Car Accidents
Below is a trial transcript of an ankle injury trial in Prince George’s County in which the jury awarded $936,000. We changed the names and the dates and cleaned up a few things in terms of objections and such to make the language more understandable and usable to other trial lawyers and victims who want to understand how a trial works.
We settle most of our serious injury cases before trial. There was no real meaningful settlement opportunity in the case. What was the settlement offer? We did not get that far. They offer $25,000 pre-suit and made clear they thought getting to $100,000 would be hard.
So this is a case we wanted to take to trial. Moreover, our firm likes ankle injury cases and we like Prince George’s County. This case had both.
Ron Miller’s Opening Statement
MILLER: A driver is obligated to pay attention to the road and yield to other drivers when required. Let me take you back to what happened on April 20th, 2022. The Defendant, who was an attorney for the IRS, was driving her usual route to work. She drove down Annapolis Road to take a left onto another road.
(Could we have the next slide, please?) She was driving down this road… can everyone see this? She stopped at a light on a clear day. While stopped, she reached down to find her parking pass.
DEFENSE LAWYER: May we approach?
THE COURT: Yes.
BENCH CONFERENCE
(Bench Conference begins – 10:26:39m.)
(The parties approach the bench for a discussion.)
THE COURT: By court ruling, liability has been established. The focus of this case is only on damages. I understand why we’re discussing these details, but it’s about damages.
MILLER: I’m setting the scene for the accident because her damages are part of the accident narrative.
DEFENSE LAWYER: We’re only discussing the fact that an accident happened and a person was injured. The details about reaching and negligence seem to be evidence of liability.
THE COURT: I understand. It’s your opening statement, so I’ll give you some leeway.
MILLER: I’m just providing context. I’ll be getting into the damages soon.
THE COURT: Alright.
(Bench Conference concluded – 10:27:32 m.)
(The parties return to their places.)
MILLER: The Defendant heard a horn beep and took a left turn. She didn’t see the Plaintiff, who had the right of way, coming from the opposite direction. Due to the collision, the Plaintiff’s ankle was broken and required surgery.
Take a look at these images. The first one shows her ankle before surgery, the second one after surgery. Today, she still has 15 screws and three plates in her ankle. She will never be able to run again and standing for extended periods of time is difficult.
We’ve brought this case before you because of the harm caused to the Plaintiff. We needed to agree that the Defendant was at fault for the accident, which she has accepted. We also had to understand the extent and implications of the Plaintiff’s damages, not just the initial injury and surgery, but also its long-term impact on her life.
To do this, we spoke to her doctors, her husband, her friends, and even her employer. One of her doctors is going to talk to you.
This is the guy to see if something awful like this is going to happen to your ankle. He received an Ivy League education and, at one point, was the chief of foot and ankle orthopedic injuries at Johns Hopkins. He consults for the Baltimore Orioles. His resume, I want to say, is as long as your arm, but it’s actually a lot longer than that.
We’re going to bring him to talk to you guys, in a very 2023 way. It’s going to be by videotape, so his testimony will be by videotape, but it holds the same force as if it was at trial, and he came here to see us. And, of course, my partner Laura Zois and the defense attorney had an opportunity to ask him questions.
He’s going to tell you she still has 15 screws and three plates in her ankle holding everything together. The problem with that is that it creates a breeding ground for arthritis, and this 33-year-old woman already has the signs of arthritis. At some point, she’s going to need what’s called a fusion, which will stabilize her ankle. The bad news is, you can’t move it once it locks, so you no longer have the ability to bend.
This trial is about the harms and losses that she has suffered and endured as the result of this accident. This is not a case about sympathy. You should not award her damages because you feel sorry for her. You’re going to hear about how the accident has impacted her professional and personal life.
At the time of the crash, they were a very young family. They were an energetic family. This is an active family with four kids doing everything you can imagine, Six Flags, the park. They would run together. They played basketball together. They traveled everywhere, New York, Baltimore, Washington, DC. They were just a very active family.
And she also had a vibrant social life. She was a hairstylist, and she loved that job. It was her social outlet beside her kids. She would do the church choir every Wednesday, and still found times to go out and see her family. She’s still fighting with her family, but it’s hard.
She can’t work as a hairstylist anymore. So what did she do? She went back to school to the University of Maryland. She’s working, getting very close to getting her degree. She’s still fighting. She has four kids they’re chasing around.
Let’s go back and talk about how it ended up. Let’s talk about the accident. She had this awful crash and needed emergency surgery where they put in these screws. She had a nine-month-old baby, along with three other kids. She and the two girls, the younger ones, went to live with her mom. Her mom took care of her and the girls, while her husband took care of the other kids.
This has been a massive disruption to their lives. The accident has completely changed her life, and it’s reflected in every facet of her day-to-day. Her job, her family life, her hobbies, everything she used to take pleasure in has been impacted in one way or another. And the evidence in this case will show these changes are likely to persist for the rest of her life.
We ask you to consider the totality of these changes, the persistent harm and loss she’s suffered and will continue to suffer, as a direct result of the accident. We ask you to consider these when coming to a decision in this case.
This accident, however, led to an upheaval in their lives. About a month after the accident, she managed to return home with the kids. Her mother, an FDA employee, took three months off work to care for her, her daughter, and her grandchildren. The accident wreaked havoc on their lives.
She endured six months of rigorous physical therapy and another operation. While it was painful and difficult, the effort was worthwhile as it improved her condition, especially her ankle, though we wish she had recovered more.
As we delve into this case, it’s about the harm and losses experienced. We will ask you to make amends where possible and provide compensation for the irreparable harm. The damages can be categorized into three parts: her medical bills, the post-accident trauma suffered by her and her family, and the pain she will endure for the expected next 45 years of her life.
She was a spontaneous person, fond of making impromptu plans like going to Virginia Beach over the weekend or heading to the park. Now, every activity revolves around her ability to reach there, her mobility, and whether she can tolerate the pain during the trip. This situation has affected her and her four kids, as well as her husband.
The court wants to clarify that the evidence and testimonies from the witness stand are what will control your deliberations. Opening statements and closing arguments of lawyers do not constitute evidence.
This case is not just about the suffering of their children or her husband. It’s about the impact of their suffering on her. We will ask you to consider an amount that may seem high at the beginning. But we believe that after hearing all the evidence, you’ll find it to be a fair compensation for her losses and harm. The amount we suggest is $1.1 million.
Defense Opening Statement
Regarding the defendant, they acknowledge the responsibility for the accident and that it was their fault. The case is for you to determine the appropriate damages. The injury is severe, and they ask for an extraordinary amount of compensation.
