GMR Partner Jeff Tenthoff successfully defended an insured client who negligently caused an accident. A dashcam caught the collision after Jeff’s client turned left in front of the plaintiff’s vehicle. In addition to depicting Jeff’s client turn left a few seconds before impact, the video also captured the screeching tires, the crunch of the impact, and both vehicles spinning because of the force of the impact. Both vehicles required tows and were declared total losses.
The plaintiff went to urgent care three days after the accident with neck and back complaints before seeking seven months of chiropractic treatment and undergoing a cervical epidural injection. The plaintiff’s MRI report revealed a herniation “appearing acute in nature.” Plaintiff’s experts related permanent injuries, including the acute herniation to the accident, requiring ongoing chiropractic treatment and pain management injections for a claimed lifetime cost of nearly $1,000,000. The plaintiff, who was 28 years old at the time of the accident and had no other injuries or treatment for neck or back pain, alleged that she could not sit or stand for long periods, had stopped working out, could not go out socially, and missed time from work. There was also $9,500 in excess medical expenses presented.
The defense expert radiologist opined that there were no acute injuries depicted on the MRIs, while his orthopedic spine surgeon conceded that based upon plaintiff’s subjective complaints, she would have sustained a whiplash injury as a result of the accident. He further testified to several inconsistent findings on the plaintiff’s evaluation that suggested her history was inaccurate. Jeff successfully cross-examined the plaintiff with her lack of immediate complaints and relatively minimal complaints three days later at the urgent care compared to when she presented to the chiropractor, as well as social media posts showing the plaintiff at her sister’s college graduation just 6 weeks after the accident.
Mr. Tenthoff argued that the plaintiff’s subjective complaints could not be trusted, nor could her alleged limitations. Ultimately, the jury deliberated for approximately 40 minutes before returning a defense verdict on factual cause.
