An Injured California Driver, Despite Relatively Less Severe Injuries, Still Secures a $110K Jury Verdict

Did you know that, based on one study, auto accident injury plaintiffs have some of the highest rates of success with juries, winning roughly 2/3 of the time? Of course, simply obtaining a “judgment for plaintiff” may not be enough if the jury awards you only a tiny amount of damages. Sometimes, you’re injured in an auto accident but (thankfully) escape without any catastrophic injuries. You may have had no broken bones and no torn ligaments, and may have needed only a few months of medical treatment. You might, therefore, have assumed that, even if you won, your case was not “worth” all that much in terms of compensation.

Occasionally, a jury verdict comes along that serves as a good reminder about the peril of assuming. Recently, there was a San Diego woman who, despite injuries like those listed above, recovered a six-figure award of damages. The lesson of this outcome? Don’t assume. Instead, be sure you talk to an experienced San Mateo injury attorney and get a seasoned pro’s analysis of what your case is really worth.

In that recent Southern California case (San Diego Superior Court Case No. 37-2017-00001440-CU-PA-CTL), 27-year-old P.N. was stopped at an intersection in La Jolla waiting for her light to turn green. As she remained stopped, another driver who was turning left at the same intersection lost control and crashed into P.N.’s vehicle.

P.N. went to the emergency room but went home later that day. A few days later, P.N. visited a chiropractor. P.N. received treatment from that chiropractor for three months. Additionally, she received one steroid injection in her back from an osteopathic doctor that same fall. P.N.’s received no other treatment after the end of those three months.

P.N. only required those few months of treatment and one injection, with no surgeries, no years-long treatment regimens, and no prolonged rehab. With the right evidence, though, even a case lacking in catastrophic or obviously major injuries (like broken bones or other problems that require surgery) may still present a persuasive picture to the jury of an accident victim who has suffered substantial harm and deserves significant compensation.

A favorable outcome may not require a lot of outside medical experts

Achieving a successful result in a case like this does not necessarily require an army of experts, either. P.N. achieved her success while relying on only two expert witnesses – her treating osteopathic doctor and her treating chiropractor. These two medical professionals’ testimony, along with P.N.’s other evidence, was enough to persuade the jury that P.N. was a woman who had suffered considerably and would continue to suffer, from her back sprain and neck pain.

As a result, the jury awarded P.N. $75,000 in past pain and suffering and $20,000 in future pain and suffering damages. She also received $15,000 for her past medical expenses.

If you’ve been hurt in a car accident, even if your injuries appeared less severe, don’t let your lack of an obvious major injury fool you into accepting a lowball settlement offer or taking no action at all. Instead, retain the knowledgeable San Mateo injury attorneys at the Law Offices of Galine, Frye, Fitting & Frangos. Our attorneys have been providing knowledgeable representation and effective advocacy for injured people for many years. To set up a free consultation with one of our experienced attorneys, contact us at 650-345-8484 or through our website.