Attorneys Wayne Tartline and Chang Zhou recently obtained a defense verdict in Gwinnett County
By Wayne Tartline July 15, 2024 Articles
On June 26, 2024, Bovis, Kyle, Burch & Medlin partner Wayne S. Tartline, working with associate Chang Zhou obtained a defense verdict in an auto collision case in the State Court of Gwinnett County after three days of trial.
Plaintiffs, husband and wife, claimed that defendant driver and his employer caused a collision which led to debilitating injuries and over $100,000.00 in total medical costs. The wife who was the passenger in plaintiffs’ vehicle claimed that the collision caused herniations of discs in her neck and incurred over $15,000.00 in medical bills which included an epidural steroid injection. The husband, driver, claimed that the collision caused herniations of discs in his low-back, but also claimed a full thickness rent type tear of his right rotator cuff. He was treated with facet injections and claimed that the injuries caused would require shoulder surgery at a cost of $78,936.00; his total medical special damages would be in excess of $107,000.00. The plaintiffs’ treatments, surgical recommendation and expert testimony that the collision caused their injuries were provided by a national orthopedic medical practice.
At trial in Gwinnett County State Court, the plaintiffs testified that their life activities were significantly limited due to the injuries sustained in the collision. Plaintiffs asked for an award of damages of $286,000.00 or more.
The defense presented expert medical testimony calling into question whether or not the claimed injuries, including the rotator cuff tear were actually related to the collision. The defense was also assisted by expert testimony from biomechanical engineer Dr. Niky Zaragoza-Rivera, whose forensic investigation, and amazing command of the facts of the case, convinced the jury that the forces and mechanisms required for the injuries claimed were not present in this collision.
After only an hour of deliberations, the jury returned a verdict in favor of the remaining defendant driver (his employer was dismissed from the case on a motion for directed verdict). Although the jury did find that the defendant driver was 90% at fault for causing the collision, the jury awarded no damages to either plaintiff.
Read More