A 72 year old corporate vice president received a jury verdict for $525,000.00 after proving a cognitive decline following a motor vehicle crash where the defendant was at fault.
The plaintiff was driving a car while his wife was passenger. He stopped at a red light, and was rear ended by the defendant. The plaintiff did not strike his head but did briefly lose consciousness and as taken by ambulance to the hospital. A CT scan was given, which revealed a small subdural hematoma. He returned to work two weeks later.
The plaintiff continued to work for several years following the accident, but was forced to retire two years early. A coworker testified to the plaintiff's difficulties in the office following the accident, which included a significant decrease in the hours he worked, an inability to run the departments he previously oversaw, and a difficulty remembering people's names.
The plaintiff also had neurology and neuropsychology experts testify that he suffered a mild traumatic brain injury from the accident, which impacted his memory and executive functioning skills.
The defendant presented testimony that he was driving no more than 5-10 mph at the time of the incident, and showed that plaintiff's medical records noted that the plaintiff did not actually lose consciousness and that his subdural hematoma resolved within a short period of time. Additionally, he pointed out that the plaintiff's medical expenses were a mere $17,000.00. Also working against the plaintiff was the fact that he continued to work an additional three and a half years following the accident. The defendant claimed that the plaintiff's cognitive issues were actually a result of an age-related degenerative process.
The defendant presented expert testimony as well, pointing to other causes as to the plaintiff's symptoms, but the court excluded much of this evidence due to the misrepresentations in the expert's original reports. The plaintiff's primary care doctor provided rebuttal testimony to much of what the defendant's expert claimed, further making the defendant's expert testimony unconvincing to the jury.
In the end, the jury awarded the plaintiff $525,000.00 and the plaintiff settled his 93A claims against the insurer for another $120,000.00.
If you've been the victim of a motor vehicle accident, hiring an attorney can help prove all your damages, even the less obvious ones that you may have suffered. Contact our office today for a free consultation.