Mitchell C. Motu Prevails in a High-Stakes Premises Liability Claim For Brightview

Our team represented Brightview Landscaping in a catastrophic injury case arising from alleged sidewalk upheaval attributed to tree roots. Plaintiff presented a high eight-figure demand for a paraplegic injury, positioning Brightview as a primary target in a complex premises liability and public entity risk environment.

Challenge
Plaintiff sought a high eight-figure recovery and alleged that Brightview’s maintenance activities caused or contributed to a dangerous condition of public property. Multiple parties faced potential joint exposure, including the City. The immediate objective was to neutralize liability theories directed at Brightview, preserve indemnity and apportionment defenses, and reallocate risk to the responsible public entity while positioning the matter for an efficient resolution.

Strategy
We executed a focused discovery plan centered on targeted Person Most Knowledgeable (PMK) depositions, supported by exhaustive document review. We ultimately uncovered damaging text messages, photographs, and work orders implicating that Brightview’s scope of work did not include inspection or management of tree roots or sidewalks.

Execution
Through carefully sequenced PMK depositions and intensive preparation, we secured critical admissions regarding: (a) the City’s exclusive control over sidewalk design, repair, and hazard abatement; (b) the City’s notice and knowledge of root-related uplift conditions in the relevant area; (c) limitations on Brightview’s obligations to inspect, alter or repair hardscape conditions; and (d) the allocation of responsibility embedded in municipal policies and maintenance directives.

These admissions undercut claims centered on Brightview’s alleged control and created substantial settlement pressure on the City.

Result
Leveraging these admissions and our premises liability expertise, we resolved Brightview’s participation for $200,000, while shifting the vast majority of risk to the City for the remainder of the eight-figure settlement. This outcome protected our client’s interests and avoided protracted trial risk and expense in a catastrophic-injury matter.