$1,500,000 Settlement for Client Who Sustained Herniated Disc Injuries After a Rear-End Collision
COURT AND COUNTY
Kings County Supreme Court
AGE AND OCCUPATION OF PLAINTIFF
Plaintiff was a 62-year-old self-employed livery cab driver at the time of the accident.
FACTS AND ALLEGATIONS
Plaintiff was driving on Broadway at the intersection of 133rd Street in Manhattan, New York. The accident occurred when the Plaintiff’s vehicle was struck in the rear by the defendant’s delivery truck. The action was filed in Kings County Supreme Court based on the Plaintiff’s residence. After depositions were held, the plaintiff moved for summary judgment on the issue of liability. The Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment was granted, leaving a damages-only trial. The Defendants did not appeal this decision.
After the accident the Plaintiff was taken by ambulance to St. Luke’s-Roosevelt Hospital where he was treated for cervical and lumbar pain and released. He followed up with an orthopedist and pain management physician and underwent conservative treatment, including physical therapy and pain medication. An MRI of the cervical spine revealed that the plaintiff sustained a serious neck injury, including multiple herniated discs at the C4-C5, C5-C6 and C6-C7 levels. An EMG test revealed that he had C5-C6 Radiculopathy. He also underwent a lumbar spine MRI which revealed a disc herniation at L5-S1 and disc bulges at L2-L3, L3-L4 and L4-L5. After conservative treatment failed, he eventually underwent surgery to his neck which included the insertion of hardware into his cervical spine. Plaintiff’s treating spinal surgeon opined that the cervical injuries and need for the surgery were related to the accident.
Plaintiff also sought economic damages for future medical needs and the cost of future healthcare related to his injuries from the accident. His future medical needs included treatment related to his cervical spine that he would need going forward for the span of his lifetime. In support of these claims, Plaintiff retained a Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation specialist who examined the Plaintiff and opined regarding his future medical needs and the costs for same and indicated that his injuries were disabling and permanent. The Plaintiff missed work only sporadically after the accident and after the surgery and was back to work in his normal occupation to the present day. The Plaintiff also retained an expert economist who extrapolated the present cost of his future healthcare needs using applicable economic growth rates.
The case settled on October 7, 2011, for $1,500,000.
The case was handled by Daniel P. O’Toole and Frederick C. Aranki.