. .

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 25082

$________ - Motor Vehicle Negligence - Bus Negligence - Transit Authority Negligence - New York City Transit Authority bus driver loses control of bus and strikes concrete wall - Husband and wife are passengers in bus - Husband sustains osteochondral fracture of left femur requiring arthroscopic surgery, carpal tunnel syndrome of right, dominant wrist, and pain and range-of-motion limitations of knee - Wife sustains fracture of left orbital socket and cervical herniated discs at C4-5 and C6-7 with impingement.

Richmond County

On May 4, ________, the plaintiffs, a 53-year-old disabled and legally blind male, and his 56-year-old wife, contended that the each sustained injuries when a New York City Transit bus driver lost control of the bus in which they were passengers and struck a concrete wall. The accident occurred on Fingerboard Road in Richmond County. The crash caused both plaintiffs to be propelled out of their seats. The plaintiffs sued the New York City Transit Authority, its parent agency, the Metropolitan Transportation Authority ("MTA"), and the bus driver. The plaintiffs claimed that the bus was traveling at an excessive rate of speed as it entered a curve on a rainy day. They contended that the bus skidded approximately ________ feet before striking the wall.

Prior to trial, the transportation authority performed an internal investigation of the accident which concluded that there were no defects to the bus and that the driver was operating the bus at an excessive rate of speed. The judge redacted the latter finding.

The defendants presented an accident reconstruction expert who testified that rain would have caused oils to rise out of the asphalt road and onto the road’s surface. He opined that the oil would have reduced the road’s braking resistance, and that the oils would not have been washed off by the rain because it was only raining lightly.

The plaintiff husband sustained an osteochondral fracture of his left femur. He claimed that the injury was confirmed by an MRI. He underwent arthroscopic surgery on October 4, ________. He further contended that he suffered from sore ribs and that he developed carpal tunnel syndrome in his right dominant wrist. He underwent 11 months of physical therapy.

He also claimed to suffer from pain and range-of-motion limitations in his knee and that he requires the use of a cane. One of the defendants’ expert orthopedic surgeons opined that the plaintiff’s osteochondral fracture stemmed from a preexisting deep vein thrombosis.

The plaintiff wife sustained a fracture of her left orbital socket.

MRIs and EMGs revealed that she also sustained herniated discs at C4-5 and C6-7 with impingements. She underwent six months of physical therapy. She claimed to suffer pain and range-of-motion limitations in her neck and shoulder. The defendants’ expert neurologist opined that the plaintiff did not suffer from any neurological injuries.

The judge did not permit the plaintiffs or their medical expert to make any reference to their MRIs because the test results did not include a radiologist’s name which violated CPLR ’ ________(a).

The plaintiff husband asked the jury to award $________ for past pain and suffering and $________ for future pain and suffering. The plaintiff wife asked the jury to award $________ for past pain and suffering and $________ for future pain and suffering. The city of New York was released from the action during discovery.

The trial took four days. After deliberating for 15 minutes on liability and 3.5 hours on damages, the jury found that the remaining defendants were ________% liable for the crash. The jury awarded the plaintiff husband $________; it awarded nothing to the plaintiff wife.

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.