Brain and Leg Injuries Result in $15,000,000 Pain and Suffering Verdict Reduced to $5,000,000 by Appeals Court

On November 29, 2004 at about 3:15 p.m., Rashawana Belt was on the sidewalk that abutted the eastbound side of 110th Avenue, near its intersection at Merrick Boulevard, in the Jamaica section of Queens. In a split second, her life would change unalterably when a drunk driver mounted the sidewalk, struck Rashawana and drove her into a wall causing massive injuries to the 22 year old college student.

Cars should not be driven on sidewalks!

After a trial in 2009, Ms. Belt was awarded pain and suffering damages of $15,000,000. Claiming the damages awarded were excessive, the defense successfully appealed and, in Belt v. Girgis (2d Dept. 2011), the appellate court has ordered a reduction to $5,000,000 ($2,000,000 past - 3 1/2 years, $3,000,000 future - 10 years).

Here are the details of the injuries sustained by Ms. Belt::

  • traumatic brain injuries - cerebral concussion, temporal bone fracture, intracranial hemorrhage and frontal lobe hematoma
  • displaced transverse femur fracture
  • pelvic fracture
  • ankle fracture with significant scarring
  • severe clavicle fracture

Her injuries left Rashawana hospitalized for five months during which time she was in a coma for four weeks, underwent a tracheostomy, and had her femur fracture repaired via open reduction with internal fixation using an intramedullary rod.

Unfortunately, plaintiff was left unable to walk without a cane, with a permanent palsy of her face and permanent memory loss. At trial, it was shown that she functioned at a grade school level, was severely incapacitated and could not return to school or her part-time job as an office assistant.

In reducing the verdict from $15,000,000 to $5,000,000, the appellate judges cited and relied upon several prior relevant decisions:

  • Coque v. Wildflower Estates Developers, Inc. (2d Dept. 2008) - $4,300,000 (increased from $1,750,000) for a 31 year old who sustained a burst fracture of his thoracic spine leaving him paralyzed from the waist down, incontinent and requiring self-catheterization six times a day.
  • Cintron v. New York City Transit Authority (1st Dept. 2008) - $4,750,000 (increased from $2,500,000) for a 14 year old who sustained multiple skull fractures requiring surgery (and  a hip fracture). He was left with cognitive impairments such as diminished sensory skills in his hand and his visual-spatial thinking but by the time of trial was able to get a high school diploma and work as a carpenter.
  • Chelli v. Banle Associates, LLC (2d Dept. 2005) - $3,500,000 (reduced from $4,500,000) for a 38 year old who sustained compound depressed skull and highly comminuted hand fractures requiring a craniotomy and open reduction internal fixation hand surgery leaving him with traumatic brain injuries including severe linguistic defects, bilateral hemiparesis and unable to walk without an ankle foot arthrosis and a cane.
  • Reed v. City of New York (1st Dept. 2003) - $5,000,000 affirmed for a 43 year old who sustained multiple skull fractures, a subdural hematoma and occipital contusions causing permanent brain damage that left her demented, with a complete loss of olfactory sense and unable to lie down (requiring her to sleep in a sitting-up position)

Inside Information:

  • A witness reported that the driver continued to apply the car's accelerator pedal after the vehicle had stopped and pinned Belt, despite Belt's screams and the witness's pleas.
  • The  driver was imprisoned as a result of the drunk driving incident and he did not attend the trial.

 

 

 

Femur Fracture Pain and Suffering Injury Cases - $4,800,000 Upheld on Appeal in New York

The femur (commonly called the thighbone) is the longest and the strongest bone in the body. To break the femur across its length, or shaft, takes a great deal of force, such as might occur in a car accident or a fall from a high place. Repairing the broken bone often requires open reduction internal fixation surgery and it's not unusual that there are also accompanying complications such as blood vessel injuries. Mid-shaft femur fracture traumatic injuries can be life-threatening injuries due to significant blood loss.

