MOTOR VEHICLE NEGLIGENCE. Tractor-Trailer Negligence. DEFENDANT'S VERDICT Motor vehicle negligence - Tractor-trailer negligence - Truck/auto rear end collision - Plaintiff contends defendant driver of tractortrailer truck owned by defendant trucking company negligent in rear-ending plaintiff's vehicle - Cervical disc herniations; headaches; anxiety and depression - Orthopedic and chiropractic treatment and need for future cervical surgery - Defendants stipulate liability but argue plaintiff not injured in collision.

• Pages: 17-18

As a result of the collision, the plaintiff sustained posterior

disc herniation at C5-6 with right side radiculopathy. The

plaintiff initially treated with chiropractic care, physical

therapy, and trigger point injections. She ultimately un-

derwent cervical fusion surgery including permanent an-

terior instrumentation, and cervical decompression. The

plaintiff has a permanent scar from the surgery. The

plaintiff sought damages for past and future medical

expenses, pain, suffering and the loss of enjoyment of

life.

The defendant argued that the plaintiff did not sustain

injuries as a result of the subject collision. The defendant

further asserted that any injuries the plaintiff claimed

were degenerative and not caused by the subject colli-

sion. The defendant presented expert medical testi-

mony indicating that the plaintiff’s radiological studies

showed distinct degenerative changes, such as osteo-

phytes and disc bulges, not herniations, which were

symptoms of age-related change and not traumatic in-

jury. The defendant maintained that the plaintiff had no

need for future medical care.

The jury found in favor of the plaintiff and against the de-

fendant and awarded damages in the amount of

$260,006 in damages; broken down as follows:

$118,406 in past medical expenses; $141,600 in past

and future non-economic damages. Following the ver-

dict, the court added $11,073 in attorney fees and

costs to the award and, after adjustment for insurance

set-offs, the plaintiff recovered net damages of

$209,734.

REFERENCE

Samoylova vs. Nichols. Case no. 20-530-CA; Judge

Alan C. Drake, 08-24-22.

Attorney for plaintiff: Shane M. Dean of Dean &

Camper, P.A. in Pensacola, FL. Attorneys for

defendant: Randall G. Rogers and Michael A.

McDonald of Cole, Scott & Kissane, P.A. in Pensacola,

FL.

DEFENDANT’S VERDICT

Motor vehicle negligence – Rear end collision –

Cervical, thoracic, and lumbar sprain; left

shoulder strain; muscle spasms and acute post-

traumatic headaches – Chiropractic treatment with

TENS therapy and physical therapy – Defendant

stipulates liability but challenges nature and

causation of plaintiff’s injuries.

Volusia County, FL

In this motor vehicle negligence case, the plaintiff,

a mason, asserted that the defendant driver struck

his vehicle from the rear with such force that it

caused significant, permanent injury. The

defendant stipulated liability but contested the

plaintiff’s damages.

On March 7, 2017, the plaintiff was traveling Orange

Camp Road in Deland. The defendant was approach-

ing from behind the plaintiff. The plaintiff contended that

he was stopped for a red light, was about 10 cars back

from the intersection, and was at a complete stop for

several minutes when he heard the squeal of tires and

felt an impact from the rear. The plaintiff contended that

the defendant negligently failed to observe stopped

traffic and failed to slow or stop for traffic ahead of him.

The defendant struck the plaintiff’s vehicle from behind

and the force of the impact resulted in permanent inju-

ries to the plaintiff. The plaintiff contended that he had

to give up masonry as a result of the accident and

semi-retired, working only part-time mowing lawns. As a

result of the collision, the plaintiff sustained cervical, tho-

racic, and lumbar sprain; left shoulder strain; muscle

spasms; and acute post-traumatic headaches. The

plaintiff treated with chiropractic treatment with TENS

therapy and physical therapy. The plaintiff asserted that

he had had no prior similar symptoms or treatment prior

to the subject collision. The plaintiff claimed $64,301 in

unpaid medical expenses. The defendant argued that

the plaintiff’s injuries were pre-existing, degenerative in

nature, consisting mostly of age-related arthritis, and not

caused by the subject collision.

The jury found no cause of action and returned a verdict

in favor of the defendant.

REFERENCE

Smiley vs. Peterson. Case no. 2017 11665 CIDL; Judge

Kathryn Weston, 07-15-22.

Attorneys for plaintiff: W. Doug Martin and Louis

Defreitas, Jr. of Morgan & Morgan, P.A. in Orlando,

FL. Attorney for defendant: Dale T. Gobel of Gobel

Flakes, LLC in Orlando, FL.

Tractor-Trailer Negligence

DEFENDANT’S VERDICT

Motor vehicle negligence – Tractor-trailer

negligence – Truck/auto rear end collision –

Plaintiff contends defendant driver of tractor-

trailer truck owned by defendant trucking

company negligent in rear-ending plaintiff’s

vehicle – Cervical disc herniations; headaches;

anxiety and depression – Orthopedic and

chiropractic treatment and need for future cervical

surgery – Defendants stipulate liability but argue

plaintiff not injured in collision.

Florida Jury Verdict Review & Analysis

17

Subscribe Now