Articles Posted in Car Accidents

The following blog entry is written to illustrate how a car accident lawsuit might follow. Reviewing this kind of case 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 car accident lawsuit and its proceedings.)

Sarah claimed that she sustained neck pain and left shoulder pain as a result of the November accident. She was placed in an ambulance and transported to Kaiser, where she was treated and released. She underwent approximately one month of additional physical therapy, and two months of chiropractic treatment. MRIs on her back and neck revealed a slight disc protrusion. She claimed that she missed some work as a result of the second accident.

For the January accident, Sarah sought recovery of $57,056.11 in economic damages and $13,000 in noneconomic damages. She claimed $12,121.11 in medical expenses, and $44,935 in lost wages from Jan. 17 to Oct. 30, 2004. Remmy sought recovery of $7,500 for her economic damages, and Aaron sought recovery of $6,000 for his economic damages.

For the November accident, Sarah sought recovery of $18,777.71 in economic damages and $7,500 in noneconomic damages. She claimed $7,942.71 in medical expenses and $10,835.50 in lost wages from Nov. 8, 2004 to Jan. 16, 2005.

Defense counsel for ABC Services argued that Sarah’s treatment was unreasonable and unnecessary, and that she frequently telephoned doctors requesting an extension of disability.

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

Continue Reading ›

The following blog entry is written to illustrate how a car accident lawsuit might follow. Reviewing this kind of case 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 car accident lawsuit and its proceedings.)

INJURIES: Sarah claimed that she sustained neck and back strain as a result of the January accident. Aaron and Remmy claimed that they sustained soft-tissue neck and back injuries.

Facts:

On Jan. 17, 2004, plaintiff Sarah Serrie, 41, a computer technician, was driving a car in the left-turn pocket in El Dorado County. Her son, Aaron, 15, and daughter, Remmy, 13, were passengers. When Serrie stopped her car, it was rear-ended by a utility van driven by Sam Lemons.

On Nov. 8, 2004, Sarah Serrie was in a second accident. She was driving south in Folsom, CA, and Barry Samsin was driving a car north, in a left-turn pocket. Another driver waived Samsin through a gap in a line of cars which were stopped for a traffic light. Samsin had almost completed his left turn when he struck Serrie’s vehicle over the rear tire.

Serrie and the two children sued ABC Services, the owner of the vehicle in the January accident; Sarah also sued Samsin for the November accident. Both causes of action were brought on the same complaint, and both cases were tried together.

For the January accident, Sarah, Aaron, and Remmy claimed that Sarah stopped when the traffic light changed. They claimed that Steven Lemons was driving the van in the course and scope of his employment with ABC Services, and that ABC Services was vicariously liable.

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

Continue Reading ›

The following blog entry is written to illustrate how a car accident lawsuit might follow. Reviewing this kind of case 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 car accident lawsuit and its proceedings.)

INJURIES: Several days after the accident, the plaintiff visited her general physician for neck pain. After an extended course of pain medications and physical therapy, an MRI revealed a herniation at L4-5. She underwent a laminectomy and cervical fusion more than a year after the accident.

Facts:

On Sept. 24, 2003, the plaintiff, a nursing assistant, was stopped on Folsom Avenue in Sacramento, CA when her vehicle was struck from behind by a car driven by the defendant. The impact was approximately 10 mph, and the damage sustained by both cars was minimal. The police were not summoned.

The plaintiff sued the defendant for motor vehicle negligence.

The defendant did not test liability.

After the surgery, the plaintiff returned to her job, but eventually began experiencing pain in her neck again. After another set of imaging studies, it was determined that the plaintiff had adjacent disc disease. She underwent a second fusion more than four years after the accident.

Defense counsel argued that the impact was so minimal that the risk of injury — much less one of this magnitude — was minimal, if nonexistent. Defense counsel contended that the 10 mph impact and the facts that the police were not called and the plaintiff waited three days to visit a doctor prove that the damage was minimal.

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

Continue Reading ›

The following blog entry is written to illustrate how a car accident lawsuit might follow. Reviewing this kind of case 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 car accident lawsuit and its proceedings.)

The plaintiff sought $300,000 in past medical bills, 80,000 in past lost earnings, $300,000 in future lost earnings and pain and suffering.

The defense argued that Wallace had little more than whiplash and standard soft-tissue injuries. Counsel claimed that anything else was related to pre-existing, asymptomatic, degenerative disc disease and the defendant was liable only for a temporary aggravation of pre-existing conditions.

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

Continue Reading ›

The following blog entry is written to illustrate an example of a personal injury case. Reviewing this kind of lawsuit 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 personal injury lawsuit and its proceedings.)

