Michael Panish Parking arm Verdicts
7.6M Parking Arm VERDICT
Mike Panish was the primary gate expert in the $7.6M Gibson v Universal verdict. He was retained by Plaintiff’s attorneys and provided critical technical testimony on gate arm failure."
Peter Gibson vs The Chamberlain Group, Inc., Universal Studios Hollywood, Universal Parks & Resorts, Universal Studios Lot, et al State of CA, County of Los Angeles, No. 20STCV01718;
As the primary door and gate expert witness in this case, Mike Panish’s testimony was a key factor in the $7.6 million jury award in January 2025.
- Proving Negligence - The defense (Universal Studios) initially downplayed the incident as a minor "tap." Mike Panish’s technical analysis was essential in proving that the parking arm was improperly maintained or functioned outside of safety parameters, causing it to strike the plaintiff unexpectedly.
- MTBI - By establishing the mechanical fault of the gate, Mike Panish provided the necessary legal foundation for the plaintiff’s law firm and the medical experts to prove that the strike—while seemingly minor—led to a life-altering Mild Traumatic Brain Injury (MTBI).
- Credibility Under Fire: In a high-stakes trial with over 30 witnesses and a massive corporate defendant, Mike Panish provided the indisputable authority the jury needed to rule in favor of the plaintiff.
ZERO LIABILITY DEFENSE VERDICT
Lourdes Latour and Edward Latour vs Miami-Dade County, Circuit Court Miami-Dade County, Florida, Case No. 18-853 CA 01 (11)
On November 5, 2017, Lourdes Latour was riding her bicycle through the Gables by the Sea community exit. A malfunctioning automatic security gate arm, owned and maintained by the County, lowered prematurely and struck her. The impact threw her from her bike, resulting in a severe supracondylar humerus fracture and permanent nerve damage requiring multiple surgeries.
Mike Panish was the gate expert for the defense, retained by Universal Protection Services, LLC, the guard service that managed the entry point with the barrier arm. His expert opinion was that Universal Protection Services, LLC had no obligations or responsibility for the alleged injury to the plaintiff. The guard system was not responsible for the installation or design of the barrier arms, had no obligation or responsibility for changing or reworking the installation as configured, and met the standard of care regarding the post position instructions to man the entry point as requested by the property and facility owners. Placing any responsibility or blame upon the guard system is inappropriate and meritless. The installation, as configured, was designed to allow vehicle access only. The barrier arm system was not intended for pedestrian or bicycle access. The plaintiff failed to exercise a reasonable degree of personal awareness that the parking barrier arm may close without warning as she crossed the egress path. The plaintiff failed to verify if there were other access points that were appropriate for pedestrian or bicycle ingress/egress. The plaintiff used this opening without positively determining if it was safe to do so.
After a long deliberation, the jury reached a defense verdict awarding 0% liability to the guard service, making Miami-Dade County the responsible entity.
Testimonial from Wilson Elser Moskowitz Edelman & Dicker LLP: Mr. Panish, we would like to thank you for all the work you did on this case, including your testimony yesterday that we believe helped sway the jury in our favor. It was a pleasure meeting you and working with you throughout this case.
