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

Christine Enriquez, Michelle Peek, Amanda Howe v. Ronald Parker, Monrovia Pottery Ranch Inc.

Published: Mar. 1, 2008 | Result Date: Jan. 22, 2008 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: GC036939 Verdict –  $12,387

Court

L.A. Superior Pasadena


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Phillip T. Vondra
(Vondra & Hanna)

Anton C. Gerschler


Defendant

Stephen C. Pasarow
(Knapp, Petersen & Clarke)


Experts

Plaintiff

Duane Eyre
(medical)

Jack H. Florin
(medical)

Michael H. Millar
(medical)

Defendant

Brian Pires
(medical)

Facts

On May 7, 2005, plaintiff Christine Enriquez, a 40-year-old homemaker, was driving a Honda Pilot on the 210 freeway near Baldwin Avenue in stop and go traffic when she was rear-ended by defendant Ronald Parker, 74, who was driving a Toyota Camry in the course and scope of his employment with the Monrovia Pottery Ranch Inc.

At the time of the accident, Enriquez was driving with Michelle Peek, 39, Amanda Howe, 31, and two others (who did not make claims) as passengers.

Amanda Howe was also involved in a subsequent rear-end accident on Sept. 16, 2005. Howe continued to treat with Dr. Duane Eyre after the second accident. On Dec. 12, 2005, Howe was given a high velocity neck manipulation by Dr. Eyre. This caused a bilateral dissection of an artery, which resulted in her having a stroke. She was admitted to the hospital for three weeks.

Contentions

PLAINTIFFS' CONTENTIONS:
The plaintiffs contended that the accident caused soft tissue whiplash type injuries with reasonable and necessary chiropractic treatment.

Howe claimed that she was still treating for injuries from the May 7, 2005 accident when she was involved in the second accident; that the need for the chiropractic treatment resulting in the stroke was caused from the May 7,2005 accident. Howe contended that the defendant was responsible for the medical treatment from the stroke pursuant to CACI 3929.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS:
The defendants contended that the accident on May 7, 2005 was a minor to moderate impact that would have caused mild injury and that the treatment of the three plaintiffs by Dr. Eyre was not reasonable or necessary.

As for the stroke, the defense contended that the second accident was a superceding cause because Howe had essentially recovered from the first accident by the time of the second accident.

Settlement Discussions

Trial Judge Jan Pluim conducted a mandatory settlement conference the first day of trial. The judge recommended $25,000 for Howe, $6,000 for Peek and $6,000 for Enrique. Plaintiffs agreed to accept the judge's recommendations, but the defense remained at $4,300 for Enrique, $,4,100 for Peek and $15,000 (CCP 998) for Howe. Plaintiffs Peek and Enrique then offered to settle separately for $6,000 each, but State Farm would only settle as a group.

Specials in Evidence

$3,820 (Enriquez); $6,343 (Peek); $2,463 plus $77, 372.88 for hospitalization after stroke (Howe).

Injuries

Each plaintiff alleged soft tissue injuries to neck and back. Howe had a stroke from chiropractic treatment.

Result

$3,745 for Enriquez; $5,179 for Peek; $3,463 for Howe.

Other Information

The case did not settle at mediation or MSC. FILING DATE: April 4, 2006.

Deliberation

2.5 hours

Poll

12-0 (for all plaintiffs)

Length

four days


#122804

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

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