Here's what the normal, non-fractured, femur looks like:

New York jurors have recognized the severity of pain and suffering from femur fracture cases and awarded significant verdicts - often in the millions. In a recent case, Mostafa v. Daraselia (Civil Court, Kings County; Index # 300737/07; 11/13/08), a 26 year old taxi driver was awarded $2,720,000 for his pain and suffering ($1,900,000 past, $825,000 future) after he suffered a comminuted femur fracture (the bone was broken into more than two distinct fragments).

In November 1994, Mostafa was walking between two cars at a gas station when one of them lurched and pinned him between the two, shearing his thighbone and also resulting in an occlusion of the artery in his leg. He underwent two emergency surgeries to repair the leg's artery and had to wait 13 days until the bone fracture could be addressed by open reduction internal fixation surgery with five screws. His doctors testified he'd need more arterial surgery and probably surgery around his knee as well.

Mr. Mostafa was left with very ugly and disfiguring scars, weakness (atrophy) in his leg's quadriceps muscle and residual reduction in his leg's range of motion. The jury, after a nine day trial in November 2008, took only an hour and 15 minutes to decide that $1,900,000 was a fair verdict for Mostafa's terrible course of treatment and his pain and suffering over the prior four years. They then added $825,000 for his future pain and suffering (over the course of the next 45 years).

Here's what the femur looks like after open reduction internal fixation surgery to repair the fracture:

The leading appellate cases ruling on pain and suffering for femur fracture injuries in New York indicate that an award like the one for $2,720,000 in the Mostafa case would be upheld. For example, in Lopez v. Gomez, the appellate court affirmed a Bronx County jury's award of $1,500,000 just for past pain and suffering for a seven year old boy in a car accident who sustained a comminuted fracture of his femur. The boy was hospitalized for three weeks, underwent surgery and was left with leg shortening.

In Carl v. Daniel, another appeal from a Bronx County case, Colette Billups was 12 years old when she was a passenger in a car accident in which it took a half hour to extricate her from the car and she suffered a severe comminuted fracture of her left femur. She had two surgeries within a week of the accident - one to insert a tibial pin into her leg and the other to insert an intramedullary rod into her femur. She had a third  surgery two years later to have the rod removed.

Unfortunately, the severe damage to the muscle tissue surrounding the area of Colette's broken leg resulted in the formation of extra bone within the muscle tissue itself. This condition, called heterotopic ossification, erodes muscle tissue, causes weakness and is very painful. Colette's doctors testified at trial, seven years after the accident, that it would increase in severity during the entire course of her life and that she would need an operation within five years to remove the excess bone once the pain became unbearable.

The jury awarded Colette Billups $7,000,000: $4,000,000 for her past pain and suffering (over seven years) plus $3,000,000 for her future pain and suffering (61 years). The trial judge ruled that these amounts were too high and he reduced them to $1,500,000 for past pain and suffering and $1,000,000 for future pain and suffering.

The defendant appealed, contending that the reduced total of $2,500,000 was still too high. Bad move. Plaintiff's appellate counsel, Mauro, Goldberg & Lilling, widely known and respected for its work representing defendants on appeals, in this case had the guts to argue that the trial judge's reduction was erroneous and that the entire jury verdict of $4,800,000 should be reinstated. Good move.

The appeals court compromised and ruled that $4,800,000 was the proper pain and suffering award for Colette Billups ($2,300,000 past, $2,500,000 future). It found that that the the trial judge's reduction was too much but also that the jury's figure was too high. The appellate court was impressed with the very painful and debilitating time Colette endured during her formative teenage years and it was also moved by the medical testimony at trial that Colette would endure a lifetime of pain and additional surgeries. With interest (once a judgment is entered in New York, it accrues 9% interest by law until paid), the defendant ended up paying about $6,000,000. Had the verdict been paid after the trial judge reduced it to $2,500,000 there would have been a savings of $3,500,000.

