Common Personal Injury Accidents
Auto Accident
Construction Zone Injury
Truck / Big Rig Accident

Catastrophic Injuries Caused by Accidents
Amputations
Back & Neck Injury
Brain Damage
Paralysis
Paraplegia
RSD
Quadriplegia
Whiplash Injury
Wrongful Death

Protect Your Rights:
Free Case Evaluation 
by Hawkins * Caputo
Call 408-280-7111 or use this form to email us about your case.

Communication by you via this Web site does not establish an attorney-client relationship with The Law Office of Hawkins * Caputo.

Hawkins * Caputo - Personal Injury Attorney's

Wheelchair-Bound Victim Wins $2.165 Million Lawsuit Against Santa Clara Transportation Agency

Santa Clara, CA – The five-year-long battle between the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Agency (VTA), California, and disabled crusader, Maria Santos Borja, has finally come to an end. Borja v. Valley Transportation Agency should be seen as a huge victory for disabled wheelchair occupants everywhere! And the decision to award Borja $2.165 million in damages may very well leave transportation agencies across the country reexamining their current policies regarding passenger securement and safety.

San Jose-based attorney, Paul Caputo, helped make history when he decided to take an unprecedented approach to the case – going after the source of the problem, rather than nit-picking over every little detail. According to Caputo, the true culprit was a widespread National public policy that effectively insulated transit agencies from liability, by recklessly exposing disabled passengers to substantial risk.

Borja, who suffers from cerebral palsy, has never let that stop her from living life and doing right by others. A long-time volunteer and advocate for the homeless, she tragically suffered a broken neck while working in the kitchen of a non-profit agency in 1991. Five years later, matters were made even worse when Borja fell victim to an armed robbery. Left to endure a lifetime of pain and “quadriparesis”, a severe weakening of all four limbs, Borja refused to stand still.

On October 27, 2000, after taking a class for disabled students at Evergreen College, Borja left campus to board city bus #77. Scooter-bound at the time, Borja used the wheelchair lift to board. By her account, she asked the driver for help strapping herself in, but claims she was refused – the driver citing the bus running behind schedule. Moments later, Borja’s scooter tipped over when the bus took a sharp turn. She suffered a torn rotator cuff, a broken shoulder joint and several head lacerations.    

At first, it appeared to be another tragic, yet all too typical, case of “he said/she said” (or in this instance, “she said/she said”) – the driver contending Borja never requested assistance; but neither Borja nor Caputo would let that deter them from making their case heard. In a highly unusual move, Caputo decided to attack the recklessness of the defendant’s wheelchair securement policy, rather than the individual driver’s actions-in-question. A policy, Caputo argued, which lead directly to the plaintiff sustaining major injuries that required a lifetime of care. “The case wasn’t going to be won by pointing fingers at the individuals involved. Our best chance was to attack the source of the problem, the policy. VTA was hiding behind it, and the jury saw that,” said Caputo.

  Fortunately for Borja, the large settlement amount will cover these medical expenses. “Paul has been the bright light in my darkest hours,” said Borja. “Without his assistance, there is no way I could have afforded legal help to fight someone as big as the VTA.”

Ned Einstein, a transportation expert with Transportation Alternatives, who testified in the case, referred to Caputo’s choices as “interesting and adventurous.”

According to the Americans with Disabilities Act, transit agencies have two choices when it comes to establishing their wheelchair securement policies. And depending on the agency, the terminology will differ; however, it essentially boils down to a matter of “system choice” versus “passenger choice”. And all but a few of the nation’s major cities have a policy of “system choice” in place. In simplest terms, a policy of “system choice” means that the transit agency may deny service to wheelchair occupants who refuse to cooperate with the drivers’ efforts to secure their chairs. Securement is necessary to ride. Alternatively, “passenger choice” states that disabled passengers have the right to refuse securement.

  Obviously, the latter is more likely to leave the bus companies open to liability; and, thus, the policy may continue to become less and less common. That or else these agencies may find themselves the target of frequent scrutiny, or worse, having to defend themselves in similar court proceedings across the country.

“A policy of passenger choice is and was a ruse, so that when somebody gets hurt, they blamed it on the passenger,” Einstein concluded. “Agencies, such as the VTA, are hiding behind this law and it’s negligent to do so.”

Currently, New York City, Chicago and San Jose are among the few cities with a policy of “passenger choice” still in effect; but perhaps Borja’s unwavering courage and Caputo’s creativity in the courtroom will change that… or at the very least, give agencies and passengers alike something to think about. 

  * * * * *