Facts

Meera Sivarajah filed suit against Jacqueline Peck, in relation to a motor vehicle collision that occurred on Aug. 10, 2012.

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS: Plaintiff contended she entered the intersection on a green light, which phased to yellow as she was passing through. Defendant stopped in the opposite direction and began to turn as the light changed from green to yellow. In doing so, she turned into the side of plaintiff’s car impacting it just behind driver’s door at about 12 mph. The impact caused plaintiff’s vehicle to rotate counter-clockwise 180 degrees before stopping. There was no airbag deployment. There was no police or other emergency response.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS: Defense admitted liability prior to start of trial.

Insurer

State Farm

Settlement Discussions

Plaintiff made a CCP 998 demand for $1.25 million. Defense made a CCP 998 offer for $218,000 raised to $504,000 right before trial.

Damages

Plaintiff claimed $174,897 in past medicals and $4,176,783 in future medical expenses. Plaintiff was a Regulatory Affairs manager with Amgen earning $106,000/year at time of accident. Plaintiff worked until she had a micro-discectomy in March 2014, but has not worked since being laid off in October 2014. She claimed $288,954 in past lost earnings; lost earning capacity of $1,826,094, which is half of projected $3,415.400 based upon Vocational Rehab Paul Broadus’ evaluation with indication of ability to return to work 50 percent time as a consultant in a year after psychological pain management training completed and plaintiff being fully weaned off opiate medications. She also claimed past non-economic damages of $2.5 million and future non-economic damages of $4.97 million based upon a suggested $100K/year for her 49.7-year life expectancy, for a total $13,936,728. There was approximately $6,300 in property damage, which was not in evidence since it was previously paid. Defendant is elderly, bedridden, incompetent, and could not offer any testimony was not in the courtroom during trial. Her son came in to testify as to her condition post-accident and the absence of any injury from the accident.

Injuries

At the time of the accident, the 27-year-old plaintiff was returning home from receiving a left-knee injection (prolo-therapy) and had been told to schedule a similar procedure for her chronic SI Joint pain. She returned to the same medical office four days later when she was diagnosed as acute on chronic SI Joint Dysfunction, but reported her pain as “a little higher”. She continued her ongoing PT for 3 weeks. When she went back and saw the doctor that she had seen on the date of accident she was told to get a Lumbar MRI. The MRI was done three days later, which showed early degenerative changes particularly at L5/S1 with no significant bulging. This was later read by defense radiologist as a 2mm bulge, plaintiff expert’s interpretation was a 4mm bulge with added trial testimony of an annular tear. Plaintiff received another injection in her SI Joint on 9/20. She then stopped treatment with this doctor and went to UCLA-Santa Monica where she was given another SI Joint injection. She also had a number of pelvic scans, which were all negative. A third injection to SI Joint was given to her in January 2013, from which she felt three weeks of relief. She was then referred to PT, and began experiencing radicular symptoms around June/July 2013. She saw a number of doctors, who all thought the SI-Joint. Her radicular symptoms allegedly increased and plaintiff ultimately saw John Liu of USC-Keck in February 2013. He recommended she undergo a new lumbar MRI. This time, the MRI showed 5 to 6mm disc bulge at L5/S1 with impingement. He recommended injections, which plaintiff rejected and instead underwent a micro discectomy on March 28, 2014, which gave her immediate relief for 4 to 5 weeks. However, the radicular pain returned and was worse than pre-accident. Pain management did not give her any relief. Plaintiff then visited the Mayo Clinic, where she was given an epidural. The epidural gave some relieve. Plaintiff’s diagnosis was scar tissue enveloped the L5 nerve, not surgical. She then started with Dr. Pangarkar at UCLA, where she underwent epidurals, but there was no significant relief. Then she was put on medication therapy for two years. She also tried trial of spinal cord stimulator in March 2016, which gave her relief of her radicular symptoms. A permanent stimulator was implanted in July 2016. Her status at trial, the leads had just migrated, so capture of relief diminished. They were working to regain capture versus surgery in order to replace leads to stimulator. Non-retained doctors that testified on behalf of plaintiff included Danielle Aufiero, M.D., who saw her for SI Joint issues and knee injections prior to the accident; Beny Charchian, M.D., who was first to see her after accident, Dr. Liu, and Brian Rudin, M.D., who saw her in July 2013, a year post accident. Dr. Rudin reviewed her one month subsequent to accident MRI and said her problems were in the SI Joint and she should have an ablation. He saw her a second time in February 2014, after the second MRI and had opined that this was new from first MRI, which he confirmed.

Result

The jury found in favor of the plaintiff and awarded her $67,339.

Deliberation

4.5 hours

Length

eight days