Jury Awards $176 Million to Family of Two Boys Killed in Westlake Village Crosswalk

Who Are the Parties & What Happened

Mark Iskander, 11, and Jacob Iskander, 8, were killed while crossing Triunfo Canyon Road in a marked crosswalk on September 29, 2020, as they walked with their mother and younger brother. The boys' mother grabbed their youngest sibling and dove out of the path of a black SUV. She looked up and saw a white SUV pass the spot where Mark and Jacob had been. Mark likely died within minutes of being struck. Paramedics took Jacob to a Thousand Oaks hospital, where he was later pronounced dead.

Grossman, wife of plastic surgeon Dr. Peter Grossman and co-founder of the Grossman Burn Foundation, was driving the white SUV. Scott Erickson, her then-boyfriend and a former Los Angeles Dodgers pitcher, was driving alongside her. The family's attorneys alleged that the two had been drinking that night and were engaged in a speed contest along Triunfo Canyon Road, reaching speeds up to 80 mph in a 45 mph zone before the crash.

The Criminal Case

The civil verdict comes on top of an already-resolved criminal one. In the criminal trial, Grossman was found guilty on February 23, 2024, of two counts each of second-degree murder and vehicular manslaughter with gross negligence, and one count of hit-and-run driving. She was sentenced to 15 years to life in prison. She tried to appeal the conviction, but it was upheld in March of this year.

Erickson's path through the legal system was far less severe. Erickson did not face any criminal charges in connection with the crash. He resolved his case by recording a public service announcement. The civil trial was, for the Iskander family, the primary avenue for holding Erickson accountable.

What the Civil Trial Revealed

The five-week trial in Van Nuys Superior Court brought out details that added dimension to what the criminal case had already established. Grossman's attorney argued that the crash was caused by a hazardous crosswalk design and that the city had known about the dangerous condition for years. The family's attorney, Brian Panish, countered that an estimated 24 million vehicles had passed through that crosswalk without incident.

Panish told jurors that Erickson hid in bushes after the crash, admitted lying repeatedly to police, and admitted switching vehicles and using cold plates, calling these acts criminal in nature. Erickson testified he was not racing Grossman, though he did admit to driving 55 mph in a 45 mph zone. Grossman and Erickson each blamed the other for striking the boys.

The Verdict & What Comes Next

Jurors found both Grossman and Erickson negligent and awarded the Iskander family more than $170 million in damages. The panel also found that Grossman and Erickson acted with malice, opening the door to a potential punitive damages phase. In Erickson's case, the jury additionally found fraud. The malice and fraud findings mean the plaintiffs may also be able to recover punitive damages on top of the compensatory award.

That distinction matters enormously. Compensatory damages are meant to make the family whole, covering losses like the boys' expected future earnings, the parents' grief and suffering, and the family's long-term emotional harm. Punitive damages are meant to punish and deter, and they are only available when a jury finds the defendants acted with malice, oppression, or fraud. That the jury found all three across both defendants signals that this case is not over in terms of financial exposure for Grossman and Erickson.

What This Case Means for Similar Claims

For readers who have lost a family member due to someone else's reckless driving, the Iskander case illustrates several principles that apply broadly in wrongful death litigation.

Criminal and civil accountability are separate. Erickson faced no criminal charges and received what amounted to a public relations penalty. The civil system provided a second, independent avenue for the family to hold him responsible. A criminal acquittal, or even a failure to charge, does not foreclose a civil wrongful death action.

The malice finding matters. When a driver was not merely negligent but acted in conscious disregard of human life, such as by drinking and street racing in a residential area, juries can go beyond compensatory damages. That potential for punitive exposure is a meaningful deterrent, and it becomes available precisely when the conduct was egregious rather than simply careless.

Accountability can take years, but it still comes. The crash happened in 2020. The criminal conviction came in 2024. The civil verdict arrived in 2026. For families in the aftermath of a fatal crash, the timeline can feel impossibly long, but the legal system provides multiple opportunities to pursue justice even when the criminal process has concluded.

Our deepest sympathies remain with the Iskander family. No verdict returns Mark and Jacob. But the jury's decision to hold both defendants fully accountable, and to find malice in their conduct, is a meaningful form of recognition for what this family lost.

If you have lost a loved one due to reckless or impaired driving, the independent attorneys we connect you with can help you understand every avenue for accountability and recovery available under the law.

For more articles like this, visit our News Page.