Complex Lawsuit Results In Million-Dollar Verdict
An employee involved in a vehicle crash while on the job recently won a nearly $1 million verdict at trial after years of litigation. The issue was complicated by several factors and the allegations in the case were unique. The woman was not suing over the crash itself, but rather she claims her employer’s workers’ compensation insurer stalled the process of getting her treatment which resulted in more pain and suffering and further injury.
In response to the complaint, the defense admitted that the plaintiff was in a vehicle crash but alleged that the plaintiff failed to take several steps that would have reduced the likelihood of injury and then failed to mitigate her injury after it occurred. Ultimately, the jury sided with the plaintiff and the insurer will now be required to pay for past and future medical expenses alongside pain and suffering damages that they contributed to.
The insurer’s defense
The insurance company claimed that the car accident wasn’t that big of a deal and that the plaintiff was not severely injured. In this case, they had to overcome the fact that the vehicle itself was completely warped and twisted in the accident. The jury had it left to their imagination how severe the plaintiff’s injuries were. In response, the defense put an expert witness on the stand that testified that one cannot determine how gravely injured a driver was by the extent of the damage on their vehicle. In other words, the defense made a generic statement in response to the allegations, but no specific testimony about the plaintiff’s injuries.
Among the allegations made against the plaintiff, the defense contended that she failed to wear a seatbelt during the accident.
Car injury lawsuits in Florida
Since Florida is a no-fault state, your injuries must be severe enough to cross a specific threshold in order to trigger the right to file a tort lawsuit. In this case, the insurer contended that the defendant’s injuries were not severe enough to trigger the tort provision under the law. Hence, the claim should be denied.
Further, the defense claims that the plaintiff had already received enough benefits from collateral sources to compensate her for the injury. The defense demanded a trial by jury but failed to convince the jury of their claims.
The case was complicated because of several entanglements under the law. Firstly, while the driver of the vehicle was on the job, the injury was the negligence of a third-party. That means that she could receive benefits from workers’ compensation, but she would also be entitled to file a lawsuit against the driver. In those cases, the exclusive remedy provision doesn’t apply, and plaintiffs can occasionally receive benefits from both parties and the workers’ compensation insurer can pursue compensation from the auto insurance company.
Talk to a Tampa Personal Injury Attorney Today
The Tampa personal injury attorneys at the Matassini Law Firm helps those who have been injured due to the negligence of another party file suit and recover damages related to their injuries, lost wages, medical expenses, pain and suffering, and reduced quality of life. Call today to learn more.