$______ RECOVERY - PREMISES LIABILITY - FALL DOWN - PLAINTIFF TRIPS AND FALLS ON SIDEWALK DEFECT ABUTTING CO-OP CITY - QUADRICEPS TENDON TEAR - SURGERY - PLAINTIFF DEVELOPS EXCESSIVE BUILD-UP OF FLUID - PLAINTIFF BELIEVES RISKS OF RECOMMENDED ADDITIONAL SURGERY OUTWEIGH POTENTIAL BENEFITS.

• Pages: 8-8

herniation at C5-C6. On May 1, 2018, plaintiff had a C7-T1

interlaminar steroid injection which provided only temporary re-

lief. The plaintiff continued to complain of left arm and wrist pain

and hand/grip weakness. She had another set of injections, median

branch blocks, at C5-C6 and C6-C7 in August 2019, also with

reported no lasting relief.

On February 3, 2020, the plaintiff had a radio frequency ablation.

She states that too did not provide lasting relief. On November 27,

2020, plaintiff had a C5 to C7 anterior cervical decompression and

fusion surgery with allograft and a plate. At a post-operative fol-

low up she continued to complain of pain in her left shoulder, arm

and hand, as well as left arm weakness and difficulty swallowing.

Her symptoms improved slowly over time. The plaintiff’s expert re-

ported that the plaintiff will need medical care for the rest of her

life and will need a 2nd fusion surgery within the next 10 years.

$1,150,000 RECOVERY – PREMISES LIABILITY – FALL DOWN – PLAINTIFF TRIPS AND

FALLS ON SIDEWALK DEFECT ABUTTING CO-OP CITY – QUADRICEPS TENDON TEAR –

SURGERY – PLAINTIFF DEVELOPS EXCESSIVE BUILD-UP OF FLUID – PLAINTIFF

BELIEVES RISKS OF RECOMMENDED ADDITIONAL SURGERY OUTWEIGH POTENTIAL

BENEFITS.

Bronx County, NY

In this action for premises liability, the 72-year-

old plaintiff contended that the defendant

property manager of Co-op City negligently failed

to notice and repair an approximate 1-inch height

differential between sidewalk flags, resulting in

the plaintiff tripping and fall, suffering a

quadriceps tendon tear. The plaintiff maintained

that despite surgery and physical therapy, he will

suffer extensive permanent pain and limitations.

The defendant maintained that the alleged defect

was de minimis and denied that it was negligent.

The plaintiff related that as he was walking on the

sidewalk, he suddenly tripped and fell on the height

differential. The plaintiff maintained that if the defen-

dant provided appropriate inspections and mainte-

nance, it would have discovered and repaired the

defect. The defendant asserted that the plaintiff

failed to make adequate observations and was

comparatively negligent.

The plaintiff maintained that the fall caused a tear of

the quadriceps tendon. The plaintiff was hospitalized

and underwent an open surgical repair. The plaintiff

contended that because of continuing build-up in

fluid in the knee, he continued to experience severe

pain. The plaintiff asserted that the pain and limitation

continued despite several months of physical ther-

apy. The plaintiff maintained that additional surgery is

indicated but that he felt that because of his age,

the risks outweighed the benefits and that he de-

clined the surgery. The plaintiff asserted that he was

previously very active, had enjoyed endeavors such

as dancing and must now lead a much more

sedentary life style.

The case settled during trial for $1,150,000.

REFERENCE

Plaintiff’s economist expert: Debra Dwyer, Ph.D. from

Stony Brook, NY. Plaintiff’s orthopedic surgeon

expert: Jerry Lubliner, M.D. from New York, NY.

Plaintiff’s physiatrist expert: Ali E. Guy, M.D. from

New York, NY.

Jenkins vs. Riverbay Corp. Index no. 21753/18, 12-21-

21.

Attorney for plaintiff: William Peterman of Burns &

Harris in New York, NY.

COMMENTARY

It is felt that the plaintiff achieved a substantial recovery, especially

in view of the absence of any income claims made by the plaintiff,

who is retired. In this regard, the plaintiff would have stressed that

after a lifetime of work, the plaintiff looked forward to remaining

active, having enjoyed endeavors such as dancing. Additionally, the

plaintiff, who was afraid the second surgery that had been recom-

mended, would have argued that when the risks, including risks

associated with age, were explained, he realized that a more pru-

dent course was to decline the surgery.

8 SUMMARIES WITH TRIAL ANALYSIS

Volume 37, Issue 6, June 2022 Subscribe Now