--- title: "San Francisco Sidewalk Injury Settled for $75K" meta: "og:description": "San Francisco sidewalk injury case ends in $75,000 conditional settlement before trial, resolving negligence and premises liability claims." "og:title": "San Francisco Sidewalk Injury Settled for $75K" description: "San Francisco sidewalk injury case ends in $75,000 conditional settlement before trial, resolving negligence and premises liability claims." --- September 22, 2025 # **San Francisco Sidewalk Injury Settled for $75K** San Francisco sidewalk injury case ends in $75,000 conditional settlement before trial, resolving negligence and premises liability claims. [**Premises Liability**](https://exlitem.com/jury-verdict/san-francisco-sidewalk-injury-settled-for-75k/jury-verdict/category/premises-liability) [**Personal Injury**](https://exlitem.com/jury-verdict/san-francisco-sidewalk-injury-settled-for-75k/jury-verdict/category/personal-injury) ### **Outline** Author ![](https://media.jurimatic.com/cdn-cgi/image/q=70/profile_images/shared_image_1.webp) **Sohini Chakraborty****Sohini Chakraborty is a lawyer, with over two years of experience in legal research and analysis. She specializes in working closely with expert witnesses, offering critical support in preparing legal research and detailed case studies.** ![Article Image](https://media.jurimatic.com/cdn-cgi/image/q=70/images/default_1.webp) On September 29, 2023, Frank Mufarreh tripped on an uneven sidewalk at 1959 Ocean Avenue, San Francisco. The pavement, lifted near a street tree, had been flagged in a 311 report over two months earlier. Mufarreh sued the City and County of San Francisco and property owner Timoleon Zaracotas, alleging negligence, premises liability, and dangerous condition of public property. He claimed the defect was known but unrepaired, causing his fractured hand and lasting impairment. Defendants denied liability, citing immunities, comparative fault, and lack of notice. The case settled for $75,000, pending Board of Supervisors approval, ahead of a November 2025 trial. ### **Case Background** On September 29, 2023, Plaintiff Frank Mufarreh walked on the sidewalk at 1959 Ocean Avenue, San Francisco. The pavement appeared uneven and raised near a street tree. Over two months earlier, a 311 report alerted the City to the defect. The report noted possible tree-root lifting. Defendant City and County of San Francisco oversaw street trees under Proposition E and Public Works Code §16.129. Defendant Timoleon Zaracotas owned the abutting property. Law placed sidewalk upkeep duties on fronting owners under state and City codes. ### **Cause** Plaintiff alleged the sidewalk contained a hazardous height discrepancy. He claimed the City and Zaracotas controlled, maintained, or created the defect. He pointed to the prior 311 notice as proof of actual or constructive notice. He argued no repairs, warnings, or barricades followed. He asserted the condition posed a foreseeable tripping risk to pedestrians. He further alleged employees or agents of Defendants contributed to the hazard. One allegation referenced an uncovered utility box at the site. ### **Injury** Plaintiff tripped and fell on the uneven concrete. He fractured his left hand and required surgery. He suffered pain, scarring, and physical limitation. He reported emotional distress and reduced enjoyment of life. He alleged ongoing impairment from the fall. ### **Damages** Plaintiff sought medical expenses, past and future. He claimed lost earnings and diminished earning capacity. He requested compensation for household service losses. He sought non-economic damages for pain and mental suffering. He also asked for costs and interest as allowed by law. ## Key Arguments and Proceedings ### **Legal Representation** - **Plaintiff(s):** Frank Mufarreh - **Counsel for Plaintiff:** Samuel Lasser - **Defendant(s):** City and County of San Francisco | Timoleon Zaracotas, as Trustee of the Timoleon | Corinne Zaracotas Living Trust | Does 1–10 - **Counsel for Defendants:** David Chiu | Jennifer E. Choi | Margaret S. Schroeder | Mark L. Dawson ### **Claims** Plaintiff brought three counts. First, General Negligence against all Defendants for failing to inspect, maintain, or repair. Second, Premises Liability against all Defendants for negligent ownership, control, or use of the property. Third, Dangerous Condition of Public Property under Government Code §835 against the City and Does 1–10. He alleged Defendants created the danger, knew or should have known of it, and failed to fix or warn. He demanded a jury trial. ### Defense Defendant denied all allegations and damages. It asserted threshold bars. This included failure to state a claim, non-compliance with Government Code claim requirements, and statutes of limitation. It invoked Tort Claims Act immunities and the Public Liability Act. It asserted discretionary-act and design-immunity defenses. It claimed the Court lacked jurisdiction for untimely claims and cited Public Works Code sections 706 and 805. It also pled no ownership, maintenance, or control of the property and a variance between any tort claim and the Complaint. Defendant shifted fault. It alleged assumption of risk, comparative negligence, and negligence of third parties. It denied causation and damages. It argued the condition was not dangerous, was trivial, and lacked notice, while invoking Government Code §835 limits. It asserted failure to mitigate, estoppel, laches, waiver, and unclean hands. It raised res judicata and claim-splitting. It sought Proposition 51 several liability for non-economic damages and pursued indemnity, contribution, and set off, while reserving additional defenses. ### Settlement The parties reached a conditional settlement of the case for **$75,000**, subject to approval by the San Francisco Board of Supervisors. Plaintiff Frank Mufarreh filed a Notice of Settlement of Entire Case on April 18, 2025, indicating that a dismissal would be filed no later than August 29, 2025. The settlement resolved all claims against the City and County of San Francisco and other defendants, bringing an end to the litigation before the scheduled November 3, 2025, trial date. ## **Court Documents** Court documents are available for purchase upon request at [jurimatic@exlitem.com](https://exlitem.com/jury-verdict/san-francisco-sidewalk-injury-settled-for-75k/mailto:jurimatic@exlitem.com) [Share with Facebook](https://www.facebook.com/sharer/sharer.php?u=https://exlitem.com/jury-verdict/san-francisco-sidewalk-injury-settled-for-75k) [Share with X](https://x.com/intent/post?url=https://exlitem.com/jury-verdict/san-francisco-sidewalk-injury-settled-for-75k&text=x) [Share with LinkedIn](https://www.linkedin.com/sharing/share-offsite/?url=https://exlitem.com/jury-verdict/san-francisco-sidewalk-injury-settled-for-75k) [Share with Email](https://exlitem.com/jury-verdict/san-francisco-sidewalk-injury-settled-for-75k/mailto:?body=https://exlitem.com/jury-verdict/san-francisco-sidewalk-injury-settled-for-75k&subject=email) [Share with WhatsApp](https://api.whatsapp.com/send?text=https://exlitem.com/jury-verdict/san-francisco-sidewalk-injury-settled-for-75k%20whatsapp) ### **Find your next Expert Witness today** ![Sanjay Adhia](https://exlitem.com/jury-verdict/san-francisco-sidewalk-injury-settled-for-75k/_ipx/q_80/user-default.svg) ###### **Sanjay Adhia** Forensic Psychiastry ![George Reis](https://exlitem.com/jury-verdict/san-francisco-sidewalk-injury-settled-for-75k/_ipx/q_80/user-default.svg) ###### **George Reis** Forensic Imaging ![Maria Babinetz](https://exlitem.com/jury-verdict/san-francisco-sidewalk-injury-settled-for-75k/_ipx/q_80/user-default.svg) ###### **Maria Babinetz** Vocational Rehabilitation Find and retain experts without brokerage or upcharge. ### Looking for more? Join our subscriber community and receive regular updates delivered straight to your inbox. It’s quick, easy, and free.