. .

Invest in your success.
JVRA helps lawyers win cases by providing critical information you can use to establish precedent, determine demand and win arguments.

ARTICLE ID 195972

$________ – MOTOR VEHICLE NEGLIGENCE – AUTO/BICYCLE COLLISION – CLOSED HEAD INJURY – INTRACRANIAL HEMORRHAGE – MULTIPLE RIB FRACTURES – PUNCTURED LUNG – HUMERUS FRACTURE – FINGER FRACTURE – NECK AND BACK INJURIES – EMOTIONAL INJURIES.

Philadelphia County, PA

The plaintiff was a 42-year-old man who was riding a bicycle in Radnor Township, Pennsylvania, on March 2, ________, when he collided with a delivery truck. The plaintiff brought suit against the truck driver, the trucking company which employed the driver, and the company which hired the trucking company, as well as the owners of an adjoining property which allegedly had an excessively high fence obscuring the vision of motorists. The defendant property owner argued that the fence did not obscure vision of the approaching truck, and that the plaintiff was comparatively negligent in causing the collision, and disputed the extent and nature of the injuries he claimed to have sustained as a result of the accident.

The plaintiff claimed that he reached the intersection first, controlled by a stop sign in both directions, and that the defendant’s truck had not yet reached the intersection when he arrived. The plaintiff supported that he proceeded to ride his bicycle across the intersection, but the defendant truck driver failed to stop for the stop sign, striking him. The plaintiff alleged that the defendant driver was traveling at an excessive speed and looking at a GPS in the truck instead of paying attention to traffic. The plaintiff also alleged that the defendant truck driver had a poor driving record, criminal convictions, and was negligently hired by the defendant employer.

The plaintiff was diagnosed with a closed head injury, intracranial hemorrhage, and a traumatic brain injury characterized by cognitive deficits, memory problems, and difficulty performing multiple tasks at once. His orthopedic injuries included: Multiple rib fractures, humerus fracture, and fracture of the little finger. In addition, the plaintiff suffered a punctured lung, axillary vein thrombus, and injuries to his neck and back. The plaintiff underwent internal fixation of the humerus fracture, and also required insertion of a left chest tube for his pneumothorax. He alleged emotional injuries, including depression and anxiety.

The plaintiff complained of continuing chronic headaches, neck and back pain, left knee pain with numbness, hip pain, numbness of his left arm and hand, pain in his right shoulder, lower back pain, and bilateral leg weakness. The plaintiff was employed as an assistant manager at a home improvement store at the time of the accident. He alleged that he was totally disabled as a result of the accident. His economist estimated the plaintiff’s total economic damages to be in the range of $________ and $________.

The defendant truck driver maintained that he was traveling within the posted speed limit. He claimed that the plaintiff failed to stop at the stop sign, rode his bicycle into the intersection in front of his truck and could not avoid the collision. The defense asserted that the plaintiff was wearing earbuds and listening to music at the time of the collision. The plaintiff admitted that he was wearing earbuds, but that his music was not playing at the time.

The defendant property owners asserted that the fence was in place when they purchased the property in ________ and was erected with appropriate township permits. The defendant property owners also claimed that photographs demonstrated that the truck was visible over the top of the fence and should have been observed by the plaintiff. In addition, the defendants all disputed that the plaintiff suffered a traumatic brain injury and opined that he had recovered from his accident-related injuries.The case was settled during jury selection for a total of $________. The defendant driver and trucking company, which employed him, contributed $________ through its insurance policy and paid an additional $________ out of pocket. The defendant who hired the trucking company agreed to pay $________, and the defendant property owner paid $________. In addition, two non-party companies, involved in obtaining insurance for the defendant trucking company, contributed a total of $________, and the plaintiff’s underinsured motorist carrier paid $________ towards the settlement.

To read the full article, please login to your account or purchase

5 ways to win with JVRA

JVRA gives you jurisdiction-specific, year-round insight into the strategies, arguments and tactics that win. Successful attorneys come to the table prepared and use JVRA to:

  1. Determine if a case is winnable and recovery amounts.
  2. Determine reasonable demand for a case early on.
  3. Support a settlement demand by establishing precedent.
  4. Research trial strategies, tactics and arguments.
  5. Defeat or support post-trial motions through past case histories.

Try JVRA for a day or a month, or sign up for our deluxe Litigation Support Plan and put the intelligence of JVRA to work for all of your clients. See our subscription plans.