Personal Injury Lawyer Blog
The following blog entry is written to illustrate a common motion filed during civil litigation. Reviewing this kind of filing should help potential plaintiffs and clients better understand how parties in personal injury cases present such issues to the court.
(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this traumatic brain injury lawsuit and its proceedings.)
EVIDENCE OF PLAINTIFF BROWNE’S ACADEMIC SUSPENSION IN EXTREMELY PROBATIVE TO THE ISSUES OF DAMAGES AND FUTURE DAMAGES
Plaintiff contends that his traumatic brain injury has caused him severe memory and cognitive deficits, and attributes many of the post-accident occurrences in his life to those injuries. He has not been able to complete his high-school education. His academic success at school, after the accident, was poor and as a result he was not eligible for baseball or other athletics. He attributes these academic struggles solely to the 2008 subject accident, irrespective of pre-accident academic difficulties.
In his mediation brief, plaintiff alleges that his medical experts believe the 2010 gun-incident is directly derived and related to the traumatic brain injury. Dr. Randall Hill has opined that plaintiff “did not have the executive functions needed to keep in mind that he had left the rifle in his car, although now attending school, or that his action in doing so would have consequences.” Similarly, Dr. Li was also called upon to opine whether or not the gun and knife expulsion incident was related to his TBI.
For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.
Plaintiff points to the 2008 accident and his related injuries as the sole reason he was unable to complete his education. However, it is clear that the true reason he was unable to complete his schooling is due to his decisions to transport his hunting rifle and knife, in the back of his care to school. Defendants are entitled to show that plaintiff’s behavior, in situations that call for judgment and reasoning (both academic and not), have consistently put him into trouble and that many of the negative occurrences since the accident are not attributable to his alleged injuries. (See Part 3 of 4.)
For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.