Lest one think that all femur fracture cases result in million dollar pain and suffering verdicts, we leave you with two cases that resulted in significantly lower amounts. In Moore v. MTA (Supreme Court, New York County; Index # 111504/06; 7/28/08), an 87 year old woman fell inside a moving bus and fractured her femur requiring open reduction internal fixation surgery. The defense contended that Ms. Moore's fracture and her continuing disabilities stemmed from pre-existing osteoarthritis. Maybe so, but the Manhattan jury still found that a pain and suffering award of $450,000 was fair ($250,000, past, $200,000 future)

In Singh v. Catamount Development Corp., a 14 year old boy fell while skiing and sustained both a femur fracture and a shoulder fracture, with three leg surgeries and multiple post-accident dislocations of his shoulder. Vincentine Singh got only $18,000 in past pain and suffering damages from the Manhattan jury (and nothing at all for his future pain and suffering). Why? Because this tough kid, after a 3 1/2 month recuperation, followed by physical therapy, went out and returned to competitive skiing 10 months after the accident. Good for him.

The appeals court, though, increased Singh's awards to a total of $300,000 ($200,000 past, $100,000 future). The jury clearly "bought" the defense argument that because Vincentine made a good recovery and was skiing again he should get little or nothing; however, the appeals court disagreed and ruled that, considering what this kid went through with all his surgeries and pain and with some limitations that are always present following such major trauma, an award of $300,000 was fair.

I often tell clients that they should go out and recover as best they can, push through their pain and try to return to normalcy. Try to be better than you were. I'll take care of presenting your damage claims to the jury and I will convince them not to penalize you for being a "trooper." Jurors hate malingerers and will penalize them. They generally like "troopers" and will reward them. And if jurors make the wrong decision, well then that's what the appeals courts are for.

 

Leg Fracture Verdicts for Pain and Suffering in New York Injury Cases Upheld on Appeal for $1,100,000 and $1,500,000

A broken or fractured tibia (the shin bone) is the most common long-bone injury. Several types of fractures can occur, ranging from the hairline stress fractures common in runners to severe open fractures (where the skin is broken) often resulting from motor vehicle accidents. And when severe, the fibula (the long, thin lateral or outside bone of the lower leg) is also fractured - thus the term tib-fib fractures.

An appellate court in New York has just upheld a $1,100,000 jury verdict for a 45 year old woman's pain and suffering ($500,000 past, $600,000 future) for fractures of her tibia and fibula. In Keating v. SS&R Management Co., Lori Keating was a passenger in a taxi that was struck by another car. She sustained an open fracture of her tibia and a fracture of her fibula, requiring six surgical procedures performed over the course of three years, including external fixation and internal fixation, as well as skin, muscle and nerve grafts. The Manhattan jury was also told of the fact that Ms. Keating's fractures did not heal (non-union), causing her significant pain and leaving her with severe scarring. The jury awarded her a whopping $12,000,000 for her pain and suffering ($5,000,000 past, $7,000,000 future) but those amounts were reduced by the trial judge to the amounts then sustained this month by the appellate court.

Here's an intraoperative (during surgery) illustration of the type of open reduction internal fixation ("ORIF") surgery that Ms. Keating underwent showing how the rod is placed down into the tibia:

 

In another recent appellate case, Bello v. New York City Transit Authority, a jury's $1,500,000 verdict for pain and suffering ($750,000 past, $750,000 future) was upheld for Vidal Bello, a boy who was seven years old when he was struck by a moving bus that then rolled over his leg resulting in open tib-fib fractures as well as a degloving injury to that leg (i.e, the skin was torn away, or avulsed). By the time of trial, Vidal had already suffered through eight surgical procedures including external fixation, grafting and placement of an intramedullary rod.

Here's what his leg looked like with the intramedullary rod in place:

 

Vidal also had ugly scarring from the accident, a permanently curved leg and a limp that would only get worse over the course of his entire life.

The Keating and Bello cases are important in evaluating the upper limits of lower leg pain and suffering verdicts and settlements; however, it's also important to appreciate that juries can award much lower amounts that will be sustained and that the appellate courts are not forced to modify up or down jury verdicts that to the litigants seem too low or too high. The standard, as we have previously discussed here and here, is simply this as set forth in CPLR 5501:

  • The jury's pain and suffering award will be deemed excessive or inadequate "if it deviates materially from what would be reasonable compensation."

