MOTOR VEHICLE LIABILITY

“CASE RESULTS DEPEND UPON A VARIETY OF FACTORS UNIQUE TO EACH CASE, AND DO NOT GUARANTEE OR PREDICT A SIMILAR RESULT IN ANY FUTURE CASE”

$350,000.00 Verdict For Eastern Shore Man Hit From Behind

Attorney: Gregory Sandler

Location: Northampton County, VA

What Happened:

My client, a long time resident of Cape Charles, VA on the Eastern Shore of Virginia, had left McDonalds and was heading north on Route 13 in his truck. He stopped in order to make a left turn into a local business, and a woman in a vehicle, who was trying to change lanes around a slower vehicle, smashed into the rear of my client’s truck, which such force as to shoot his truck across the oncoming lanes.

My client suffered injuries to his neck and back, but they were not of a nature that surgery would correct. He suffered through years of treatment, only to be left in chronic pain, getting around with the aid of a cane, and dependent upon regular pain medication to get through the day, and to allow him to sleep.

The client was somewhat fortunate in that he had limits under his auto insurance policy in Virginia, that were much higher than those of the negligent defendant. Neither insurance company believed that my client was seriously injured, despite the severity of the impact and the level of medical treatment he had undergone. As a result, we filed suit on his behalf in Cape Charles, VA, and proceeded with one of the few jury cases handled in that venue.

The case proceeded over a two day period, with the jury hearing evidence from my client and his wife, along with the medical providers treating him. The defense even tried to put on evidence that my client had been drinking, but after the judge heard the evidence without the jury, he ruled that it was not sufficient to be considered. During the proceedings, I offered the jury an explanation of just how to place a value on the chronic pain my client lived with.

The jury returned a verdict in the amount of $350,000.00, which was then, one of the highest verdicts returned in an auto case in that jurisdiction.

MOTOR VEHICLE LIABILITY

“CASE RESULTS DEPEND UPON A VARIETY OF FACTORS UNIQUE TO EACH CASE, AND DO NOT GUARANTEE OR PREDICT A SIMILAR RESULT IN ANY FUTURE CASE”

Handicapped Passenger Receives Settlement After Being Dumped In Van

Attorney: Gregory Sandler

Location: Norfolk Circuit Court

What Happened:

My client was a 53 woman, who had lost both of her legs due to complications with diabetes and circulation. Her mobility requires her use of a wheelchair. She is of modest means, and her bedroom is equipped with a “trapeze” bar above her bed, allowing her to transfer to and from the bed, and to reposition herself, through the use of her arms and arm strength. She regularly used the transportation services of a nationwide contract transport company.

In November 2012, the client called the transport company to assist her in going to the polls to vote in the Presidential election. When it arrived, she, in her wheelchair, and accompanied by a friend, went to the curb and were assisted into the transport van. The proper procedure for the van operator is to secure each of the four wheels of the wheelchair to the deck of the van. On this occasion, for some reason, the operator of the van only secured the back two wheels. When the van started off, the momentum propelled the wheelchair backwards, and without secured front wheels, the chair flipped backwards. The patient was secured in the chair with a seatbelt, so she went with the chair, unable to stop her fall.

As a result of the fall, the client suffered a rotator cuff tear of her shoulder, and after lengthy therapy, required surgical correction. Again, post surgical therapy was extensive to return her to her level of strength. However, the impact on her quality of life and limitations of movement during the injury cannot be overstated. Essentially, a woman whose mobility had been reduced from 4 limbs to 2, was now further reduced to only the use of one arm.

After filing suit in Norfolk Circuit Court, I was able to engage defense counsel in discussions about the potential evidence to be presented at trial, and we were able to reach a substantial confidential SETTLEMENT, for the client, which will allow her to acquire her own transportation vehicle for her future.

MOTOR VEHICLE CRASH

“CASE RESULTS DEPEND UPON A VARIETY OF FACTORS UNIQUE TO EACH CASE, AND DO NOT GUARANTEE OR PREDICT A SIMILAR RESULT IN ANY FUTURE CASE”

$100,000.00 Verdict For Passenger T-Boned In Chesapeake

Attorney: Gregory Sandler

Location: Chesapeake, VA

What Happened:

My client was a passenger in the family van driven by her husband, along with her two children, heading to the movies on a Sunday. As the van was traveling on Battlefield Blvd in Chesapeake, VA, the Defendant, driving an oversized pickup truck, came through a stop sign, intending to cross three lanes of traffic, and crashed into the van, directly at the passenger door, inches from my client’s body. The impact smashed the passenger door, spun the van and caused the client to be thrown forward hitting her head on the dash.

Before the crash, my client was an active mother and wife, teaching exercise at the YMCA and faithfully walking her dogs twice a day. The crash changed all that. MRIs showed that the crash had resulted in bulging or herniated disks in her neck, causing decreased sensation in her arm, with pain and limitation of movement in her neck. Through the use of printed MRI images we were able to have her treating orthopedist point to the precise places of damage, so that the jury would understand that her injury and her pain were real.

After months of conservative treatment including therapy and spinal injections, the client still suffered from pain. Her doctor prescribed cervical disk surgery, but the client was petrified of the procedure, so, at the time of her trial, she had not undergone the procedure. The defense argued that she really wasn’t hurt as badly as she claimed, and they did not want to place a value on the future surgery. In an attempt to bolster their position, the defense hired a doctor to examine my client and testify that she really didn’t need surgery. Our investigation, however, revealed that the defense’s doctor had NEVER PERFORMED THE SURGERY, and the jury declined to believe him.

The jury heard the evidence for two days, and returned a verdict in favor of this wife and mother, in the amount of $100,000.00.