In Warren’s case, the plaintiff claimed a life altering traumatic brain injury after a head-on motor vehicle collision with the defendant. The accident itself was very significant totaling both vehicles and pushing the plaintiff into a third car as a result of the defendant’s negligence. Plaintiff’s injuries included claims of memory loss, photophobia, difficulty concentrating, loss of balance, and increased irritability. She also complained that she could no longer read to her children, watch television, or attend events with her family after the accident. These complaints were complicated by her underlying multiple sclerosis which, according to her expert neurologist, made her more susceptible to injury and prevented her brain from healing normally.
Plaintiff called a total of eight witnesses who testified about the severity of the accident, as well as the Plaintiff’s physical and mental condition both before and after the collision. Since liability was uncontested, the Defendant’s only witness was her expert neurologist, who testified that Plaintiffs’ ongoing complaints could not be attributed to a traumatic brain injury. In support of this claim, the defense pointed out that the plaintiff did not lose consciousness in the accident and that subjective complaints of concussion-like symptoms were not objectively supported by the medical evidence. In addition, Warren supported his defense of the case with evidence of plaintiff’s continued ability to work, which required a heavy level of concentration and that her social media illustrated a life after the accident that did not appear to be affected due to injuries. After deliberation, the Chester County jury found that while the plaintiff may have been injured in the accident, they agreed with Warren that the plaintiff’s injuries were not serious and did not constitute a “serious impairment of a bodily function.”