CLAIMED INJURIES

According to Plaintiff: After the accident, plaintiff complained of a head laceration, neck pain, right flank and hip pain and bruising, right shoulder pain, back pain, and a possible loss of consciousness. He was taken to an emergency room. Initial x-rays of his right hip found no fracture; however, due to persistent pain, an MRI was performed, which revealed acute fractures of the right sacral ala, superior and inferior rami, and public fractures. A CT scan of his head was reported to show no acute findings. He was diagnosed with right sacral and pelvic fractures and lumbar and sacral tenderness. On August 3, 2008, plaintiff reported feeling numbness in his left leg. An examination found palpable tenderness in the right groin over the ramus and in the posterior right sacral region. On August 6, 2008, he was examined by another doctor and he reported continued morning headaches. X-rays of his right ribs taken on August 10, 2008 revealed a non-displaced fracture of the anterior segment of the eighth rib. By September 3, 2008, plaintiff’s headaches were becoming more severe, with confusion, altered mental status, blurred vision, lower extremity tremors, and numbness. A CT scan revealed a 2.5 cm hematoma on the left cerebral hemisphere and midline shift. He was admitted to a hospital, and burr holes were done for drainage. The following day, a CT scan found more hemorrhage and a craniotomy was performed. He was discharged on September 14, 2008. Plaintiff was subsequently diagnosed with disc bulges at L3-L4 and L4-L5, severe spinal stenosis at L4-L5, and L5-S1 facet hypertrophy. He underwent physical therapy from April 14, 2009 until May 25, 2009, and he underwent an epidural injection on January 14, 2010. He underwent a surgery at L4-L5. Plaintiff claimed that he had cognitive deficits and experiences memory loss, confusion, and right arm tremor. Plaintiff’s counsel argued that plaintiff’s relationship with his wife and his quality of life had been affected by his injuries. He suffers from depression and a personality change, with him being more aggressive and argumentative with a shorter temper. Plaintiff’s counsel argued that this was an effect of the closed-head injury. Defense counsel disputed the traumatic brain injury claims and the need for back surgery.

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

Continue Reading ›

The following blog entry is written to illustrate how a car accident lawsuit might follow. Reviewing this kind of case 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 car accident lawsuit and its proceedings.)

INJURIES: Wallace sustained right (dominant) shoulder impingement syndrome as well as radiculopathy in his neck. After the accident, he was taken to an emergency room, where he was treated and released. He underwent several months of conservative treatment, including chiropractic care, physical therapy, pain medication and epidural and facet injections.

Facts:
On Jan. 5, 2006, plaintiff Sam Wallace, 57, an office manager, was reportedly rear-ended at 35 mph by Ronald German on the 605 Freeway in Sacramento.

Wallace sued German and his employer ABC Electrical Contractors Inc., for motor vehicle negligence and vicarious liability. Wallace asserted that the accident resulted from German’s inattentiveness.

Wallace underwent arthroscopic surgery on his right shoulder and an anterior cervical decompression and fusion at C5-7 with right structural iliac crest autograft instrumentation on Sept. 5, 2006. The fusion alleviated the radiculopathy, but did not cure the severe, ongoing headaches.

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

Continue Reading ›

The following blog entry is written to illustrate an example of a personal injury case. Reviewing this kind of lawsuit 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 personal injury lawsuit and its proceedings.)

CASE INFORMATION
FACTS/CONTENTIONS

According to Plaintiff: In June 2008, plaintiff Matt Marrion, a 74-year-old farmer, was driving a truck southbound on El Dorado Hills Avenue when he came to a stop at the intersection with Grass Valley Avenue and then began to proceed through the intersection. He was struck by a truck driven by defendant Rod Martinez, who was traveling eastbound on Grass Valley Avenue making a delivery for his employer, Interstate Services, to ABC Logistics Services Inc. Martinez did not stop at a stop sign at the intersection.

Plaintiff sued Martinez, his employer, Interstate, and ABC Logistics, alleging that Martinez was negligent in the operation of the vehicle, while Interstate and ABC were vicariously liable. Defendants filed a cross-complaint against Jerry Mann for indemnification and apportionment of fault.

Plaintiff’s counsel argued that Martinez was not paying attention and was speaking to his assistant at the time of the accident. Plaintiff’s counsel argued that plaintiff stopped, looked both ways, and then proceeded into the intersection at 5 mph.

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

Continue Reading ›

The following blog entry is written to illustrate how a car accident lawsuit might follow. Reviewing this kind of case 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 car accident lawsuit and its proceedings.)

INJURIES: Cameron claimed he sustained herniated discs at L4-5 and L5-S1. He also complained of dizziness. He underwent three months of chiropractic treatment in addition to three lower back epidural injections. He did not work for approximately a year after the accident as he could not stand for more than 10 minutes at a time. He also underwent a microdiscectomy in May 2009. He may need additional epidural injections or a back fusion in the future.

Facts:

On Dec. 20, 2005, plaintiff Oliver Cameron, 37, a quality control inspector for medical supplies, was stopped at the intersection of Sacramento Avenue and Fair Oaks Street in Sacramento when his car was rear-ended by a delivery truck driven by Phil Lawry. Lawry was driving approximately 35 mph at the time of the accident.

Cameron sued Lawry and his employer, ABC Glass Systems Inc. He alleged that Lawry was negligent in the operation of his vehicle and that ABC was vicariously liable for Lawry’ actions.

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

Continue Reading ›