Plaintiff Kimberly Hughes was struck by a truck driven by defendant Nathan Libeu while riding her bicycle through an intersection. Security video captured the collision, which occurred after Hughes abruptly turned left at a crosswalk as Libeu’s truck—traveling about 10 mph over the speed limit—entered the intersection.
Hughes brought a personal injury lawsuit in California state court. The case proceeded to trial and a jury found Libeu was not negligent. In a motion for new trial and on appeal, Hughes mainly argued jury misconduct, citing declarations that jurors discussed their personal driving experiences through the same intersection and opined whether Libeu’s speed of 33–35 mph was reasonable. One juror stated he regularly drove through the intersection at that speed and felt it was safe. The trial court denied the new trial motion, finding Hughes had not shown actual jury misconduct. Hughes appealed, and Libeu retained Horvitz & Levy to preserve the judgment.
The Court of Appeal affirmed. It held that jurors may draw on their backgrounds and life experiences when weighing evidence, and distinguished this case from true misconduct cases involving experiments, scene visits, or undisclosed bias. Much of Hughes’s proffered evidence was also barred under Evidence Code section 1150, which excludes jurors’ internal thought processes. Because the jurors here did not supplant the trial evidence with extraneous information, no misconduct occurred. The Court of Appeal also rejected Hughes’s remaining evidentiary and instructional challenges.
View Opinion 
