Hon. Vedica Puri (Ret.)

• Over the course of her trial career, Judge Puri developed not only an expertise in insurance coverage but also across a wide array of complex matters. In every case where insurance coverage is at issue—whether involving personal injury, construction defect, sexual assault, elder abuse, or embezzlement—she had to master the underlying substantive law to effectively pursue or challenge coverage. This breadth of exposure required her to become fluent in the intricacies of each practice area, resulting in a uniquely well-rounded perspective. Rather than a specialist in name only, she became a de facto subject matter expert in both the coverage law and the underlying legal claims, making her an especially effective advocate, trial judge and now, mediator.
• California Law firm sued for legal malpractice alleging the firm missed an important deadline. When the firm tendered the claim to its insurance company, the insurer not only refused to defend but also rescinded the firm’s E&O policy on the grounds that the managing partner lied on the policy application. After years of litigation, the insurer reinstated the law firm’s coverage and contributed to settling the underlying malpractice claim.
• A Renaissance reenactment group was sued in civil court for failing to protect minors from molestation. Certain group members were arrested and convicted in criminal court for molestation of six children. The group settled the civil suit for millions and tendered the settlement to its carrier for reimbursement. The insurer refused because its policy contained a molestation exclusion. The group argued the exclusion did not cover negligence claims as was the insured’s intent. The insurer moved for summary judgment requesting that the court issue an order that there was no coverage as a matter of law because of the molestation exclusion. In an opinion of first impression, the court denied the summary judgment and shortly thereafter, the parties settled.
• A family in the Bay Area made a claim for a massive water leak that damaged their entire home. The family’s homeowner’s insurer denied coverage. The home fell into disrepair, consumed by mold damage from the water leak and the family invoked the policy’s appraisal provision. The appraisal panel reviewed the insurer’s bid to repair the home (of $800K) and the family’s bid to rebuild the home and determined it would take $2.1M to repair the home. The carrier still refused to pay. The family sued the carrier for bad faith and after deposition of key representatives, the case settled.
• Software company was sued for failing to perform on a contract. The company tendered the claim to its Technology Errors and Omissions carrier. The carrier agreed to defend the claim by appointing and paying for defense counsel. Two years into that suit, the software company tried to reach a settlement and invited the carrier to attend those discussions. The carrier declined. At the settlement meeting, the software company agreed to waive its outstanding invoices and tendered the settlement for reimbursement. The carrier refused, arguing that a waiver of invoices did not equal damages. A bench trial resolved the issue of first impression holding that invoices could be considered damages under the terms of the Tech E&O policy at issue. Shortly before Phase 2 of trial, the bad faith phase, was to begin, the case settled.

• A public institution bought a complex insurance policy through brokers. The institution provides health insurance for their employees through a self-funded plan and also subscribes to a kind of insurance, called stop loss insurance, to protect itself against catastrophic claims. Names of patients who could possibly become high-cost insureds were sent to the broker so those patients could be properly insured. The broker failed to include a key group of patients, whose insurance claims tallied over $1M in medical care costs. The institution’s claim for reimbursement was properly denied as a result. The broker refused to acknowledge the mistake and took the case to trial. The jury announced within an hour of deliberations that the broker committed negligence and awarded a majority of the medical care costs sought.
• Parents sued their next door neighbors for negligence alleging the neighbors' teenager had molested their child while babysitting him. The teenager’s family tendered the case to their homeowner’s carrier, who denied coverage based on sexual misconduct exclusion. It was argued that while there may not be any coverage for the teenage boy’s acts, there was coverage for the parents. After intensive negotiations at mediation, the carrier agreed to contribute a significant share of the settlement to resolve the case short of trial.
• An employee of a care-giving company fleeced an elderly client of all her savings. The company made a claim for reimbursement under its employee dishonesty policy and the claim was successfully resolved after investigation and mediation.
• A California family’s severely developmentally disabled son was placed into a Level 4 group home on a part time basis. He lived with his parents on a part time basis as well. After an incident in the group home, tragedy struck and the son strangled and ended up killing his roommate. The contract for Level 4 homes requires 24-hour supervision. The son was found incompetent to stand trial and his parents were sued in civil court for wrongful death. The family’s homeowner’s insurance declined to defend the family against this lawsuit on the grounds that the son acted intentionally. After litigation, the insurer reversed course, provided a defense and tendered full policy limits to settle the matter.
• Complex insurance coverage issues involved in wrongful death action by son of father killed in accident based on negligence theory against the driver of the car, a pastor. Plaintiff sued the pastor’s church under a vicarious liability theory alleging the accident occurred during a church trip.

view all

• A rental car crashed into a motorcyclist, who suffered a catastrophic injury resulting in a below-the-knee amputation on one of his legs. There were dramatic pictures of the crash and injuries. Each party claimed the other was solely responsible for the accident. The motorcyclist sued the driver and rental car company for negligence, future medical expenses and pain and suffering. The Court found in favor of the plaintiff after a lengthy bench trial on the issues of comparative fault and damages. The case settled after the defense appealed the trial court decision.
• A truck driver for a recycling company was on his route when a dead tree branch suddenly fell and shattered the truck’s side window injuring the driver. The plaintiff suffered traumatic brain injury (TBI) and sued the City, the property owner and the owner’s homeowner’s association. The City settled before trial and the jury returned a verdict in favor of the plaintiff against the owners. Defense appealed and the case settled.
• Plaintiff alleged he was choked and then thrown down the stairs of a bar by the bar’s security guards. As the plaintiff landed on the street from the staircase, in a rag doll state, a bystander’s cell phone video shows a leg emerge from the bar staircase and viciously kick plaintiff in his head. Plaintiff suffered major traumatic brain injury (TBI) injuries and sued the bar owners for assault, battery (on an alter ego theory), negligence hiring and supervision and for punitive damages. The case settled the day a jury panel was due to be sworn.
• A 72-year old was driving her car when she was broadsided by a police vehicle during a hot pursuit. Plaintiff’s car was totaled and left her with a mild traumatic brain injury (TBI). She sued the city and its police department. After extensive discovery on the police department’s practices and procedures during a hot pursuit, at mediation, the case resolved.
• A road rage incident, partially captured on video led to serious injury and soft tissue damage to plaintiff’s hand. Plaintiff was a high-level software coder for a major Bay Area company before the incident and was on track to receive a promotion. Plaintiff sued the driver of the other car for wage loss, lost earning capacity, negligence, intentional infliction of emotional distress, punitive damages and civil assault and battery.

