PRODUCT LIABILITY. $______ VERDICT - PRODUCT LIABILITY - MANUFACTURING DEFECT - DEFECTIVE DESIGN - TIRE MANUFACTURED AND DISTRIBUTED BY DEFENDANTS FAILS CAUSING PLAINTIFF'S TRUCK TO CAREEN OUT OF CONTROL AND EJECT PLAINTIFF - CATASTROPHIC INJURIES - TRAUMATIC BRAIN INJURY - MULTIPLE FRACTURES - MULTIPLE SURGERIES.

• Pages: 21-22

plaintiff maintained that she was left with

significant scarring on the hand and the donor

site which is permanent in nature. The plaintiff

also contended that the infant plaintiff will

permanently suffer reduced grip strength and

some difficulties with extension of the fingers. The

defendants denied that the splint with Ace

bandage was applied incorrectly or that the

treatment was causally related to the

development of compartment syndrome.

Thecasesettledbeforetheexchangeofexpertsfor

$1,500,000.

REFERENCE

Gray vs. NCHHA, et al. Index no. 805400/17, 10-21.

Attorneys for plaintiff: Matthew T. Gammons and

Udeyveer Singh Brar of Rosenbaum & Rosenbaum,

PC in New York, NY.

$1,000,000 CONFIDENTIAL RECOVERY – MEDICAL MALPRACTICE – PRIMARY CARE

NEGLIGENCE – PRIMARY CARE PHYSICIAN NEGLIGENT IN FAILING TO DISCLOSE TEST

RESULTS AND ORDER FOLLOW-UP TESTING FOR CANCER DIAGNOSIS – LOSS OF

CHANCE TO MORE AGGRESSIVELY TREAT CANCER – LESSENED LIKELIHOOD OF

SURVIVAL.

Withheld County, MA

In this medical malpractice matter, the plaintiff

patient alleged that her primary care physician

was negligent in failing to disclose test results and

order follow-up testing for her cancer diagnosis.

The plaintiff alleged that the defendant’s

negligence caused her to lose her chance to more

aggressively treat her cancer. The defendant

physician denied the allegations and disputed

causation and damages.

The plaintiff brought suit against the defendant physi-

cian alleging negligence and seeking damages. The

defendant physician denied the allegations. The de-

fendant disputed that there was a deviation from ac-

ceptable standards of care in the defendant’s

treatment of the plaintiff.

The parties agreed to resolve the plaintiff’s claim for

the sum of $1,000,000 in a confidential settlement

between the parties.

REFERENCE

Cancer Patient vs. Primary Care Physician. 06-15-21.

Attorneys for plaintiff: James D. O’Brien, Jr.,

Katherine A. Bagdis and Patricia F. Gates of

Mountain Dearborn & Whiting in Worcester, MA.

PRODUCT LIABILITY

$3,081,121 VERDICT – PRODUCT LIABILITY – MANUFACTURING DEFECT – DEFECTIVE

DESIGN – TIRE MANUFACTURED AND DISTRIBUTED BY DEFENDANTS FAILS CAUSING

PLAINTIFF’S TRUCK TO CAREEN OUT OF CONTROL AND EJECT PLAINTIFF –

CATASTROPHIC INJURIES – TRAUMATIC BRAIN INJURY – MULTIPLE FRACTURES –

MULTIPLE SURGERIES.

Allegheny County, PA

This product liability action was brought by the

plaintiff following a single vehicle collision that he

maintained occurred when a front tire,

manufactured and distributed by the defendants,

failed, causing the vehicle the plaintiff was

operating to go out of control, ejecting the

plaintiff from the vehicle. The plaintiff suffered

catastrophic injuries with neurologic damage. The

defendants denied all allegations of negligence

and argued that it was the plaintiff and the

plaintiff’s employer who were negligent in failing

to inspect the tires on truck.

The plaintiff sustained traumatic injury to his head,

brain, and body which included concussion, fracture

of seventh cervical vertebra, damage at C7-T1 spinal

area, fracture of malar and maxillary bones, fracture

of nasal bones, orbital fractures, right frontal sinus

fractures and right eye injury. He underwent surgical

fixation of the spine with posterior C5-T2 fusion instru-

mentation with graft and a C7-S1

laminoforaminotomy.

The only defendant remaining at trial was defendant

Kumho Tire U.S.A. The jury found that there was not a

defect in the tire when it was manufactured but that

the tire was defectively designed by either a Con-

sumer Expectation Standard or a violation of The Risk

Utility Standard and that the defect caused the plain-

tiff’s incident and injuries. The jury awarded the plain-

tiff past medicals of $220,833, future medicals of

$534,001, past and future pain and suffering of

$1,886,000 and past and future household services

of $440,287, for a total of $3,081,121.

REFERENCE

Plaintiff’s neuropsychologist expert: Edward Maitz,

M.D. from Philadelphia, PA. Plaintiff’s physiatrist

expert: Laurie A. Browngoehl, M.D. from Haverford,

PA. Plaintiff’s tire expert expert: Troy Cottles from

Metairie, LA.

SUPPLEMENTAL VERDICT DIGEST 21

Pennsylvania Jury Verdict Review & Analysis

Subscribe Now