She broke her ankle, which was repaired surgically with plates and screws. There was a second surgery due to loosening of the screws, which were then removed. She attended physical therapy, which improved her ability to move her ankle. Whether she will need surgery in the future is uncertain.
The past medical expenses are around $36,505, which we don’t contest. Her lost wages due to the accident are around $3,400 to $3,500. These are not the focal points of this case. The main issue is the amount to be awarded for non-economic damages, for which we request something fair, reasonable, and sensible.
Thank you for your time and attention, and we hope to conclude this case promptly.
Testimony of Victim’s Husband
Mr. Miller: Good morning. Can I have your address?
SJ: Certainly.
Mr. Miller: How long have you lived at that address?
SJ: I bought the house in 2003, so it’s been approximately ten years.
Mr. Miller: Who lives there with you?
SJ: My wife, and our four children.
Mr. Miller: Can you tell the jury how old your children are and their names?
SJ: Yes. My children are 13, and the others are…
The Honorable Judge: Please continue.
SJ: …five, and three.
Mr. Miller: I understand. And for some background, what do you do for a living?
SJ: I’m currently the general manager at Oreck Clean Home Center.
Mr. Miller: And where are these locations?
SJ: We have six locations in Maryland and Virginia.
Mr. Miller: What are your responsibilities at work?
SJ: I oversee all six stores and manage one of them.
Mr. Miller: Can you describe your work schedule?
SJ: I work Monday through Saturday, from 10:00 am to 7:00 pm. Often, I work seven days a week which means working on Sundays from 12:00 pm to 5:00 pm.
Mr. Miller: How do you feel about those hours?
SJ: They are long, but I need to work to support my family.
Mr. Miller: How long have you known your wife?
SJ: I met her in 1993, she was my sister’s best friend.
Mr. Miller: You mean your wife was your sister’s best friend?
SJ: Yes, I apologize for the confusion. She was indeed my sister’s best friend.
Mr. Miller: Let’s move to another topic. Do you remember the car accident your wife was in 2022?
SJ: Yes, I do.
Mr. Miller: Prior to the accident, can you describe your household?
SJ: Our household was what I would consider the perfect life. My wife and children were happy and always engaged in activities. We used to take vacations and attend family reunions.
Mr. Miller: Was your wife a spontaneous person or a planner?
SJ: She was more spontaneous, always ready to take on new activities.
Mr. Miller: Could you describe her for the jury?
SJ: She is always happy, loves socializing and helping people. She attended choir rehearsal, Bible study every week, and also took care of our four children.
Mr. Miller: What was her job at the time of the crash?
SJ: She was the assistant manager of a hair salon.
Mr. Miller: Did she enjoy her work?
SJ: Yes, she loved her work. It was part of her identity.
Mr. Miller: Did your wife’s demeanor change after the car accident?
SJ: Yes, after the accident everything changed. Our family life and activity level changed significantly. She used to take the children to sporting events and practice basketball. Now, she can’t do these activities. She no longer goes on family vacations. My two older sons call her “boring” now because of her reduced activity level. The accident has restricted her capabilities and as a result, she can’t even do simple tasks like carrying laundry baskets or standing up to cook. Our family life has changed drastically since the accident.
Mr. Miller: Has your wife gone back to work since the accident?
SJ: She tried to help a friend out a couple of months ago at her hair salon, but it ended with her in a lot of pain due to the swelling in her ankle.
Mr. Miller: I have here a picture you received from your wife. Is this the picture she sent you?
Mr. Miller: Can you tell us how your wife’s personal social life has been affected since the crash?
SJ: Her social life has indeed changed significantly. Before the accident, she would regularly go out with friends, engage in dancing, and other social activities. However, the constant pain and discomfort after the crash have made such activities impossible. Her social life is definitely not the same as before.
Mr. Miller: You mentioned earlier about her job. Was she able to resume work post the crash?
SJ: She attempted to return to work, but the persistent pain made it unmanageable, particularly the long-standing hours. Eventually, she was forced to leave her job.
Mr. Miller: How has this situation impacted your family’s finances?
SJ: The impact has been substantial. She held the position of an assistant manager at a hair salon, bringing in a significant income. Now, with my single income, managing expenses for our four children and her medical bills has been strenuous.
Mr. Miller: Besides the financial struggle, can you share how your relationship with your wife has evolved post the accident?
SJ: Our relationship has undeniably been affected. She isn’t the same person she was before the crash. Her constant pain and fatigue, coupled with frustration, have been hard on both of us.
Mr. Miller: And your children? How have they been coping with all these changes?
SJ: Our children have had to make significant adjustments. They miss the mother they had before the crash, not understanding why she can’t engage in the activities she used to do with them. My older sons, in particular, have had to step up, assisting more with household chores. It’s been a lot for them too.
Mr. Miller: Finally, could you share your hopes for your wife’s future?
SJ: My biggest hope is for her to find relief from her pain and regain some semblance of normalcy. She deserves to live her life, not just endure it. It’s challenging to see such a wonderful person go through this. We are taking each day as it comes, hoping for a better future.
Defense Attorney Cross Examination of Victim’s Husband
Q: Regarding the foot stretching exercises, you assist her with those?
A: Yes, I do.
Q: Looking through her medical records, I noticed there’s mention of an exercise bike at home. Do you have one?
A: Indeed, we do have an exercise bike at home.
Q: Did she frequently use the exercise bike, especially post-accident?
A: Initially, during her therapy, they had her try riding the exercise bike.
Q: Can you tell us what kind of exercises she did at home after the accident?
A: She was given a chart with exercises, and I’ve been helping her to flex her foot in both directions to try and loosen it up.
Q: How long did this routine last?
A: Actually, I still assist her with the foot exercises every night.
Q: So you assist her based on the instructions from the chart?
A: Not directly from the chart, but I’ve learned the correct angles and try to flex her foot every night for her comfort and to aid her sleep.
Q: Does she drive?
A: Yes, she does.
Q: Prior to the accident, she was employed full time?
A: Yes, that’s correct.
Q: The jury was informed initially that she was also pursuing a degree?
A: Yes, she was attending the University of Maryland.
Q: Did she commute to the university?
A: At certain points she did, but due to our four children, she primarily takes her classes online now.
Q: How close is she to obtaining her degree?
A: She’s expected to graduate within the next year.
Court: Any redirect?
Mr. Miller: No further questions, Your Honor.
Court: Thank you, sir, you may step down. Proceed with your next witness.
(Witness excused – 11:56:56 a.m.)
Bench Conference
Plaintiff’s Attorney: Thank you, Your Honor. The plaintiff would like to call the next witness. Could we approach the bench for an administrative matter?
Court: Sure.
(Bench Conference begins – 11:57:19 a.m.)
