This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Personal Injury
Auto v. Auto
Rear-End Collision

Margaret Gore v. Johann T. Hunter, R.W. Jacks Trucking Inc.

Published: May 20, 2006 | Result Date: Nov. 16, 2005 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: SCV0016560 Verdict –  $30,300

Judge

Charles David Wachob

Court

Placer Superior


Attorneys

Plaintiff

J. Collinsworth Henderson

Glenn S. Guenard
(Guenard & Bozarth LLP)


Defendant

Jeffrey W. Lambert

Stephen J. Mackey
(Donahue Davies LLP)


Experts

Plaintiff

Paul Kisiliwicz
(medical)

James Willis
(medical)

Steven H. Kaufmann
(medical)

Robert Mistretta
(technical)

Charles McCrory
(medical)

Gary D. Nibbelink
(medical)

Peter Matthews
(technical)

Martin Shaffer
(medical)

Defendant

Michael R. Klein Jr.
(medical)

Alfred French
(medical)

Facts

Plaintiff Margaret Gore was driving on southbound Taylor Road in Rockland in 2003. When her SUV came to a sudden stop due to slowed traffic, she was rear-ended by a tractor-trailer driven by Defendant Johann Hunter. The defendant was driving the tractor in the course of his employment with Defendant J.W. Jacks Trucking Inc. The plaintiff, who was in her 30s, sued Defendant Hunter for negligent operation of a motor vehicle. She also sued Defendant J.W. Jacks under a theory of respondeat superior.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
The plaintiff took the position through eyewitness testimony that her vehicle had come to a stop for several seconds when the defendant rear-ended her. The plaintiff further contended that although the defendants denied liability for the accident during the discovery phase, during trial, they neither admitted nor denied liability. The plaintiff's physicians suggested that the plaintiff suffered from reflex sympathetic dystrophy/complex regional pain syndrome.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
The defendants denied liability for the accident. The defense challenged the plaintiff's physician's claims that she may suffer from reflex sympathetic dystrophy/complex regional pain syndrome. Instead, the defense opined that the plaintiff was making up the claims. A defense expert orthopedist who examined the plaintiff contended that although she was injured in the accident, her injuries were not that serious. Consequently, the defense contended that only damages for soft tissue injuries should be awarded.

Settlement Discussions

The plaintiff demanded $100,000 pursuant to the defendant's insurance policy limits. The defendants offered $151,000 (C.C.P. 998).

Specials in Evidence

The plaintiff sought $1.3 million to $1.7 million for both medical and economic damages.

Damages

The plaintiff sought damages for past and future pain and suffering.

Injuries

The plaintiff was taken to the hospital by ambulance. She claimed injuries to her neck, back, arms and legs. She also claimed she suffered a right knee injury. Although all tests and scans conducted at the hospital came back normal, the plaintiff continued to suffer from pain for which she took heavy pain medications. The plaintiff could not afford to undergo a spinal cord stimulation procedure that her pain management physician recommended.

Result

$30,300. The defendants were found fully liable for the accident.

Deliberation

three hours

Poll

12-0

Length

six days


#115456

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390