Last November, a jury hit the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) with a sizeable verdict for failing to install a traffic signal at an intersection in Apple Valley, California.

Richard Herchelroath, 49, suffered a spinal cord injury that left him permanently disabled when he collided with another motorist who turned left directly in front of him at the intersection. He sued Caltrans, alleging it had failed to install a signal light even though it knew the intersection was dangerous. Caltrans argued the other motorist's negligence was the sole cause of the accident.

"We decided that the way to win this case was to convince the jury, through the testimony of their own local people, that the intersection was dangerous and that Caltrans knew about it," said the man's attorney.

At trial, the engineer for Apple Valley testified that the intersection was so dangerous the town had offered to pay Caltrans to install a traffic light. The head accident investigator for the state highway patrol, who tracked the number of accidents at the intersection by placing pins on a map, said that he ran out of room to put the pins. He testified that he and his chief told Caltrans they had to do something to reduce the "inordinate number of serious and fatal accidents" at the intersection.

Other key evidence establishing that Caltrans knew the intersection was dangerous included a petition signed by 870 local residents and three letters from a local businessman asking Caltrans to install a signal light.

This case shows the primary role that jurors play in our civil justice system. "We were talking to a group of people who were not going to be persuaded by quick talking experts and fancy demonstrative evidence," counsel said. "We tried the case based on the testimony of local residents and merchants."