Belinda Roloff v. Budget Foods, Inc., et al.
Published: Jun. 12, 1999 | Result Date: May 18, 1999 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |Case number: 97AS06584 Verdict – $320,328
Judge
Court
Sacramento Superior
Attorneys
Plaintiff
Todd S. Bissell
(Todd S. Bissell APLC)
Defendant
Experts
Plaintiff
Richard Rentfro
(medical)
Neil Wood
(medical)
Dan Dunlevy
(medical)
Defendant
Harry A. Khasigian
(medical)
Facts
On Jan. 25, 1997, an Isuzu delivery truck owned by defendant Budget Foods Inc. and operated by defendant employee Ronald Anthony Silva ran a red light and broadsided the 45-year-old plaintiff in the driver's door. The impact nearly caused the plaintiff's 1985 Toyota van to tip over, and totaled both plaintiff's van and the Isuzu truck. The plaintiff's 19-year-old daughter was also in the van and injured in the collision, but settled her case over a year before trial. The defendant admitted liability but contested the cause of plaintiff's injuries and the reasonableness of her medical treatment. The defendant also contended that plaintiff was not entitled to any wage loss or loss of earning capacity damages in that plaintiff was unemployed on the day of the accident. The plaintiff impacted her left shoulder in the collision in the driver's foor. Two days later, she complained of right shoulder pain and sought conservative treatment including chiropractic physical therapy, steroid injections, and trigger point injections. The right shoulder pain worsened with time and developed into adhesive capsulitis (frozen shoulder). An MRI of the shoulder was normal. 18 months post-accident, the plaintiff underwent a manipulation under general anesthesia, which helped improve the motion, but did not resolve the pain. Her surgeon testified that he considered plaintiff a candidate for arthroscopic acromioplasty to scope and perhaps clean out the shoulder in an effort to reduce her pain. The plaintiff had been diagnosed with fibromyalgia in 1991.
Settlement Discussions
The case was arbitrated in August 1998 before Robert Drabant. Prior to that time, no demands or offers had been made. The plaintiff had her manipulation under general anesthesia a few weeks before arbitration when her wage loss was much less and no indication of future surgery was seen. The award was $112,088. The defendant rejected it, and the plaintiff filed a C.C.P. º998 in this amount in September 1998. The defendant's first offer of $40,000 came at the March 3, 1999 mandatory settlement conference. The plaintiff demanded $275,000 at the mandatory settlement conference. The pro tem judge, Charles Miller suggested a settlement of $75,000. The defendant increased their C.C.P. º998 offer to $50,000 on March 10, 1999 and again to $75,000 on May 6, 1999. The plaintiff indicated that if defendant put the arbitration award on the table ($112,088) that plaintiff would negotiate off of the $275,000. The defendant never went above $75,000.
Specials in Evidence
The plaintiff incurred $16,322 in present medical specials, and her surgeon estimated that the global costs of future arthroscopy was $25,000. The defendant argued that plaintiff needed only three months worth of treatment at an estimated cost of $4,800 and that future surgery was not indicated $25,000
Damages
The plaintiff was unemployed at the time of the accident. She had been self-employed as a house cleaner, but wound down that business in December 1996 in preparation for entry into a business school for low income persons, in which she would learn secretarial skills. The school started three weeks before the accident. The plaintiff was set to graduate in May of 1997, but had to quit school as a result of her growing right shoulder pain. The school CEO testified that by contract with the Federal Government, they are required to place at least 80 percent of their students in positions of employment. The school placed 86 percent of plaintiff's class into full time positions with benefits at salary ranges between $8 and $14 per hour. The defendant argued that plaintiff was not entitled to any such damages in that they were speculative. The plaintiff argued that she would have earned at least $74,000 in past and future earnings until such time as she can have her arthroscopy.
Other Information
The verdict was reached approximately one year and five months after the case was filed. The defendants have filed a notice of intention to motion for new trial and remittitur. EXPERT TESTIMONY: The defendant's expert testified that he thought that plaintiff's injury was nothing more than soft tissue, and that her pain was the result of the pre-existing fibromyalgia. All of plaintiff's experts disputed this, and stated that the fibromyalgia simply made plaintiff's pain worse, and prolonged her recovery.
Deliberation
5½ hours
Poll
12-0
Length
five days
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390