(All parties approach the bench for the following discussion.)
Defense Attorney: Considering it’s nearly noon, it might be more practical to break for lunch now, given the next testimony might be lengthy.
(Bench Conference concluded – 11:57:37 a.m.)
(The parties return to the trial tables where the following ensues:)
(the Plaintiff, first having been duly sworn according to law, was examined and testified as follows:)
Direct Examination of Plaintiff
BY MS. ZOIS:
Q. You gave us your full name.
A. [Gives name.]
Q. Can you give us your current address?
A. [Gives address.]
Q. And are you familiar with the gentleman that just testified?
A. Yeah. That’s my husband.
Q. And do you have any children?
A. Yeah. I have four children.
Q. And can you tell us their names, ages, and maybe just a little bit about your children?
A. That’s our oldest. He’s 13. And… He’s Len. And there’s… She’s five. And then there’s… She’s three.
Q. What’s your birthday?
A.
Q. How old are you?
A. I’m thirty-three.
Q. How old were you back in April of 2022?
A. I was 30 years old.
Q. Did you graduate from high school?
A. Yes, I did, from…
Q. What year?
A. In 2009.
Q. Before April of 2022, what was your career?
A. I was just employed as an assistant manager at a salon, and I was to assist the manager who at the time was moving to another position. And I was being trained to take her spot.
Q. What’s your plan moving forward?
A. Well, you know, I just figured I need to… you know, to become, you know, a teacher or, you know, like a world study teacher. I just feel maybe that would help me to, you know, provide for my family because my biggest fear is my children, not being able to be there for them financially and, you know, emotionally.
Q. Would you like to get back into the salon industry one day?
A. That’s… that was my main… that was my dream to just open a salon. That’s every hairstylist’s dream. You know, you work for others and to get the experience with them, to just have your own salon and be able to compete in hair shows. Just the whole ordeal of it.
Q: MS. Zois: Your Honor, may I approach the witness?
A: THE COURT: Sure.
Q: BY MS. ZOIS: I’m going to show you what’s been marked as Plaintiff’s Exhibit Number 12. And are these photographs that show what your foot and ankle looked like after you had the surgery at Prince George’s County Hospital?
A: Yeah, it is.
Q: May I offer into evidence Plaintiff’s 12 into evidence?
A: THE COURT: Any objection?
A: No, Judge.
Q: It’s admitted. May I publish these to the jury?
A: THE COURT: Sure.
Q: BY MS. ZOIS: Let me ask you, if you stay on your — well, let me ask the question a different way. Because of the surgery, do you have scars on your ankle?
A: Yes, I do.
Q: Can you describe for the ladies and gentlemen of the jury how you feel about those scars?
A: Having the scars on my leg, I became a little insecure and — because this is — was kind of new to me. I just felt like everyone was looking and watching me. And when I try to go find appropriate shoes now because I can’t wear certain kind of — type of shoes like the — like one full example is when I had went in a shoe store, the guy just was like, “Oh, did you know that one of your leg was, like, bigger than the other?” And I just didn’t want to deal with that. Like, I’m not there yet, you know.
Q: Have you changed the way you dress at all because of the scars?
A: Yes. I wear longer dresses just to cover it. I don’t want to see it.
Q: And I know that you don’t have one of those long dresses on today.
A: MS. ZOIS: Your Honor, would it be okay if she approached the members of the jury to show what the scarring looks like?
A: THE COURT: Sure.
Q: Can you describe to the ladies and gentlemen of the jury how it is you feel about the limping you have?
A: I feel insecure. A lot of this is just that it’s kind of new to me. I mean, a person will go to the mall or, you know, something where I did — I would ask my husband, like, “Is anyone watching me or something?” because I just feel as though people are just staring, and they’ll look and point, you know. And because of my limp now I don’t — I mean, since the accident I have gotten used to coping with it. So I would go into a store, and I wouldn’t spend as much time. I will know what I’m going to get. I will go in there, get it, and then I’ll just leave. So that’s, I mean, a lot now as I’m coping with it.
Q: When you go to the mall now, do you park in the parking lot, or do you get dropped off at the entrance?
A: At the entrance. Usually I get dropped off at the entrance.
Q: Has your injury affected your relationship with your sons?
A: Yes. That’s the thing that really, really gets to me, how it has affected my children.
Q: How do you feel about how the injury affects you and your relationship with your children, starting with your oldest one?
A: Well, he’s the one that always wants to go outside and play. You know, I tell him no because I really can’t watch him, you know. And he’s —
Q: How has your injury impacted your relationship with your ten-year-old?
A: He’s the one that always wants to go outside and play. You know, I tell him no because I really can’t watch him, you know. And he’s the one that came up with the “boring mom” story. I believe that’s… He’s just unhappy sometimes because he wants to go play. He wants to be involved in sports. And my injury because of what happened to me has really prevented that.
Q: How has your injury impacted your relationship with the two girls, the younger girls?
A: When it first happened, I really didn’t have a chance to bond with my daughters, my babies. You know, I can’t — they have — they can’t — they’re always in the house with me, and they haven’t really been out, you know, playing. And you know, we — when my husband gets home he can do that. A lot of time they only spend, like, an hour at the park or so. But it’s just — in the beginning, it did.
Q: Are you able to carry the girls?
A: No. Not the way that I want to. No.
Q: What bothers you the most about your injury?
A: Just my children, just everything about it is just affecting my family. And people go on their everyday life, they don’t expect something like this to happen to them, you know. It makes you realize that you take so much for granted that you — you know, and I just — I’m just scared that I can’t help my children, you know, financially for their college or just everything affects me.
Q: MS. ZOIS: Court’s indulgence for a moment, Your Honor.
A: THE COURT: Sure.
Q: MS. ZOIS: No further questions, Your Honor.
Bench Conference #2
THE COURT: All right. Normally, we would proceed with cross-examination at this stage, but given it’s nearing lunch break, we will pause here. Cross-examination will resume after the break. At this point, you understand the proceedings better than you did during the last break. However, remember not to discuss this case among yourselves or with anyone else. Avoid overhearing anyone discussing the case. Also, refrain from conducting any independent research or investigation about the facts of this case or anyone associated with it, including counsel, courthouse staff, parties, and witnesses.
Your judgment should be based only on the evidence presented in this courtroom and the legal instructions I provide. I emphasize this because you will be getting your phones back, but you must continue to abstain from independent research or investigation. Please return to the jury lounge at 1:30 pm. Once everyone is present and ready, we will escort you back to resume the trial. Enjoy your lunch, and I’ll see you afterward.
(Jury excused – 12:29:15 a.m.)