CPLR 5501 is not much of a guide for injured persons or their attorneys. Add to that the fact that appellate court decisions routinely fail to advise the readers of the precise injuries or the disabilities suffered. Worse yet: the appellate court cases often cite as support (for their rulings increasing or decreasing a jury award) cases that do not even deal with or discuss the injuries in the pending case.

As readers of this blog know, it is our aim to fill these voids as much as possible by digging into these cases, to find out -- from appellate briefs, trial transcripts, trial court motions and the like -- exactly what it was that happened to the injured plaintiff. In that way, all concerned with injury case pain and suffering evaluation can have more and relevant information with which to make educated settlement and trial decisions.

We leave you with an example of a recent appellate court case dealing with the reduction of a jury's award for pain and suffering in a a case involving comminuted fractures to the shaft of a 53 year old man's tibia and fibula. In Brown v. Elliston, a pedestrian was injured in 2003 when a car hit him and came to a stop on top of his leg and then rolled back over it a second time. In 2006, a Suffolk County jury awarded Mr. Brown $800,000 for his pain and suffering ($300,000 past, $500,000 future) after hearing evidence that Brown's leg was in a hard cast for nine months, he developed an ulcer at the fracture site, he had open reduction internal fixation surgery and was left with an angled foot and a limp. All of that was gleaned from the appellate court decision which then goes on to reduce the future pain and suffering jury award from $500,000 to $400,000 while affirming the $300,000 past pain and suffering award - total appellate determination: $700,000.

Here's what is disturbing about the decision in Brown:

  • There is no mention of Mr. Brown's prior accident, in 1995, when he was crushed between two garbage trucks and left totally disabled, unable to walk well and on narcotic pain medication. The defense briefs on appeal which we dug up made much of these facts. The appeals court makes no mention of them. That's simply  not instructive, if not downright unfair, to future litigants and their attorneys who constantly need to evaluate injury cases and seek to do so in large part with guidance from appellate court precedent. After all, when both sides are fully informed as to injury case evaluation, then there will be more settlements and fewer trials. Aren't those admirable goals and aren't they to be facilitated by lofty appeals courts?
  • There is no explanation at all for why the appeals court chose to reduce the future pain and suffering award from $500,000 to $400,000. That's not such a large percentage and one wonders: why not reduce by $50,000? why not by $250,000? For most people, $50,000 here and $250,000 there are significant amounts and if we are to have appeals court judges who were not present at the trials reduce or increase the jury's verdicts by these or any similar amounts then are we not entitled to some explanation?
  • The cases cited are not instructive. For example, the first and the most recent case cited isSingh v.Catamount Development Corp. That's a case involving a 14 year old boy in a skiing accident who sustained both a fractured femur and a fractured shoulder. No tibia or fibula fractures. And there, the plaintiff returned to competitive skiing 10 months after his accident. So why refer at all to that case as precedent in which there was an upward modification to $300,000 (the jury had awarded $18,000 for past pain and suffering and nothing for future)? What's the relevance? What lesson is the court trying to impart? Beats me - it's totally unclear.

We will continue our effort to shine light on and analyze significant pain and suffering verdicts and settlements so that persons with traumatic injuries and their attorneys can evaluate their own cases with more knowledge and information than is available from the publicly reported court decisions. 

Hip and Pelvis Injuries - Pain and Suffering Verdicts and Settlements Vary Widely in New York

It usually takes quite a bit of trauma or force to break bones in one's hip or pelvis. And when that happens, additional bones are often broken too. So it's particularly difficult to find court cases that isolate and deal with pain and suffering just for the injured hip or pelvis. But that's just what I've tried to do in this post.

Most recently, the appellate court in Denis v. City of New York (2d Dept., 9/16/08), affirmed a Kings County jury verdict for pain and suffering in the sum of $1,000,000 ($600,000 past, $400,000 future) for a 60 year old man who fell 15 feet from an unsecured ladder. He sustained a comminuted fracture (where the bone is broken into two or more pieces) of his acetabulum (the hemispheric concavity on the pelvis - see below) that articulates with the head of the femur (the thigh bone). Mr. Denis also suffered a displaced fracture of his ilium and fractures of his pubis.

