by Dorian Hargrove / Times of San Diego / Aug. 18, 2026
The family of a young girl who was severely injured when a drunk driver drove onto a pedestrian pathway in Liberty Station in September and plowed into her is now suing the city of San Diego, the driver and a peer-to-peer car-sharing platform.
The collision occurred Sept. 6, 2025, just after 4:30 p.m.
Alex and Leann Tomasevic, their young son and 5-year-old daughter were standing on the pedestrian pathway near the flagpole circle at Liberty Park in Liberty Station when Savannah Monique Taylor, 22, drove onto the promenade, striking the girl.
Taylor was drunk at the time and has since been sentenced to eight years in prison.
The girl, identified by her initials, OT (Times of San Diego is not using the girl’s name because she is a minor), suffered a traumatic brain injury and numerous broken bones. Doctors placed her in a medically induced coma following the collision and she spent the following seven months in the hospital. OT continues to require extensive medical attention.
“She came close to dying several times because of the defendant’s actions,” Alex Tomasevic told the judge during Taylor’s criminal sentencing. “This is what life is like for her today. She can’t walk. She can’t use the toilet. She uses diapers. She cannot eat on her own. She has a feeding tube. She can’t bathe herself. She can’t attend regular school. She can’t talk. She can’t crawl into bed.”
Beyond the criminal case, the Tomasevics are now looking to hold not just Taylor, but others, including the city of San Diego, accountable for the girl’s life-changing injuries and the trauma the family experienced watching it happen.
The defendants, according to the civil lawsuit obtained by Times of San Diego, include the driver, Taylor, the city and the peer-to-peer rental company, Turo.
Get Peninsula Beacon in your inbox – community news that connects and informs.
Sign up to get free Point Loma and Ocean Beach news weekly – along with the Times of San Diego daily at 7 a.m. and breaking news. Update at any time. By clicking sign up, you agree to the terms.
The city, attorneys for the Tomasevics contend, failed to install protective bollards and ensure vehicles could not travel onto the promenade. Turo, according to the suit, rented the car to Taylor despite her having previous convictions involving alcohol.
The family’s suffering, the lawyers argue, is in part due to the city failing to make the promenade where the girl was struck safe for pedestrians.
The lawsuit claims the location resembles “a drivable roadway, was contiguous with adjacent parking lots and driveways, and lacked signage clearly indicating that the area was closed to vehicular traffic, and could readily be mistaken by a motorist—particularly an impaired, confused, or unfamiliar motorist—for a vehicular roadway.”
In addition to failing to differentiate the pedestrian path from the roadway, the family’s attorneys say the city did not install bollards, concrete planters, or other barriers to prevent cars and intoxicated drivers from driving onto the path.
The Tomasevics also are targeting Turo over Taylor’s long criminal history. Their lawsuit says her four arrests for battery all involved alcohol. Despite those arrests, the family’s attorneys say Taylor was still able to rent the 2018 BMW 330i sports sedan from the platform.
“Turo knew, or in the exercise of reasonable diligence should have known, that Taylor was
incompetent, unfit, or reckless to operate a motor vehicle, including because of Taylor’s
documented history of alcohol-related arrests, her ongoing residence at a sober-living facility, her pre-trial diversion status, her documented history of violence, and her other indicia of unfitness,” reads the family’s lawsuit.
According to a Turo spokesperson, Taylor presented a valid California driver’s license at the time of the rental. In a statement to Times of San Diego, the spokesperson said the company’s “hearts go out to the Tomasevic family.”
The spokesperson said millions of trips and rentals on Turo end without any incidents, and the company prioritizes the safety of drivers, owners and the community.
“While we cannot comment specifically on pending litigation, the safety of our marketplace is fundamental to Turo,” said the spokesperson. “We remain committed to maintaining safeguards that support the responsible use of our platform and the safety of guests, hosts, and the communities where trips occur.”
San Diego’s City Attorney’s Office declined to comment due to pending litigation.
Tagged: Liberty Station
Free neighborhood news in your inbox
Join the 20,000+ people who get Times of San Diego in their inbox at 7 a.m. daily – plus breaking news alerts. And we have weekly updates from San Diego neighborhoods – select community news below.
Pacific/Mission Beach
Downtown
La Jolla
Uptown
Point Loma/OB
Navajo/College Area
Mission Valley
North County
South Bay
La Mesa
Times of San Diego newsletter
By
I certainly feel for the family in this horrible tragedy.
But holding the City responsible ? How is that right ?
The attorneys maintain that the pedestrian path resembles a drivable roadway and “could readily be mistaken by a motorist—particularly an impaired, confused, or unfamiliar motorist—for a vehicular roadway.”
Are there any other recorded incidents of someone “mistaking” this pathway with people walking on it for a drivable road ? Drunken drivers have been known to drive the wrong way on streets and even freeways, is the City supposed to be able to prevent that ?
If you look up the original news reports of this incident, the car travelled at least 30 feet from the road, and went through a bench and a bush before hitting the girl. This was not a case of someone mistaking a path for a road as the lawyers’ statement tries to make it appear. The news reports showed that the car veered onto a sidewalk, then hit a steel bench, then continued through some bushes, and then onto another sidewalk where it hit the little girl before slamming into a tree.
What manner of protection could be reasonably expected from the City here ? Bollards are mentioned, but if a steel bench isn’t stopping that vehicle then bollards might as well be toothpicks.
Next is the car rental company.
“Their lawsuit says her four arrests for battery all involved alcohol. ”
It doesn’t say “moving violation arrests”, it says battery, which is a criminal case. No car rental company conducts criminal background checks that I know of. As far as I know, they require that you are a licensed driver and that you carry active and adequate insurance.
So why aren’t they suing the insurance company (which is not mentioned) ? If Turu did not require proof of insurance, or provide insurance themselves I can see why the lawyers would go after them.
But Turo’s website shows this:
“*Liability insurance is provided under a policy issued to Turo by Travelers Excess and Surplus Lines Company. Liability coverage is up to $750,000 for all host protection plans, except in some states and at some airports that require additional coverage.”
No doubt that it is not enough, but then there is no amount that would be enough, nothing is going to make up for this horrible event..
The perpetrator is in jail and rightfully so, 8 years in state prison.
Nothing is going to fix this situation, so how does a naked money grab at the only two entities who potentially have money do anything to help ?