THE COURT: Counsel, please join me in chambers at 1:30 pm to discuss jury instructions. The discussion shouldn’t take long since the jurors may need some time to return. I wish to clarify one matter about the life expectancy instruction – it states 79 years, but I believe it should be 49 additional years, right?
MS. ZOIS: Allow me to check. The correct figure is 45 years, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Understood.
MS. ZOIS: The precise figure is 45.4, but we’ll round it to 45.
: Could you provide me a copy?
MS. ZOIS: Yes. This is the court exhibit, identified as Plaintiff’s Exhibit Number 14, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Alright. I don’t usually admit such documents unless there’s a compelling reason.
MS. ZOIS: That’s perfectly fine, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Anyway, I have adjusted it to an additional 45 years. The document indicated 79 years, but it could be a handwriting misinterpretation or something else.
MR. MILLER: She is indeed in good health.
THE COURT: Yes, I was about to remark on that. So, are you asking for future medical expenses?
MS. ZOIS: No, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Very well.
MS. ZOIS: We have no figure for future medical expenses.
THE COURT: I just wanted to confirm. I heard some remarks and was unsure about the direction we were taking.
All right. Please join me in the chambers at 1:30 pm. Afterward, we will hopefully finish with cross-examination. I presume you have no other witnesses, but let’s see how things go. Thank you.
MS. ZOIS: Your Honor, may we stay in the room, or do we need to leave?
THE COURT: You will need to leave since the staff can only depart once you’re out. They will lock the door afterward, but you can leave your belongings if you are concerned about them.
MS. ZOIS: Alright.
(Off the record – 12:31:20 p.m.)
(On the record – 1:48:34 p.m.)
MS. ZOIS: We have offered Plaintiff’s Exhibits 1, 5, 6, and 7 for identification in the video, without any objection from the Defense counsel. Exhibits 11, 12, and 13 have been marked, moved in, and admitted, I believe. Could you confirm, Madam Clerk?
We have also discussed with Defense counsel that Plaintiff’s Exhibit 10, which pertains to the Defendant’s property damage
Defense Attorney Cross Examination of Plaintiff
Q: Are you currently taking any pain medications?
A: Yes, I have been prescribed pain medication.
Q: Are you actively using the prescribed medication?
A: Yes, I am.
Q: Can you specify which pain medication you are currently taking?
A: I am currently taking Ibuprofen 800s.
Q: Is Ibuprofen 800s an over-the-counter medication?
A: No, it was prescribed to me.
Q: Who prescribed this medication to you?
A:
Q: Have the expenses for this pain medication been significant in this case?
A: The medication has cost me 53 dollars.
Q: Have you been consistently taking the prescribed medication since the accident in April 2022?
A: I attempted to maintain a regular intake, but I experienced chest pain symptoms from the medication. Because of this, I often resort to over-the-counter options when I experience chest pains.
Q: Moving onto your financial situation, you previously mentioned concerns about supporting your children. You’ve also mentioned that you were previously a hairdresser but had to switch careers due to not making enough money, is that correct?
A: Yes.
Q: Can you tell us how much you used to earn as a hairdresser?
A: I was making roughly a thousand dollars per week or more.
Q: Was that earning calculated after a 50% cut from the salon and taxes?
A: After the salon took their share and taxes were accounted for, I was left with about 700 dollars every two weeks.
Q: So, to clarify, you were earning around 1,400 dollars a month as a hairdresser?
A: Yes, plus I also received tips.
Q: Was your income as a hairdresser documented in a W-2 form for the year you worked prior to the accident?
A: Yes, that’s correct.
Q: According to Exhibit Number 1, it states you earned a total of $4,300 up until April 20th of that year, is this correct?
A: That’s not entirely correct. I began the position in mid-February and was trained for two weeks before officially starting in early March.
Q: So you were only at this job for a few months prior to the accident?
A: Yes, that’s correct.
Q: According to the provided information, you earned a total of $16,549 in the calendar year 2021, is that correct?
A: Yes, that’s correct.
Q: After having your baby in July, you did not work for the rest of the year, is that correct?
A: Yes, that’s right.
Q: Your studies at the University of Maryland are conducted online, correct?
A: Yes, that’s correct.
Q: Have you visited the university for registration purposes?
A: Yes, I have.
Q: Prior to your current studies, you had some college education, right?
A: Yes, that’s correct.
Q: How many credits did you need to take to obtain your degree?
A: Before I had to stop my studies due to my pregnancy in 2008, I had completed two years of college.
Q: Have you taken any in-person classes at the University of Maryland since the accident?
A: No, I haven’t.
Q: Following the accident, you went to see a doctor referred by your attorneys, correct?
A: Yes, that’s correct.
Q: Was it your understanding that the referral came from your attorneys?
A: Yes, that’s correct.
Q: You mentioned undergoing therapy prior to your visit with this doctor, correct?
A: Yes, that’s right.
Q: Was this therapy conducted at Accessible Therapy in Greenbelt?
A: Yes, it was.
Q. Did you visit him to discuss possible future physical therapy treatments?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. And this appointment was set up by your attorneys, correct?
A. Yes, that’s correct.
Q. His primary objective was to guide you on how to manage your physical therapy going forward, correct?
A. Yes, that’s correct.
Q. Was there any discussion about his potential appearance in court as a witness when you were meeting with him?
A. I’m not sure about that.
Q. But you knew that the attorneys arranged this visit, correct?
A. Yes, that’s correct.
Q. Did he provide you with any guidance on the type of therapy that could help you prevent arthritis in the future?
A. He didn’t specifically mention arthritis, but he did provide exercises to improve my ankle’s condition.
Q. Did he prescribe some exercises for you to do at home?
A. Yes, he did.
Q. Did he suggest using a stationary bike at home for exercise?
A. Yes, he did, but I told him that it was painful.
Q. Did he show you a method to use the bike that would reduce your pain?
A. Yes, he did.
Q. And he recommended you do these exercises daily, right?
A. Yes, that’s correct.
Q. Have you been doing these exercises daily?
A. Not necessarily, the bike at home is a different shape than the one at his facility.
Q. His report suggests that he believed there was a good potential for functional improvement with this management, did he mention this to you?
A. I’m not sure about that.
Q. Did he tell you that regular exercise would significantly reduce the likelihood of arthritis?
A. I don’t recall him specifically mentioning arthritis.
MS. ZOIS: I’m going to object.
(At 2:00:59 p.m., Counsel approached the bench and the following occurred:)
MS. ZOIS: I’ve let Counsel go with this for a while, but he’s not reading directly from the records, number one. Number two, anything that he said to her is hearsay. And number three, he’s a physical therapist, not a doctor.
Oh, that’s incorrect.
