Facts

Personal injury involving a radio controlled model airplane. The defendant flew his radio controlled model airplane into plaintiff, striking him in the leg and tearing his femoral artery which nearly resulted in death.

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Plaintiff contended that the defendant, for no reason at all, negligently and/or intentionally flew his radio controlled model airplane into plaintiff, striking him in the leg and tearing his femoral artery which nearly resulted in death.

Plaintiff contended that the defendant was a novice flyer of radio controlled airplanes and that he was extremely inexperienced. He further contended that if there were distractions that were bothering the defendant, such as the plaintiff's unusual flying techniques, he should have simply landed his plane and sat down. Instead, the plaintiff alleged that the defendant ignored the distractions because he wanted to continue flying, and as a result, lost sight of his own plane, which struck the plaintiff.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
The defendant contended that he was flying his own plane, minding his business, when the plaintiff's plane "buzzed him" several times. There was evidence that the plaintiff's plane may have come as close as 30 to 40 feet from the defendant at speeds of 100-plus mph. As a result, defendant "ducked" and lost control of his plane.

Settlement Discussions

Plaintiff made a demand of $2.1 million dollars a few weeks before trial. During the course of trial, plaintiff indicated that he would be willing to take something in the area of the demand at the Mediation (which was approximately $800,000). A C.C.P. Section 998 of $100,000 was made and expired. There was a demand of $500,000 made during the deliberations but the jury reached its verdict before an offer could be made.

Specials in Evidence

$140,000; $120,000.

Injuries

Plaintiff's doctor, Dr. Merritt, stated that the plaintiff had an extremely serious injury which resulted in damage to various nerves in the thigh, a complete transsection of the femoral artery, and loss of soft tissue and muscle. The injury was permanent. Plaintiff's expert also contended that Mr. Wasilow had severe pain and needed medication for the rest of his life and that he had complex regional pain syndrome, which needed further evaluation and treatment. Plaintiff walks with a limp and has severe pain resulting in an inability to have sexual relations with his wife and/or touch the area in issue. He is unable to engage in activities with his young children, and to fly radio controlled model planes. Mrs. Wasilow also sued for loss of consortium.

Result

Defense verdict.

Other Information

Dr. Wienir, on behalf of the defense, generally agreed with the plaintiff's expert, except that he said that a diagnosis of chronic regional pain syndrome was inappropriate. He also testified that the main issue was the subjective nature of plaintiff's pain, and he did not believe the plaintiff was suffering as badly as plaintiff contended.

Deliberation

five hours

Poll

9-3

Length

nine days