In a landmark decision that could reshape athletic instruction liability across California, the state’s Supreme Court has declined to review a civil jury verdict awarding Jack Greener more than $46 million after a devastating injury during a Brazilian jiu-jitsu lesson left him paralyzed.
The case, which has wound through California’s court system since 2018, reached its final chapter this week when the high court allowed the substantial judgment to stand. With post-judgment interest, Greener’s attorneys say the award now exceeds $56 million.
“This ruling cements a critical legal victory not only for our client, but also for injured athletes across California by reaffirming that sports instructors and facilities may be held accountable when they unreasonably increase risks beyond those inherent in the sport,” said Rahul Ravipudi, one of Greener’s attorneys.
The tragic incident occurred on November 29, 2018, at Del Mar Jiu-Jitsu Club, where Greener, then a 23-year-old beginner, was paired with instructor Francisco Iturralde, a second-degree black belt. According to court documents, Iturralde placed Greener in a position that put his entire body weight upon the student, crushing Greener’s cervical vertebrae and rendering him quadriplegic.
The consequences were catastrophic for Greener, who was just weeks away from college graduation and beginning a promising career as a professional surf instructor. Following the injury, he spent several months hospitalized, suffering multiple strokes and numerous other medical complications.
In 2023, a San Diego jury sided with Greener, awarding him $46 million in damages. The verdict was later affirmed by a state appellate panel in late 2024 before the Supreme Court’s decision not to review the case, effectively finalizing the judgment. Rener Gracie received wide criticism for characterizing the technique during which the injury happened as ‘spiking’ which it wasn’t, by all accounts. He was the expert witness for the defense.
ADCC champion Royler Gracie commented:
“I see the video many times, backing for many times. And then I’m not a judge, you know, but I’m expert in jiu-jitsu. I’ve trained jiu-jitsu for more than 50 years. And then I can see when someone have bad intention, in my opinion, for the video, what I see is an accident, completely accident. And don’t tell me the negligence for the teacher, for the school.”
“You know all the moves in jiu-jitsu I do to the black belts and to the white belt. I do it to everybody.”
The case has significant implications for sports instruction throughout California, establishing clearer boundaries for instructor liability, particularly in high-contact training environments. Legal experts suggest the ruling may prompt martial arts studios and athletic training facilities to review their safety protocols and instructor training programs.
The case of Jack Greener v. M. Phelps, Inc., et al. has reached its final conclusion with the $46.475 million jury verdict now upheld in full, marking a significant legal victory for injured athletes in California.
The entire opinion is available here.
The defendants attempted to shield themselves under the legal doctrine of primary assumption of risk, arguing that Greener’s injuries were inherent to Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu and thus not actionable. They further sought to introduce evidence of Greener’s prior athletic background and Iturralde’s teaching methods to suggest the injuries were foreseeable or consistent with Greener’s own training history. However, the trial court rejected these arguments, instructing the jury using the “increased risk” standard (CACI No. 471, Option 2), which allows for liability when an instructor unreasonably heightens the risks beyond those normally assumed in a sport.
The jury found in favor of Greener and awarded him $46.475 million in damages. On appeal, the defense challenged both the legal standard used in jury instructions and the exclusion of certain evidence. The California Court of Appeal dismissed these arguments, emphasizing that instructors have a legal duty not to introduce unreasonable risks into sports activities. The appellate court determined that Iturralde’s conduct—immobilizing Greener and knowingly executing a dangerous move that led to severe injury—was not an inherent risk of Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu and therefore not protected by the assumption of risk doctrine. The court also upheld the trial court’s decision to exclude evidence related to Greener’s prior wrestling experience and BJJ competitions, finding it irrelevant to the specific negligent conduct in question. Additional testimony about Iturralde’s teaching practices was deemed duplicative and cumulative.
Following the appellate court’s full affirmation of the verdict on December 31, 2024, the defendants petitioned the California Supreme Court to both review the case and depublish the appellate opinion, effectively attempting to prevent it from being cited as precedent. Both requests were denied, solidifying the opinion’s place in California case law and strengthening the rights of injured athletes in instructional sports settings.
With the appellate process exhausted and nearly $10 million in post-judgment interest added, the total amount owed exceeds $56 million. Notably, this figure far surpasses the defendants’ original $1 million insurance policy. Prior to trial, Greener had made a clear and timely demand to settle within those limits, which the insurer, U.S. Fire Insurance Company (a subsidiary of Crum & Forster), rejected. Their failure to settle opened the policy, making them responsible for the full judgment. A $70 million-plus bond was posted during the appeal, ensuring that the full amount will now be paid.
The trial team, led by Rahul Ravipudi, Paul Traina, and John Shaller of Panish Shea Ravipudi LLP, along with co-counsel from Morris, Sullivan & Lemkul LLP and appellate counsel from Niddrie Addams Fuller Singh, was praised for its unwavering commitment and skill. Jack Greener expressed deep gratitude to his legal team, noting that their support and dedication helped him and his family through a long and painful legal journey. He also highlighted the significance of holding his instructor accountable for the reckless behavior that changed his life forever.
