Kentucky Personal Injury Lawyer Blog

In July of 2009, the Court of Appeals in Tennessee heard a case that involved a car accident where the Plaintiff’s vehicle was not seriously damaged and the injuries were not serious. (See Gonzales v. Long, 2009 WL 3321304 (Tenn.Ct.App).

In Gonzales, on January 2, 2004, the Defendant caused a minor car accident to the vehicle in front of her, hitting that vehicle from behind. Id. Just prior she was at a complete stop and traveled no more than 2 feet before she struck that car in the rear. The Plaintiff, a 10 year old boy, was a back seat passenger. Id. After the accident the police arrived and no one reported injuries. Id. The car Plaintiff was in was not seriously damaged, and Defendant’s car had just a fist sized dent in the bumper where it impacted the trailer hitch on Plaintiff’s car. Id. Shortly thereafter, Plaintiff claimed that he was injured and that he sustained whiplash. Id. He treated with a Dr. Hellman having $2,683 worth of medical bills. Id. The car accident case went to trial on September 15, 2008. Id.

Continue reading " Car Accident Case Minor Damage and Minor Injuries. " »

In December of 2007, the Court of Appeals in Ohio heard a case that involved a woman involved in an automobile accident. The automobile accident occurred in June of 2004 and went to trial in June of 2006. (See Clemens v. Gilbert, 2007 WL 3377287 (Ohio App. 7 Dist.)

In Clemens, Ms. Clemens was injured in an automobile accident on June 10, 2004. At trial, Plaintiff had the deposition testimony of her family doctor and her car accident chiropractor read into evidence. Id. The jury awarded zero damages so Plaintiff appealed. Based on the facts, this Court denied the appeal.

Continue reading " Car Accident Case Proof of Injuries at Trial. " »

In October of 2007, the Court of Appeals in Kentucky heard a case that involved a woman involved in an automobile accident where she was seriously injured while a passenger in someone else’s car. (See Gersh v. Bowman, 239 S.W.3d 567 (Ky.App. 2007)).

In Gersh, Plaintiff Gersh appealed a lower court’s judgment whereby Mr. Gersh was found liable for the serious bodily injuries he caused to Ms. Bowman following an automobile accident. The jury found Plaintiff liable for past and future medical expenses, pain and suffering, and impairment of her power to work and earn money, as well as punitive damages. Id.

Continue reading " Car Accident Case With Serious Injuries. " »

In August of 2007, the Court of Appeals in Tennessee heard a case that involved a woman involved in a car accident in July of 2003 where she claimed she injured herself but there was evidence that she had a pre-existing condition. (See Hutchison v. Rutt, 2008 WL 539062 (Tenn. Ct. App.)

In Hutchinson, the Plaintiff was involved in a car accident on July 21, 2003. Id. The car was rear-ended by the defendant as the Plaintiff waited to turn. Id. The trial judge awarded the Plaintiff over $100,000. Id. The Defendant appealed claiming not all of her injuries were from this accident. This Appellate Court modified the award by half. The reasoning is as follows.

Continue reading " Car Accident Case With Pre-Existing Condition. " »

In May of 2009, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan heard a case involving a car accident and a woman who claimed that she sustained a closed head injury. (See Barlow v. Adams, 2009 WL 1383305 (E.D.Mich.). In Barlow, the Plaintiff was injured in a car accident on October 4, 2005. Id. Plaintiff was a passenger in a pickup truck which was driven by her granddaughter. Id. Plaintiff was 54 years old when this car accident occurred. Id. As a result of the car accident, Plaintiff claimed she sustained closed head injury, depression, and neck and back injuries. Id. In Michigan, you have to have suffered a serious impairment of body function in order to prevail in a car accident where you seek non-economic tort damages. Id.

The issue of whether a person has suffered a threshold injury is one for the court as a question of law. Id. A serious impairment of body function means “an objectively manifested impairment of an important body function that affects the person’s general ability to lead his or her normal life.” Id. The Courts look to see if the Plaintiff is able for the most part to lead a normal life. (cites omitted). Id. It has to be more than a minor interruption in life. Id. The Plaintiff’s entire life course is looked at and if that course is still on track, then one’s injuries do not meet the serious impairment of body function threshold. Id.

Continue reading " Car Accident Case With Head Injury Is It A Serious Impairment of Body Function? " »