King County Arbitration Awards $739,459 in Rear-End Collision

In October 2018, a 47-year-old plaintiff was rear-ended by a tow truck. She initially sustained minor soft tissue injuries. In January 2019, she experienced a severe headache, dizziness, and a seizure, leading to hospitalization. She was diagnosed with a subarachnoid hemorrhage from a ruptured vertebral artery aneurysm and underwent emergent external ventricular drain placement and coil embolization. Following the embolization, the plaintiff developed vasospasm, a known complication. Over several days, her neurological condition progressively worsened with vision loss, confusion, and stroke-like symptoms. Plaintiffs alleged that despite monitoring showing increased vasospasm, her care team delayed ordering advanced imaging and failed to aggressively manage her blood pressure. When balloon angioplasty was performed, chemical angioplasty, necessary for smaller vessels, was reportedly omitted, leading to additional strokes. The plaintiff required extended hospitalization and a lengthy recovery. The plaintiff and her family filed a medical malpractice lawsuit against the hospital, asserting negligence in the delayed and inadequate treatment of the vasospasm. They argued the hospital's care fell below the standard, citing insufficient blood pressure management, delayed imaging, and incomplete angioplasty. The defendant hospital contended its staff provided appropriate monitoring and timely intervention. After an unsuccessful mediation, the case settled prior to trial, with the settlement terms approved by the Court.

On November 10, 2013, in Lynnwood, Washington, a plaintiff, who was a law enforcement officer, was a passenger in a Honda Accord that was struck from behind by a Ford Explorer. The defendant driver, operating the Explorer in the scope of her employment with Special Occasions, allegedly failed to stop while reaching for her phone. The plaintiff contended the defendant's vehicle impacted the Honda three times. After the second collision, the plaintiff partially exited his vehicle, and a third impact pushed the Honda forward. The plaintiff later found the defendant driver unresponsive and secured her vehicle. The plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the defendant driver and her employer, alleging negligence and seeking damages for injuries sustained. Both sides presented expert testimony regarding vocational rehabilitation and economic damages, indicating disputes over the extent and cause of the plaintiff's injuries. The plaintiff's team also called an internal medicine expert, while the defense presented an orthopedic surgeon. During pre-trial negotiations, the plaintiff's demands ranged from $200,000 to $500,000. The defendant's offers increased from $16,000 at mediation to $350,000 mid-trial. The case proceeded to a seven-day trial, but the provided record does not specify the final verdict or settlement.

On November 17, 2020, in Kent, Washington, the plaintiff, a caregiver, was operating her 2017 Toyota Rav4. The plaintiff contended her vehicle was stopped at an intersection, waiting to make a left turn, when it was struck from the rear. The impact reportedly pushed her vehicle into oncoming traffic, where it was struck a second time and forced off the roadway into a yard, colliding with a rockery and tree. The plaintiff subsequently settled her claim against the at-fault driver for the $25,000 policy limits. Following the initial settlement, the plaintiff filed an action against her own insurer, Progressive County Mutual, seeking Underinsured Motorist (UIM) benefits. Medical experts, including an orthopedic surgeon, an internal medicine physician, a physiatrist, and a chiropractor, testified on behalf of the plaintiff, addressing alleged injuries. The plaintiff demanded $30,055, representing the UIM policy limits, while the defendant offered $3,000. The case was referred to arbitration. The final arbitration award amount was not specified in the provided summary.

A driver's vehicle was struck from behind by a utility truck in slow-moving traffic. The defense admitted fault for the collision but disputed the extent of the injuries claimed by the driver. The driver sought substantial compensation for economic and non-economic damages, while the defense requested a verdict in their favor.

On June 23, 2017, a vehicle driven by the plaintiff was struck from the rear by a Potelco utility truck in slow-moving traffic on an Oregon highway. The defendant admitted liability for causing the collision but disputed that the incident resulted in the plaintiff's claimed injuries. During the three-week trial, the plaintiff presented expert testimony from a neuropsychologist, a vocational rehabilitation and life care planner, an economist, a neuroradiologist, a neurologist, and a naturopathic medicine specialist. The plaintiff sought approximately $2.7 million in economic damages and additional non-economic damages, suggesting a total award in the range of $10 million. The defendant, who made an offer of $25,000, maintained that the accident did not cause the alleged injuries and presented its own experts, including a neuropsychologist, an economist, and a neurologist, requesting a defense verdict. The outcome of the case was not detailed in the record.