Kings County, New York, Personal Injury Negligence Settles

A legal case stemmed from a motor vehicle accident. Few details were available regarding the specifics of the incident, the claims filed, or the outcome of the proceedings. The defense in the case reportedly engaged an expert specializing in actuarial services and forensic economics. This expert's areas of consultation included the valuation of personal injury, wrongful death, lost wages, and earnings capacity.

A 2018 Jeep motor vehicle, operated by the defendant and owned by a rental car company, rear-ended a 2011 Lexus operated by the plaintiff at Atlantic Avenue, near New York Avenue, in Kings County, New York. The plaintiff alleged that the collision caused serious and permanent personal injuries, special damages, and economic loss. The plaintiff subsequently filed a vehicular liability action in the Supreme Court of New York, Kings County, asserting claims of negligence against the defendant. The defendant denied the allegations, asserting affirmative defenses that included assumption of risk, culpable conduct, collateral source indemnification, and failure to wear seat belts or mitigate damages. The parties ultimately filed a stipulation of discontinuance of the action with prejudice, concluding the case.

An individual pedestrian was struck by a vehicle owned by the Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification Corporation and operated by an unknown driver. The incident occurred at or near the intersection of 110 Street and Liberty Avenue in Queens County, New York. The pedestrian reportedly sustained severe personal injuries, including pain, disability, and emotional distress, and subsequently filed a vehicular liability action against the corporation. The plaintiff alleged the collision resulted from the defendant's negligence, citing the vehicle operator's failure to maintain proper control and to stop at the scene of the accident. The defendant, in its answer, denied negligence and asserted affirmative defenses, including culpable conduct by the plaintiff, failure to mitigate damages, and claims barred by the application of Texas Statute, among others. The parties ultimately settled their claims through a mutual agreement, leading to a stipulation of discontinuance of the action with prejudice.

On October 15, 2019, a collision occurred on Interstate 95 near the White Plains Road exit in New York. A vehicle operated by the plaintiff driver, carrying a plaintiff passenger, was involved in a crash with another vehicle. The defendant driver operated the second vehicle, registered in Florida, with the permission and knowledge of the defendant's employer and within the scope of employment. The plaintiffs filed a case alleging the defendant driver's negligence was the sole cause of the collision. They claimed the defendant driver's careless and reckless vehicle operation created a hazardous situation, directly causing the incident. The record indicated the collision was attributed entirely to the defendants' negligence, with no contributory fault found on the part of the plaintiffs. Both plaintiffs reportedly sustained severe and permanent personal injuries. The injuries met the criteria for serious injuries under New York Insurance Law, exceeding the scope of typical no-fault insurance coverage. The available record did not detail the case's final outcome.

In December 2016, a collision occurred in Long Island City, Queens, when a food cart operator's SUV was struck by another vehicle at an intersection. The plaintiff, driving westbound on 48th Avenue, claimed his vehicle was hit on the right side by the defendant's car, which was traveling on 36th Street. The plaintiff alleged the defendant ignored a stop sign governing entry to the intersection, while the plaintiff's path was not controlled by a traffic device. The plaintiff subsequently filed a lawsuit, alleging negligence by the defendant. A motion for summary judgment on liability was granted in favor of the plaintiff, and the case proceeded to address damages. The plaintiff claimed to have suffered injuries to his back, neck, and shoulder, including aggravation of pre-existing degenerative spinal conditions, disc herniations, and multiple tears in his right shoulder. He underwent several surgeries, including arthroscopic shoulder surgery and two spinal procedures (microdiscectomy and a discectomy with other spinal interventions), in addition to approximately three years of conservative treatment. The plaintiff sought recovery for past and future medical expenses, past and future lost earnings, and damages for pain and suffering, asserting that his injuries resulted in residual pain, weakness, reduced range of motion, and an inability to perform his job duties. The defense contended that the collision was minor and could not have caused the extensive injuries claimed by the plaintiff. A defense expert radiologist opined that post-accident scans did not show a herniated disc and suggested any confirmed injuries stemmed from a prior motor-vehicle accident in 2001. The parties ultimately reached a pretrial settlement totaling $875,000. The defendant's insurer tendered its primary policy limit of $500,000 and paid an additional $375,000 from an excess policy.