Recently, before the Honorable Benjamin Nevius of the Court of Common Pleas of Berks County Pennsylvania, Paul Gambone obtained a defense verdict on behalf of his client. After 3 ½ hours of deliberations, the jury returned a verdict in favor of the defendant by finding no factual cause between the motor vehicle accident and plaintiff’s’ allegations of damages. The primary issues for the jury were plaintiff’s injury allegations and future medical expenses.
Plaintiff alleged that the car accident aggravated pre-existing degenerative issues in his left shoulder which required him to undergo arthroscopic surgery with debridement synovectomy one year after the accident. There were also numerous pain injections into his shoulder. Plaintiff’s medical expert was the orthopedic surgeon who performed the surgery. The doctor testified that all of plaintiff injuries and treatment, including the surgery and injections, were causally related to the accident involving the defendant. Additionally, the doctor testified that it was likely that the plaintiff would need to undergo further treatment in the future which could include pain injections, rotor cuff repair, and shoulder replacement surgery. Plaintiff’s life care planner testified that the costs of the future injections would be $11,000, the rotator cuff surgery would be $130,000, and shoulder replacement surgery would be $150,000.
Plaintiff admitted that he had previous problems with his left shoulder which had required two prior surgical procedures, but he testified that he had been pain free a year prior to the accident. Plaintiff also testified that it was very likely to undergo the shoulder surgery recommended by his surgeon in the next year due to the daily pain he was now experiencing.
The defense presented an orthopedic surgeon who examined the plaintiff. It was his opinion that if plaintiff had suffered any injury from the accident, it was only a sprain and strain of his left shoulder which had resolved. He disputed the opinion of plaintiff’s medical expert that plaintiff required any further treatment including surgery as a result of the accident.
Prior to the trial, the settlement demand was defendant’s bodily injury policy limits of $100,000. The settlement offer was $17,000.
Post Trial motions were not filed.
Questions regarding this matter can be directed to Paul S. Gambone.
