVE ANY IDEA WHAT IT IS LIKE FOR HER.
SHE IS ONLY 20 YEARS OLD. DO YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT SHE HAS TO GO THROUGH FOR THE NEXT 60 YEARS?(AT LEAST) "
Scrutiny wrote on Nov 13, 2008 5:26 PM:
Scrutiny wrote on Nov 13, 2008 5:24 PM:
czmtnw wrote on Nov 13, 2008 5:20 PM:
Scrutiny wrote on Nov 13, 2008 5:20 PM:
glad2beout wrote on Nov 13, 2008 5:18 PM:
czmtnw wrote on Nov 13, 2008 5:15 PM:
Scrutiny wrote on Nov 13, 2008 5:13 PM:
czmtnw wrote on Nov 13, 2008 5:12 PM:
because of ignorant f***s like you and the people who agree with you, my best friends life is ruined AND THERE IS NOTHING SHE CAN DO ABOUT IT. "
czmtnw wrote on Nov 13, 2008 5:06 PM:
it's IRONIC how before the trial even began the judge ruled in favor of the state and denied ANYONE the right to use the term "blood alley" as highway 12 is most popularly known as, and they were not allowed to bring up the fact that the lady was illegal, uninsured and unlicensed because they said that it had nothing to do with the accident.......
NOTHING HAPPENED TO HER. SHE DID NOT GET ARRESTED. SHE DID NOT GET A TICKET. SHE DID NOT GO TO JAIL. SHE DID NOT GET DEPORTED. AND NOW THAT THIS CASE IS OVER SHE CAN GO BACK TO LIVING HER OWN NORMAL LIFE. "
dogs4you wrote on Nov 13, 2008 5:04 PM:
czmtnw wrote on Nov 13, 2008 5:04 PM:
jramagic wrote on Nov 13, 2008 4:58 PM:
to where the roads are safer. "
jramagic wrote on Nov 13, 2008 4:46 PM:
The state has been negligent for well over a decade in not correcting a well-known dangerous highway with proven fixes that would ELIMINATE the 100 or so deaths that have, in fact, occurred during that period. That's simple negligence, in my book. A judgement would have sent a message...like the Pinto gas tank, cigarettes, asbestos, etc. In all those cases, a negative judgment caused an immediate reaction to correct or greatly improve the dangerous situation. "
jramagic wrote on Nov 13, 2008 4:40 PM:
Scrutiny wrote on Nov 13, 2008 4:38 PM:
jramagic wrote on Nov 13, 2008 4:28 PM:
Comments on this story are now closed.