Dreyer Babich Buccola Wood Campora, LLP

Sacramento: 916-379-3500

Auburn: 530-889-1800

San Jose: 408-275-1300

Carmel by the Sea: 831-293-6003

Orange County: 949-517-0425

Se Habla Español | Chúng Tôi Nói Tiếng Việt | Falo Português

We Make A Difference

We provide our clients with the highest quality legal representation
for their injury or loss of a loved one

  1. Home
  2.  » 
  3. Results
  4.  » Struck By Lake Oroville Boat shuttle after falling between two boats

Struck By Lake Oroville Boat Shuttle After Falling Between Two Boats

Settlement: $5.5 Million | Butte County Superior Court | Lindblad v. Bidwell Maria

The shuttle boat operator pulled the shuttle boat away from the Lindblad houseboat before Mrs. Lindblad had been able to get onto the shuttle, causing her to fall between the two vessels. Ron Lindblad grabbed his wife to keep her from sinking in the water, as she could not swim. The shuttle operator then placed the shuttle in forward and essentially rammed the shuttle with Mrs. Lindblad draped over it into the rear of the Lindblad houseboat. Defendants contested liability and claimed that the incident was Mrs. Lindblad’s fault or her husband’s based upon the manner in which they conducted themselves in getting onto the shuttle. The marina also claimed that the shuttle malfunctioned due to a defect in the throttle system. Mrs. Lindblad suffered serious injuries that essentially resulted in the removal of her small intestine. She was required to undergo a small intestine transplant due to the inability to get the necessary nutrients to survive. If she did not have the transplant, she ultimately would have died. She passed away of complications during her recovery from the small intestine transplant. This was a wrongful death action for the husband and two surviving adult children. The defendant only had $1 million policy limits in this matter. A demand was made for the $1 million policy limits and the carrier for the defendant failed to pay it. They ultimately tendered the policy limits at a later date and plaintiffs, under advice of counsel, refused to accept the tender of the policy limits because the matter was being prepared for trial. Two weeks prior to trial, the matter settled for the sum of $5.5 million, $4.5 million above the policy limits of the defendant.