(Indiscernible 2:01:23), but I’ll refer to him as physical therapist but (indiscernible).
THE COURT: Yeah, I’m just going to — so if you could correct that and not continue to read the hearsay records.
MS. ZOIS: Right. Liberties.
THE COURT: (Indiscernible). Okay. All right.
MS. ZOIS: And this is my copy, so if I can have — I (indiscernible 2:02:01), so if he could use his own copy that’s Plaintiff’s Exhibit 2.
DEFENSE LAWYER: I’m sorry. I pulled this from my file. You handed this to me.
MS. ZOIS: Oh, okay. Okay. All right. That’s not the one that you took from here?
DEFENSE LAWYER: No.
MS. ZOIS: Okay. Let’s go over there.
(At 2:02:17 p.m., Counsel returned to trial tables and the following occurred in open court:)
MS. ZOIS: Thank you, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Sure.
MS. ZOIS: And if the correction could just be made.
THE COURT: Okay, so why don’t you just rephrase the question.
DEFENSE LAWYER: Okay.
THE COURT: And sustain the objection as to a question (indiscernible 2:02:35).
BY S:
Q. For the record, is a physical therapist; is that right?
A. Yeah, he is.
Q. And he has his own office, Occupational Rehabilitation Associates, Baltimore National Pike, Ellicott City, Maryland; is that right?
A. Yeah. I believe so.
Q. Okay._,Fellow of Academy of Orthopedic Manual Physical Therapists; does that sound right?
A. Yeah. I think so.
Q. Okay. And you went up to see him about a year after the accident in April of 2012, at least according to his report; does that sound right?
A. Yeah, that does.
Q. Okay. And he talked to you about under a section called Recommendations, did he give you a report for going up there?
A. No.
Q. Did he make recommendations?
A. He handed me a list of exercises.
Q. Okay.
A. And he did mention that he just hoped for the best because he’s not sure if these are just — he was just guessing. But he —
Q. Okay. It says, “If she can be consistent with this program, she can expect to gain about three degrees in improvement a week. Since she lacks 40 degrees of motion, this will require about 15 weeks if all goes well.” Is that consistent with what he told you?
A. With his exercise I was able to move my ankle some, but it’s still a little elevated.
Q. Okay. Then did he talk about a JAS ankle device as an alternative to the stretching?
A. Yeah, he did.
Q. And then he said, “Today was shown one method of stretching her ankle dorsiflexion without using the JAS device. This program requires daily participation. This process was explained to her several times and she was provided with written instructions.” And that’s what you got; is that right, ma’am?
A. Yeah. That’s what I received, yeah. Correct.
Q. “She will likely need follow-up every week, initially, to guide her progress, reassure her, reassess her gait progression and to guide her in long-term progress and management.” Now did you ever follow up with him?
A. That was if I was to get the actual device, which I — it was very expensive and —
Q. Okay.
A. — at the time I couldn’t afford it.
Q. But it said there was a method of stretching the ankle without using the device and that’s the diagrams he gave you.
A. Right. But he also said I get my husband at home can help me do it as well.
Q. Okay. He said there was good potential for considerable functional improvement with conservative management at that time?
A. Right.
Q. Did you ever go back to see him?
A. No, I didn’t go back to see him.
Q. Did you ever make another appointment with him to go over what he had recommended?
A. No.
Q. Okay. Did the attorneys make another appointment with him, do you know?
A. No. They don’t — no.
Q. Okay. Ma’am, you testified that part of your problems from the after effects of this injury is that you go to the mall and you feel people are kind of staring at you?
A. Yeah.
Q. Okay. Do you actually see them staring at you?
A. Do you want to take a break? I’m sorry. I just sense them. I just see them pointing aL us and so, like I said, it’s just a process that I have to get over it. But —
Q. You said because of your broken ankle you’re not bonding with your daughters? Did I write that down or
A. Oh, in the beginning it was hard since I was in pain.
Q. But that’s better now?
A. Yeah. It has gotten a little better.
Okay. Thank you, ma’am. That’s all I have, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Any redirect?
MS. ZOIS: Yes, Your Honor, briefly.
Redirect Examination of Plaintiff
BY MS. ZOIS:
Q. You were asked about an appointment with a physical therapist. Did you personally arrange that appointment?
A. No, my attorneys arranged it for me.
Q. And you mentioned you were given some exercises to do at home. Were you able to consistently do them?
A. Not consistently, due to the pain and discomfort.
Q. You were also asked about a device recommended by the physical therapist. Did you ever purchase that device?
A. No, I couldn’t afford it.
Q. Regarding your feelings at the mall, you feel uncomfortable because people look at you differently?
A. Yes, I feel they’re staring at my limp and it makes me self-conscious.
Q. And with your daughters, things have improved, but would you say they’re back to how they were before the accident?
A. Not exactly, I still have limitations due to my ankle.
MS. ZOIS: Thank you. I have no further questions, Your Honor.
THE COURT: You may step down, ma’am.
Laura Zois’ Closing Statement
Good afternoon, everyone. This trial, though serious in nature, has been incredibly brief thanks to the diligent work of all involved. As you retreat to the jury deliberation room, you will be tasked with two main responsibilities.
First, you’ll have to fill out the verdict sheet. It’s crucial to come to a unanimous agreement on the parts that you believe the Plaintiff has convincingly proven, such as past medical expenses. If you reach consensus on noneconomic damages, that will also need to be recorded.
Secondly, you must engage in a thorough discussion about your personal perspectives on the case and its facts. Expressing your views on specific aspects of the case is crucial to reach a conclusion.
This has been a short trial given the gravity of the case. The seriousness of this case is not lost on my client, nor the Defendant. Its brevity can be attributed to our agreement on several key points. We both agree that the Defendant was responsible for the crash and that the Plaintiff suffered a fractured ankle. Even the Defense Attorney conceded in his opening statement that all past medical expenses in this case are reasonable and directly linked to the crash.
However, our main point of contention, which has led us here today, is not easy to resolve. We’re asking you to assign a monetary value to human pain and suffering. How do you quantify the cost of pain, suffering, inconvenience, disfigurement, or humiliation?
The Judge provided some guidance on this through the instructions given. For damages in a personal injury case, consider factors such as the extent and duration of injuries, the impact on the Plaintiff’s physical and mental health, past and future physical pain and mental anguish, and the humiliation associated with disfigurement.
You must determine a fair compensation for the Plaintiff’s losses without any sympathy for either party influencing your decision. It’s not about sympathy, but about justice.
Let’s now discuss the crash itself. This was no ordinary crash. It caused extensive property damage and led to the Plaintiff’s ankle being crushed. Consider the crash’s magnitude, its immediate aftermath, and its implications. The Plaintiff was a mother of four young children at the time, faced with the daunting prospect of emergency surgery.
