Case Background
This case came before the Honourable Judge Richard E.L. Strauss in the San Diego County Superior Court. The Plaintiff, Jack Greener, was a beginner in Brazilian Jiu‑Jitsu and trained at the Del Mar Jiu‑Jitsu Club. He trusted the staff and instructors to teach him safely. The Defendants were Michael Phelps d/b/a Del Mar Jiu‑Jitsu Club, M. Phelps, Inc., and Francisco Iturralde, an instructor at the academy. The Plaintiff claimed that the Defendants acted negligently and put him at risk by allowing an instructor with a history of reckless behaviour to teach.
The cause that led to the dispute
Greener claimed that on November 29, 2018, he participated in a lesson where Iturralde used a dangerous technique. Iturralde pinned Greener down, launched himself over him, and landed on his neck. The manoeuvre was not a part of any recognised Jiu‑Jitsu practice and put Greener at an unreasonable risk. The Plaintiff stated that the technique increased the risk of injury far beyond that of normal training and that Iturralde had caused serious injuries to other students before.
Injuries suffered
Greener suffered a catastrophic spinal cord injury when Iturralde landed with force on the C4‑C5 area of his spine. The force crushed his cervical vertebrae. The injury left Greener paralysed from the neck down, unable to move or feel his upper or lower extremities.
Damages Sought
Greener sued for medical expenses, lost income, and pain and suffering. At trial, the evidence established that he would require extensive medical care for the rest of his life and that the accident had caused profound emotional and physical damage.
Key Arguments and Proceedings
Legal Representation
Plaintiff(s): Jack Greener
· Counsel for Plaintiff(s): Shawn D. Morris | Christian W. Barton
Defendant(s): Del Mar Jiu‑Jitsu Club| M. Phelps Inc., | Francisco Iturralde
· Counsel for Defendant(s): Robert T. Bergsten |Gilbert & Bergsten
Key Arguments by Counsel
The Plaintiff argued that Greener came to the academy as a beginner and trusted the instructors to teach techniques within the sport’s boundaries. They stated that Iturralde acted far beyond those boundaries, creating a risk that could be eliminated with proper training and supervision. The defense argued that Greener assumed the risk of injury by participating in Jiu‑Jitsu and that any injuries were a result of the sport’s inherent dangers. They stated that the academy and its staff acted within the accepted practices of the discipline.
Claims Asserted
Negligence
Greener asserted that the Defendants failed to provide safe instruction and exposed him to an increased risk of serious injury.
Gross Negligence
He claimed that the Defendants acted with reckless disregard for safety, making choices that went far beyond ordinary negligence.
Negligent Hiring, Training, Supervision, and Retention
Greener argued that the academy failed to screen or oversee Iturralde, despite knowing that he had injured other students in the past.
Defense Arguments
The Defendants argued that Greener signed a waiver accepting the risk of injury inherent in Jiu‑Jitsu training. They stated that Greener acted as a willing participant and that the accident fell within the sport’s assumed risk.
Jury Verdict (Trial Court)
In March 2023, a jury in the San Diego County Superior Court delivered its verdict in the case of Greener V. M. Phelps, Inc. (Del Mar Jiu‑Jitsu). The Plaintiff, Jack Greener, suffered a catastrophic spinal cord injury during a sparring match at the academy. The jury found that the instructor, Francisco Iturralde, had acted negligently and increased the risk of injury beyond what is inherent in Brazilian Jiu‑Jitsu training. As a result, the jury awarded Greener a total of $46,475,112.33. This award comprised roughly $9.8 million for past and future medical expenses and approximately $36 million for pain, suffering, and permanent impairment. The verdict marked one of the largest personal injury awards in the martial arts industry.
Appeal and Final Judgment
The Defendants appealed the decision, seeking to overturn or reduce the award. In June 2025, the California Supreme Court declined to review the case, effectively upholding the verdict in its entirety. Including accrued interest, the judgment grew to over $56 million. The ruling reaffirmed the jury’s finding that the instructor acted negligently and violated the applicable duty of care, solidifying the judgment as a significant precedent for martial arts injury cases.
Court documents are available upon request at jurimatic@exlitem.com
