New Jersey Jury Verdict Review & Analysis

Publisher:: Jury Verdict Review Publications, Inc.
Publication date:: 2020-12-13

Issue Number

Latest documents

$______ RECOVERY - MOTOR VEHICLE NEGLIGENCE - REAR END COLLISION - PLAINTIFF DRIVER STRUCK IN REAR BY COMMERCIAL VAN WHILE STOPPED AT TRAFFIC LIGHT - CERVICAL HERNIATION - SURGERY - NO INCOME CLAIMS - COLLISION OCCURS IN BERGEN COUNTY BUT CASE BROUGHT IN ESSEX COUNTY BASED UPON RESIDENCE OF DEFENDANT.
Essex County, NJ In this action for motor vehicle negligence, the 26- year-old plaintiff driver contended that he was struck in the rear by the defendant driver of a commercial van owned by a restaurant. The plaintiff maintained that as a result, he suffered a cervical herniation that ultimately required a surgical fusion and a subsequent revision of the fusion. The defendant denied that the accident caused the claimed injuries.
CONSUMER FRAUD. DEFENDANT'S JUDGMENT
Consumer fraud - Breach of contract - Plaintiff contends defendant seller misrepresented condition of aircraft plaintiff purchased from him and defendant inspector conducted negligent inspection that misrepresented airworthiness of airplane - Defendants assert plaintiff is certified airplane mechanic and there were no misrepresentations made. Burlington County, NJ In this consumer fraud case, the plaintiff asserted that the defendant seller and inspector of an aircraft violated the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act by failing to comply with Airworthiness Directives on the plane purchased by the plaintiff. The defendant seller argued that the plaintiff is an FAA Certified aircraft airframe and power plant mechanic.
CONTRACT. DEFENDANT'S VERDICT
Contract - Plaintiff’s estate and plaintiff company contend defendant former stockholder violated non-compete agreements, breached fiduciary duty, and misappropriated trade secrets when he set up competing company in same business - Defendant asserts plaintiff knew and consented to defendant establishing company and any agreements between defendant and plaintiff company were voided when plaintiff failed to pay fees per terms of agreement. Broward County, NJ In this contract case, the plaintiffs, the estate of the founder and the company he founded, asserted that the defendants breached a confidentiality and non-compete agreement, breached fiduciary duty to the plaintiffs, committed tortious interference with the plaintiffs’ business relationships, committed fraud and conversion, and had misappropriated trade secrets. The defendant denied all of the plaintiffs’ claims.
DEFAMATION. DEFENDANT'S VERDICT
Defamation - Conversion - Fraud - Plaintiff and defendant involved in relationship which ended with altercation during which police were called - Plaintiff claims defendant falsely accused her of assault and defamed her causing economic losses and health issues - Defendant counterclaims plaintiff was abusive and caused her emotional, economic and psychological damages. Cumberland County, NJ In this matter, the plaintiff and defendant were cohabiting in the plaintiff’s residence on and off for 2 years with the intention of having a civil ceremony to become life partners. Due to various circumstances, primarily a disagreement around a $______ debt, which the plaintiff claimed belonged solely to the defendant, the parties dissolved their relationship. On August 5, 2017, during a disagreement over the joint purchase of
DOG BITE. $______ RECOVERY
Dog bite - Plaintiff carpet installer bitten by defendants’ dog while measuring for carpet installation - Puncture wounds, cellulitis and permanent scarring and sensitivity - Defendants dispute extent of injuries - Non-binding arbitration assigns 100% liability to defendants. Middlesex County, NJ In this dog bite case, the plaintiff asserted that the defendants failed to contain their dog and it bit and injured the plaintiff. Liability was not in dispute because the court had entered an order on August 12, 2019 ruling that the defendants were liable for the dog bite and any injuries suffered by the plaintiff as a result thereof.
INSURANCE OBLIGATION. $______ PIP ARBITRATION AWARD
Insurance obligation - Insurance company contends extension of disc surgery initially performed 18 years earlier was not medically necessary or related to subject collision. Morris County, NJ This case involved a plaintiff driver, in her 30s, who after the rear end collision, underwent a cervical fusion at an adjacent cervical level that was fused 18 years earlier. She had made a full recovery in the interim. The plaintiff maintained that the need for surgery and follow-up care stemmed from the collision and sought $______ from the PIP carrier. The carrier denied that the treatment was medically necessary or causally related to the collision and the case was submitted for PIP arbitration.
MOTOR VEHICLE NEGLIGENCE. Auto/Bicycle Collision. DEFENDANT'S VERDICT ON LIABILITY
Motor vehicle negligence - Auto/bicycle collision - Plaintiff bicyclist collides with drivers’ side of defendant’s vehicle as defendant is backing out of driveway - Soft tissue lumbar injuries - No verbal threshold. Salem County, NJ In this action for motor vehicle negligence, the plaintiff bicyclist, in his 60s, contended that the defendant driver negligently failed to make adequate observations as she backed out of her driveway. The plaintiff asserted that as a result, he rode into the driver’s side of the defendant’s car sustaining injuries. The defendant denied that she was negligent and contended that the cause of the accident was the negligence of the plaintiff.
MOTOR VEHICLE NEGLIGENCE. Auto/Motorcycle Collision. $______ VERDICT
Motor vehicle negligence - Auto/motorcycle collision - 4 lumbar spinous process fractures - 3 lumbar compression fractures - Coccyx fracture - Sternum fracture - Bilateral foot fractures. Burlington County, NJ In this action for motor vehicle negligence, the 17- year-old plaintiff motorcyclist contended that the defendant automobile driver failed to make adequate observations, swerving into on-coming traffic. The defendant struck the plaintiff’s motorcycle causing him to sustain serious injuries. The defendant contended that the plaintiff crossed the center line.
MOTOR VEHICLE NEGLIGENCE. Broadside Collision. DEFENDANT'S VERDICT ON LIABILITY
Motor vehicle negligence - Broadside collision - Plaintiff contends defendant is speeding, causing accident when plaintiff fails to stop at stop sign at strip mall - Defendant driving with father while still on permit - Soft tissue injuries - No verbal threshold. Monmouth County, NJ In this case of motor vehicle negligence, the plaintiff driver, who was leaving a strip mall, contended that although she had a stop sign, she could not see the defendant driver, whom the plaintiff contended was speeding. The plaintiff maintained that as a result, she was struck in the side of her car, sustaining injuries. The defendant was on her permit and driving with her father. The defendant denied speeding and contended that the sole cause of the collision was the negligence of the plaintiff.
MOTOR VEHICLE NEGLIGENCE. Intersection Collision. $______ RECOVERY
Motor vehicle negligence - Intersection collision - Failure of pick-up truck driver, in course of employment for road service company, to stop at stop sign - Multiple lumbar and cervical herniations with impingement on spinal cord - Lumbar and cervical surgery - No income claims. Middlesex County, NJ In this action for motor vehicle negligence, the plaintiff driver, in her 40s, contended that the defendant driver of pickup truck, who was in the course of his employment for a road service company, failed to stop at a stop sign, striking her on the driver’s side casing her to sustain injuries. The vehicle suffered very significant property damage. The defendant would have argued that the plaintiff made a better recovery than claimed.