Reflect on the surgery as well. It was not performed immediately, leaving her with an agonizing night to contemplate the risks. The pain and suffering that came with the surgery are part of what we ask you to evaluate.
Post-surgery, the Plaintiff was bedridden and required assistance for about four months. She was unable to perform daily tasks such as cooking, cleaning, or taking care of her children. These hardships are part of the human suffering we ask you to value.
As you deliberate, remember the gravity of this case, the responsibilities you carry, and the significant impact of your decision on the lives involved.
This isn’t her mom’s case. This isn’t a case where we’re here representing her mom, but we’re representing her. And the importance of that is how she felt about having to have her mom come in and do what she thought was her job. She felt guilty about having to have her mom come in and take care of her infant daughter, get the boys ready for school, watch the other daughter when it’s her job to be doing that. Not to mention she had just helped her nine months earlier when she had given birth to her daughter. So I want you to remember that when you’re talking and thinking about the pain and suffering that she’s incurred and endured because of this injury.
Now she went through six months of physical therapy. Six months of physical therapy is not a fun process. You bring with you your common experiences, your everyday life experiences. If anyone’s had physical therapy it’s intended to push you. It’s a painful process. She endured it. She went through it. But unfortunately, after the six months of that process, she’s not normal. She will never be normal again. Her ankle injury is a permanent injury. It’s an injury that is going to get worse over time. It is not going to get better. It is only going to continue to deteriorate and get worse.
After talking to the surgeon that did the surgery, she wasn’t satisfied with that answer. She wasn’t satisfied with “you’re not going to be normal.” It’s not going to be normal. She wasn’t happy with that. She called our office and said, “find the best. Find me the best foot and ankle guy you know of.” And I’m going to insert this here. He was asked on the video, “do you have any idea how she got to you?” He had no idea. He had no idea that we were the ones that provided her with the information that she should go see him.
But why did we give her his name? Back in the evidence room, you’re going to have an opportunity to look at his curriculum vitae. He’s the man. He’s the best. If there’s something wrong with your foot or ankle, he’s the guy that you want to go see. So take a look, review it, analyze it. He’s got 90 presentations on foot and ankle reconstruction, 27 publications, research grants. He was the chief of orthopedic ankle and foot reconstructive surgery at Johns Hopkins. He’s a fantastic doctor. He had no idea that she was there because we gave him her name.
Now she liked him. She went back and she continues to see him and what he’s done for her is the only thing that he can do for her, which is twice a year or so he can inject her ankle with cortisone. That’s what he can do for her until she needs and has the fusion. So, and I want to point out, the last time that she got an injection was October 8th. She’s in a good spot right now. She had an injection a month ago. But I know you’ve seen her walk around and you’ve heard from him. Her gait will never be the same again and she walks with a limp.
So I want you to remember those things when you’re thinking about pain and suffering in this case. I want you to think about her limp and I want you to think about the scars that she has. People are different. Some people are not bothered by the fact that they have a scar. Some people don’t care that they have a scar. I’ve got one, not hiding it. Some people don’t care. Some people might deal with a limp a little bit better than somebody else might. This limp and these scars to her have changed who she is. It has affected her self-esteem. It has changed the way she dresses. It has changed where she wants to go. It has changed how long she wants to stay out in public.
It’s impacted her in a way that maybe it might not impact other people or someone else, but this is her case. It’s her pain and suffering. It’s her inconvenience. It’s her humiliation. It’s her disfigurement. So what’s important is how it impacts her. Along that same line, I want to talk about her career and I want you to think about these things when you’re back there thinking about pain and suffering, inconvenience and how this case has affected her. She got her cosmetology license in 1999. Her career choice was doing hair. She was one of the very, very lucky people who actually love what they do.
Her job to her was not a job. She loved going to the salon. She loved talking to people and interacting with them. She loved getting to know her clients. They were like a family to her. She loved taking someone and giving them the creation that they wanted and having them walk out and feeling like a superstar. She loved her job. That has been taken away from her because of this crash. The reason I point this out is because for her, her ankle is a necessary part of her career. She has to be able to stand in order for her to continue this career. And one of the last questions that Defense counsel was going over with her was her physical therapy evaluation, and the physical therapist said she can’t stand for longer than ten to fifteen minutes at a time. She can’t do it.
This is no longer a career choice that she can keep and make. God bless her though. She still has a dream. She hasn’t given up. She thought about this. Well, gee, maybe if I can make this work and I can make my own hours and I can use a stool if I can’t — she hasn’t given up on it. But physically, her body has given up on her and she can no longer stand in order to do the things that she loves to do.
So I point that out because someone else might not think a limp or a scar’s a very big deal. Someone else might not think when you’re talking among yourselves, well, a crushed ankle might not be a life-altering career choice. But for me, if I lost my voice or if I lost my sight or something else that I have to have to do my job, it would impact me differently.
So what has happened to her has taken a career that she loved and making it an impossibility for her. A baseball player injures a shoulder, a football player injures some other body part that puts them out, it’s the same sort of concept. Everybody’s going to have an Achilles heel with their job. Maybe it’s sitting for long periods of time if you’ve got a back injury.
But what this has done, what this crash has done to her is it’s taken away her career choice that she made that she worked so hard for that she developed over time and that she loved. Now one of the things that I haven’t talked about yet is how the crash has impacted her before life versus her after life before April 20th, 2022. She was a very active mom. She took her kids to their basketball practices. She took them to museums. She took them to the beach. She took them to D.C. She took them to Baltimore. She took them to movies. She took them to Chuck E. Cheese. She took them to the family functions. She has seven brothers and sisters. They went a lot of places. They did a lot of things.
Her kids had the experience of a young, active, able-bodied mom that was taking them around and showing them the world. Since the crash, she can’t do that. She has to get dropped off at the door of the mall so she can go in and pick up a pair of shoes that by the way she won’t try on in the store.
She’ll take the box and take it home so she doesn’t have to go through the embarrassment with the sales guy of, hey, lady, did you know that one of your feet was bigger than the other one, and how did you get that scar and how did this happen? She doesn’t even want to go through that anymore.
So when you’re thinking about how this crash has impacted her life and when you’re considering the pain and the suffering and the value of human suffering, it’s important to look at what her life was like before versus what is it like now. She has to ask her children to do the things that she used to do all the time on her own.
She’s not happy about that. She doesn’t want to have to ask them to do that. She feels guilty about it. She can’t pick up her daughters. Her boys got that opportunity when she was the young mom picking the boys up. She can’t pick up her daughters. If they fall asleep on the couch, she can’t pick them up and carry them up the steps and lay them down in bed. She can’t do it. She can’t even carry the laundry basket up the steps because of what happened in this crash.