• City sued for personal injury on the theory that Muni driver negligently drove a 60-foot bus to intentionally cut off plaintiff motorcyclist forcing him to crash to the ground and sustain traumatic brain and other injuries (TBI). The jury returned a verdict for the defense.
• Plaintiff, a dog groomer and rideshare driver, filed sued against defendant driver for running a red light and alleging causing a four-car collision resulting in back injuries to the plaintiff. Plaintiff used for negligence and future medical expenses and lost wages and pain and suffering. After expert discovery on the extent of plaintiff’s injuries, the case resolved at mediation.
• Student sued elite private school for negligence alleging substitute teacher sexually harassed her. Years of litigation, several complex disposition and discovery motions later, the case on the day before trial.
• A rental car crashed into a motorcyclist, who suffered a catastrophic injury resulting in a below-the-knee amputation on one of his legs. Each party claimed the other was solely responsible for the accident. The motorcyclist sued the driver and rental car company for negligence.
• A truck driver for a recycling company was on his route when a dead tree branch overhead suddenly fell and shattered the truck’s side window injuring the driver. The plaintiff sued the City, the property owner and the owner’s homeowner’s association.
• Plaintiff alleged he was choked and thrown down the stairs of a bar by the bar’s security guards. Video captured the end of the assault as plaintiff landed on the street, and showed a leg kicking plaintiff’s head. Plaintiff sued the bar owners for assault, battery (on an alter ego theory), negligence hiring and supervision and for punitive damages.
• A 72-year old bystander was driving her car when she was broadsided by a police vehicle during a hot pursuit. Plaintiff’s car was totaled and left her with a mild traumatic brain injury. She sued the city and its police department.
• A road rage incident partially captured on video led to serious injury to plaintiff software coder’s hand. Plaintiff sued driver of the other car for wage loss, lost earning capacity, negligence, intentional infliction of emotional distress, punitive damages and civil assault and battery.
• City sued for personal injury on the theory that Muni driver negligently drove a 60-foot bus to intentionally cut off plaintiff motorcyclist forcing him to crash to the ground and sustain injuries.
• Plaintiff, a dog groomer and Uber driver, filed sued against defendant driver for running a red light and alleging causing a four car collision resulting in back injuries to the plaintiff.

view all

• Multi-million dollar wage and hour and PAGA putative class action against a temporary job agency for uncompensated time spent preparing for and attending job interviews as well as failure to prepare proper wage statements and unfair business practices.
• A former police officer alleged racism and discrimination during his employment. The police officer alleged he was retaliated against and wrongfully terminated when he attempted to report the harassment. After extensive discovery, the case settled before trial.
• Plaintiff sued employer of security guard under respondent superior theory, alleging causal connection between tort and the employment. Case settled with mediator’s proposal.
• Plaintiff sued employer for wrongful termination alleging age discrimination. Case settled with mediator’s proposal.
• Wage and hour and PAGA putative class action against a temporary job agency for uncompensated time spent preparing for and attending job interviews, failure to prepare proper wage statements and unfair business practices.

• A former police officer alleged racism and discrimination during his employment. The police officer alleged he was retaliated against and wrongfully terminated when he attempted to report the harassment.
• Plaintiff sued employer of security guard under respondeat superior theory, alleging causal connection between tort and the employment.
• Age discrimination cases against employers.

view all

• Judge Puri is well versed in real property matters, from commercial real estate disputes to property damage cases to nuisance, HOA and lease disputes. As a settlement judge, Judge Puri handled dozens of MSCs involving property disputes.
• Nuisance liability case where neighbor alleged improperly maintained drainage pipes on adjacent property caused damage. Extensive expert testimony involved and case turned on whether negligence elements met. Case resolved short of trial.
• Complicated specific performance case based on multiple easements involving several homeowners and beach access. Issues included deciding which parties were responsible for upkeep and determining if certain homeowners had unreasonably interfered with other right to use. Case settled.
• Judge Puri’s trial court ruling upheld on appeal: holding that a landlord’s termination of tenancy notice was defective when it failed to strictly comply with proper notice requirements under San Francisco’s rent ordinance.
• Complicated dispute over $30M worth of Bay Area properties, acquired over decades, held in various trusts where warring factions were close family members. The case settled with mediator’s proposal.

• Declaratory relief action by commercial property owners to invalidate leases

view all

• Adjudicate and resolve trust disputes, including petitions to remove a trustee for breach of fiduciary duty, petitions for instruction, confirming trust assets and approving trust accounting.
• Have handled multiple bench trials to determine application of undue influence presumption.
• Bench trials to determine application of undue influence presumption.
• Trust disputes, including petitions to remove a trustee for breach of fiduciary duty, petitions for instruction, confirming trust assets and approving trust accounting.
• Admitted wills to probate, adjudicated petitions to establish heirship, to approve probate accounting, and for final distribution of estates. Opened and administered estates passing through intestate succession. Adjudicated petitions for conservatorship of person and estate, as well as mental health conservatorship petitions brought under the Lanterman-Petris-Short Act.