MOTOR VEHICLE NEGLIGENCE. Head-on Collision. $______ RECOVERY

• Pages: 15-16

The plaintiff related that the driver was in his 40’s. The

plaintiff contended that the driver exited the car and

asked plaintiff if she was hurt. She testified that as she

was walking to the side of the road, the driver re-

turned to his vehicle, and drove off. She described

the car as black or dark colored, and that it was a

carasopposedtoatruckorSUV.

The defendant denied being involved or loaning the

car on the day in question, contending that it was in

his garage all day. He testified that on the day of the

accident, he was watching his four-year-old grand-

son and his 94-year-old mother.

The defendant further maintained that although his

vehicle’s license plate matched the number the

plaintiff gave to the police; he was never ap-

proached by the police or given any summonses in

connection with this accident.

He stated that his vehicle is a dark blue Dodge Da-

kota pickup truck with a quad cab, rather than the

car the plaintiff related was involved.

The jury unanimously found that the defendant’s car

was not involved in the accident.

REFERENCE

Holland vs. Oravitz. Index no. 300369-15/QU; Judge

Lanceman, 12-16.

Attorney for defendant: Thomas J. Youllar of

Abamont & Associates in Garden City, NY.

Auto/Truck Collision

$300,000 POLICY LIMIT RECOVERY

Motor Vehicle Negligence – Auto/truck collision –

Defendant automobile driver allegedly negligent

in failing to pull to side of road as she suffered

loss of power and slowed significantly on

Interstate Highway – Oil tanker swerves to avoid

slowing automobile driver and loses control, rolls

over and explodes into flames – Wrongful death.

Kings County, NY

The plaintiff asserted that the defendant

automobile driver negligently failed to move to

theshoulderofI-495uponlosingpower,

resulting in the 59-year old decedent, who was

operating an oil tanker-tractor trailer losing

control with the tanker, arising in it rolling over

and exploding into flames. The incident occurred

at approximately 8:00 a.m.

The defendant maintained that the cause of the ac-

cident was the negligence of the decedent who

failed to make adequate observations as he ap-

proached and keep the oil tanker under control. The

plaintiff claimed that there was a brief period of in-

tense pain and suffering between impact and

death.

The plaintiff would have further contended that as the

decedent was losing control and flipping over, he

probably experienced great terror and fright. The de-

cedent left a wife and two adult children.

The decedent was earning between $55,000 and

$70,000 per-year.

The defendant had $300,000 in coverage. The case

settled prior to trial for $300,000.

REFERENCE

Mutahir vs. Medina. Index no. 1699/12, 01-17.

Attorney for plaintiff: Pat James Crispi of Pat James

Crispi in New York, NY.

Head-on Collision

$245,000 RECOVERY

Motor Vehicle Negligence – Head-on collision –

SUM case – Ankle fracture and surgery – Trauma

causes short-term heightening of Rheumatoid

Arthritis that was previously under control and

requires steroid injections.

Ulster County, NY

This case was brought by a 60-year-old plaintiff

driver who contended that the defendant driver,

who had a $50,000 policy, bent over after

dropping something and traveled into the

oncoming lane, causing the head-on crash. The

plaintiff had $250,000 in SUM benefits and

$200,000 remained available after the settlement

with the driver.

The plaintiff suffered an ankle fracture and required

surgery. The plaintiff maintained that she will perma-

nently suffer pain and difficulties ambulating, which is

heightened upon changes in weather.

The plaintiff is a Rheumatoid Arthritis sufferer. She as-

serted that the condition was under control and that

as a result of the fracture and need for aggravation,

VERDICTS BY CATEGORY 15

New York Jury Verdict Review & Analysis

Subscribe Now