One of the other things that I want you to make sure you pay attention to is when she does push herself, because she does, she pays for it. But when she does push herself, what happens is her ankle swells up. This is what happens when she pushes herself. And by the end of the day she’s done things, because if you think about you get up in the morning, the first thing you do is put weight on your foot. You walk to the bathroom, you’ve got weight on your foot. You take a shower, you’ve got weight on your foot. You go down the steps to get breakfast ready, you’ve got weight on your foot. It’s one of those body parts that you use every day, all day long. You might not use your elbow all the time. You might not use your shoulder all the time. You might not even really use your neck all the time. But this is one of those body parts you’ve got to use if you want to get around and survive and live.
By the end of the day it hurts. It helps her stretch out. Sometimes that’s not enough. He told you that sometimes she’ll wake up at one o’clock in the morning in pain because of her ankle. None of this was there before April 20th, 2022. Not to mention she can never run again. Can’t run. No running. No matter what — earthquake, fire, baby runs out into the street — no running. She has difficulty on uneven surfaces, shouldn’t climb ladders, shouldn’t get on step stools, shouldn’t stand for long periods of time — those are her limitations.
Now when you’re considering all of these things and the pain and suffering and inconvenience, disfigurement, humiliation, and you’re trying to come up with a number that you think is fair compensation, fair and adequate compensation, the Judge has given you the instructions on the law. But it’s a hard thing to do to put a number on it, but that’s what we have to do. That’s the way the system works. The jury doesn’t have the power to wave a magic wand and make her ankle the same way. We don’t have the power to say, okay, well, let’s all get into a time machine and take her back to April 20th of 2022 and have that Defendant not cause this crash. You don’t have that ability.
The only ability that you have is to compensate her fairly for her losses and harms that were caused. So how do you do that? Well, you could liken it to a job. You know, let’s say you pick up the paper, you go on Craig’s List or looking at some bulletin board with a job list, and the job ad reads something like, “This is a test case for a medical experiment and we want you to, oh, go through a serious crash.” Have your ankle crushed into little pieces. Have a surgery where you have sixteen holes drilled into the bone. You have a subsequent surgery to pull one of them out. You have to have help with whatever — oh, you have family members that rely on you, but you’re going to have to pull in another family member to take care of you and your family. You’re going to have to go through six months of painful physical therapy. You’re going to never be able to run again. You’re going to be in pain. And this is 365 days a year. No vacation. No weekends. No days off. No holidays.
So liken it to a job. Who’s going to take that job? Who’s going to take that job? So if you think about it, let’s say it’s a 16-hour-a-day job because you to=AI Assistant<|im_sep|>One of the other things that I want you to make sure you pay attention to is when she does push herself, because she does, she pays for it. But when she does push herself, what happens is her ankle swells up. This is what happens when she pushes herself. And by the end of the day she’s done things, because if you think about you get up in the morning, the first thing you do is put weight on your foot. You walk to the bathroom, you’ve got weight on your foot. You take a shower, you’ve got weight on your foot.
You go down the steps to get breakfast ready, you’ve got weight on your foot. It’s one of those body parts that you use every day, all day long. You might not use your elbow all the time. You might not use your shoulder all the time. You might not even really use your neck all the time. But this is one of those body parts you’ve got to use if you want to get around and survive and live.
By the end of the day it hurts. It helps her stretch out. Sometimes that’s not enough. He told you that sometimes she’ll wake up at one o’clock in the morning in pain because of her ankle. None of this was there before April 20th, 2022. Not to mention she can never run again. Can’t run. No running. No matter what — earthquake, fire, baby runs out into the street — no running. She has difficulty on uneven surfaces, shouldn’t climb ladders, shouldn’t get on step stools, shouldn’t stand for long periods of time — those are her limitations.
Now when you’re considering all of these things and the pain and suffering and inconvenience, disfigurement, humiliation, and you’re trying to come up with a number that you think is fair compensation, fair and adequate compensation, the Judge has given you the instructions on the law.
But it’s a hard thing to do to put a number on it, but that’s what we have to do. That’s the way the system works. The jury doesn’t have the power to wave a magic wand and make her ankle the same way. We don’t have the power to say, okay, well, let’s all get into a time machine and take her back to April 20th of 2022 and have that Defendant not cause this crash. You don’t have that ability.
The only ability that you have is to compensate her fairly for her losses and harms that were caused. So how do you do that? Well, you could liken it to a job. You know, let’s say you pick up the paper, you go on Craig’s List or looking at some bulletin board with a job list, and the job ad reads something like, “This is a test case for a medical experiment and we want you to, oh, go through a serious crash.”
Have your ankle crushed into little pieces. Have a surgery where you have sixteen holes drilled into the bone. You have a subsequent surgery to pull one of them out. You have to have help with whatever — oh, you have family members that rely on you, but you’re going to have to pull in another family member to take care of you and your family.
You’re going to have to go through six months of painful physical therapy. You’re going to never be able to run again. You’ve got to be in pain. And this is 365 days a year. No vacation. No weekends. No days off. No holidays.
So liken it to a job. Who’s going to take that job? Who’s going to take that job? So if you think about it, let’s say it’s a 16-hour-a and reformatted the testimony to be as clear as possible. The text now appears in a continuous format without any page numbering or breaks in continuity.
“One of the other things that I want you to make sure you pay attention to is when she does push herself, because she does, she pays for it. But when she does push herself, what happens is her ankle swells up. This is what happens when she pushes herself.
And by the end of the day, she’s done things, because if you think about you get up in the morning, the first thing you do is put weight on your foot. You walk to the bathroom, you’ve got weight on your foot. You take a shower, you’ve got weight on your foot. You go down the steps to get breakfast ready, you’ve got weight on your foot. It’s one of those body parts that you use every day, all day long. You might not use your elbow all the time. You might not use your shoulder all the time. You might not even really use your neck all the time. But this is one of those body parts you’ve got to use if you want to get around and survive and live.
By the end of the day it hurts. He helps her stretch out. Sometimes that’s not enough. He told you that sometimes she’ll wake up at one o’clock in the morning in pain because of her ankle. None of this was there before April 20th, 2022. Not to mention she can never run again. Can’t run. No running. No matter what — earthquake, fire, baby runs out into the street — no running. She has difficulty on uneven surfaces, shouldn’t climb ladders, shouldn’t get on step stools, shouldn’t stand for long periods of time — those are her limitations.