Before going further, let's take a look at the anatomy of the pelvis:

And now a closer look at the anatomy of the hip:

Mr. Denis was hospitalized for 37 days, almost all of which time he was in traction with an external fixation device surgically implanted. His doctor testified at trial that without total hip replacement surgery Denis would never be able to walk without a limp.

Two significant trial court cases in 2008 dealt with hip fracture verdicts:

  • Kann v. New York City Transit Authority (Supreme Court, New York County; Index # 10334/07; 7/21/08) - $525,000 pain and suffering verdict ($175,000 past, $350,000 future) for an 86 year old woman who fell and suffered an intertrochanteric fracture of her hip that was addressed by open reduction internal fixation surgery.
  • Utsey v. City of New York (Supreme Court, Bronx County; Index # 28638/03; 4/21/08 verdict, 5/21/10 post-trial decision) - $2,500,000 pain and suffering verdict ($1,000,000 past, $1,500,000) future for a 77 year old woman who fell and fractured her hip. Seven years after her initial open reduction internal fixation surgery, she underwent a total hip replacement surgery. UPDATE: The trial judge issued a decison 5/21/10 refusing to reduce the damages and the case then settled 7/7/10 for 1,500,000.

Other recent appellate court cases in New York addressing hip and pelvis pain and suffering verdicts include:

Tushaj v. Elm Management Associates (2d Dept.; 2004) - $325,000 pain and suffering verdict ($200,000 past, $125,000 future) for a 54 year old man with a comminuted inter-trochanteric fracture that required open reduction internal fixation surgery. The Kings county jury had awarded plaintiff a mere $30,000 for his future pain and suffering and it took the appeals court to increase that sum. Plaintiff trial lawyers usually prefer to try cases in Brooklyn (Kings County) because it's widely thought that the jurors there are very liberal in their verdicts. Not this one!

Dooknah v. Thompson (2d Dept., 2000) - Here's another unusual case in which the appeals court found that a jury's verdict was too low. A 61 year old man was awarded $50,000 for past and future pain and suffering for his non-displaced acetabulum fracture and two pubic ramus fractures and it took the usually conservative appeals court (that governs appeals from Brooklyn, Queens, Long Island and Westchester) to increase the verdict to $200,000 ($75,000 for past pain and suffering and $125,000 for future). I would not want to suffer those injuries for $200,000 (nor would any sane person) but at least the appeals court recognized how inadequate the jury finding was.

Lopiano v. Baldwin Transport. (1st Dept., 1998) - $2,350,000 pain and suffering award for a 48 year old construction worker injured on the job when a four ton concrete catch basin pined against him. Plaintiff, who had served in Vietnam with the Marine Corps and was a very active and physical man, suffered multiple comminuted fractures of his left and right superior and inferior pubic ramus, together with a fracture adjacent to the area surrounding the foramen. Essentially, his sacrum and ilium were broken apart and thereafter failed to re-join symmetrically leaving him in lifelong persistent pain and totally disabled. The Bronx County jury returned a verdict of $750,000 past and $1,600,000 future pain and suffering but the trial judge reduced those awards to a total of $550,000. It took the stellar work of noted appeals attorney Jay Breakstone to convince the appellate court to reinstate the $2,350,000 verdict.

Here are some illustrations of the various surgical approaches to fractured hips:

These cases are good examples of how widely divergent juries in different counties can be. Jurors in Kings County are usually thought to be very generous but look at the Tushaj v. Elm Management case above. And the Appellate Division for the Second Department (hearing appeals from Long Island, Brooklyn, Queens and Westchester) is usually thought to be stingy but look what it did in the Dooknah v. Thompson case above.

So what's the lesson from all of this? Here it is: each case has to be analyzed, re-analyzed and compared against as many similar verdicts and settlements as can be found that deal with pain and suffering for the body part involved. Then, you must dig up documents, briefs and trial testimony to see what really happened in those cases, what the injuries and disabilities really were and how disabled for life the plaintiff is or how well he actually recovered. With all that information, you'll know when to hold 'em (and try the case to verdict) and when to fold 'em (and settle the case for the right number).