Now when you’re considering all of these things and the pain and suffering and inconvenience, disfigurement, humiliation, and you’re trying to come up with a number that you think is fair compensation, fair and adequate compensation, the Judge has given you the instructions on the law. But it’s a hard thing to do to put a number on it, but that’s what we have to do. That’s the way the system works. The jury doesn’t have the power to wave a magic wand and make her ankle the same way. We don’t have the power to say, okay, well, let’s all get into a time machine and take her back to April 20th of 2022 and have that Defendant not cause this crash. You don’t have that ability.
The only ability that you have is to compensate her fairly for her losses and harms that were caused. So how do you do that? Well, you could liken it to a job. You know, let’s say you pick up the paper, you go on Craig’s List or looking at some bulletin board with a job list, and the job ad reads something like, “This is a test case for a medical experiment and we want you to, oh, go through a serious crash.”
Have your ankle crushed into little pieces. Have a surgery where you have sixteen holes drilled into the bone. You have a subsequent surgery to pull one of them out. You have to have help with whatever — oh, you have family members that rely on you, but you’re going to have to pull in another family member to take care of you and your family.
You’re going to have to go through six months of painful physical therapy. You’re going to never be able to run again. You’re going to be in pain. And this is 365 days a year. No vacation. No weekends. No days off. No holidays.
So liken it to a job. Who’s going to take that job? Who’s going to take that job? So if you think about it, let’s say it’s a 16-hour-a-day job because you have to deal with the consequences and pain all day. So think about it in those terms as you deliberate the fair and adequate compensation.”
Consider what happens when she pushes herself throughout the day. From the moment she wakes up, she has to put weight on her foot. Walking to the bathroom, taking a shower, going down the steps to prepare breakfast; all these seemingly trivial activities put strain on her foot. Unlike other body parts that may not be in constant use, the foot is a crucial part of daily movements and survival. And by the end of the day, she’s in pain.
She tries to alleviate the pain through stretches, but sometimes that’s not enough. Sometimes, she wakes up at one in the morning due to the excruciating pain in her ankle. This pain, this limitation, wasn’t there before the accident on April 20th, 2022.
Furthermore, she can no longer run. No matter the circumstances — earthquake, fire, or even a child running out into the street — she can’t run. She has difficulty on uneven surfaces, can’t climb ladders or step stools, and can’t stand for extended periods. These are her new limitations.
When considering these things along with her pain, suffering, and the inconveniences she has to endure, it’s hard to put a number on it for fair compensation. The jury doesn’t have the power to erase the accident or restore her foot to its original condition. The only thing you can do is to fairly compensate her for her losses and harms.
Imagine it like a job. Let’s say the job description reads, “Test subject for a medical experiment. Expected to experience a serious crash, have your ankle crushed, go through surgeries and painful physical therapy. Incur restrictions like never being able to run again and constant pain. This will be a 365-days-a-year job with no vacation, weekends off, or holidays.”
For a job like this, let’s say it’s a 16-hour-a-day job as you sleep for eight hours. At a rate of four dollars an hour, it equates to $23,360 a year. This is how we come up with a number. The $1.1 million we’re asking for is based on this calculation.
Her “job” is a full-time role that’s going to continue for the rest of her life, predicted to be another 45 years. This “job” will get harder as her condition worsens and additional surgeries are required.
Remember, 45 years is a long time. Though this trial might be short, and you might forget about this case in a few years, she will still be dealing with her ankle in her 45th year. In those years, she’s going to be playing with her grandchildren, perhaps even great-grandchildren, while in pain.
So, when you’re deliberating, remember that this is her only shot. She doesn’t get a do-over or a chance to come back when she needs the fusion or when the pain is so unbearable that she can’t leave her bed. Consider that 45 years is a lifetime, and what you do today must fairly and adequately compensate her for her past, present, and future struggles. Thank you.
Defense Closing Statement
From the start, you were told that this case could take two days, which has proven true, given its relatively short duration. As you return home to your family and friends, they may ask you if you sat on a jury at Prince George’s County. Your response will likely be affirmative, describing the quick automobile accident trial where there was no dispute as to liability, where the defendant admitted her fault, and where you heard from a husband and wife who were seeking a million dollars in damages.
The couple testified about the wife’s inability to walk, her constant pain, and how she’s unable to carry on with her life, go to the store, or even raise her children properly due to the accident. They testified that by two o’clock, the lawyers were addressing us, and the case was over.
An objection then arose regarding the fact that the mother did not testify, despite the gravity of the injury that disrupted the couple’s life. The judge reminded the jury to base their decision on the evidence presented. You heard about how the wife’s close friend claimed that the wife’s ankle swelled the day she tried to help her work, about how her brothers-in-law and sisters-in-law and the parents of her children’s friends claim she’s not active anymore.
The couple maintained that her life is ruined due to the broken ankle from the auto accident and that they deserve a million dollars in damages. Upon reflection, it might strike you as strange that a case that was projected to last two days only took a few hours. Despite her injury, the plea for a million dollars seems excessive, even though she suffered significant fractures.
Despite her incomplete recovery, awarding a million dollars for a broken ankle seems excessive in a world that can often be cold and tough. Especially given that a small percentage of that sum would satisfy most people in this courtroom. The woman claimed that she couldn’t engage in activities with her kids anymore because of her broken ankle, which hasn’t healed properly. Yet, she still drives. Even though her injury has lingering effects, their claim that their children’s lives are ruined feels like an exaggeration to justify a million-dollar compensation.
They claimed that she should receive significant money because her dreams of working on people’s hair were crushed due to the accident. However, her tax return reveals lifetime earnings in cosmetology of $4,385, which makes her claims seem exaggerated. She only started her cosmetology job in February, two months before the accident occurred. Despite the fracture, she was still pursuing her degree at Maryland, suggesting that her dreams weren’t as crushed as they claimed.
When you return home to your families and friends, you might get a sense of how these personal injury cases are presented, with dynamic drawings and high-tech video presentations demanding significant sums of money. It’s noteworthy that you heard from no one other than the couple about the woman’s difficulties in carrying out normal tasks, or her altered interactions with her children.
The case reveals that her medical treatment for her ankle injury ended by the end of 2011 when her therapist discharged her, citing remarkable improvement. She saw another doctor four times who confirmed her pain, but didn’t really treat her. He stated that her pain is likely permanent, but he only saw her four times after all her therapy had stopped.
Their request to award a million dollars was only supported by the couple. There’s no question about paying for her medical bills, and there might be a loss of earnings claim, but awarding her for a career and 45 years of pain that primarily comes from her and her husband’s testimony gives you a sense of how these lawsuits get tried. A non-economic damage award of a percentage far smaller than that would be fair and sensible to all the parties in this case. Thank you.