The plaintiff a waitress, was stopped in her Honda Civic, southbound, intending to turn left, when she was rear-ended by a Ford Taurus . The victim was pushed across the median into the northbound lane, when she was broadsided on the passenger’s side by a van that was driving in the course and scope of his employment. As a Maryland auto accidnet lawyer I handle many types of accidnets similar to the facts of this case.
Prior to the collision, the driver had stolen the Ford Taurus from a private home in where the homeowner had left his car unlocked and running with the keys in the ignition. Following the crash, the driver fled the scene and was apprehended a few days later. He was charged with such charges as theft, reckless driving, driving under the influence (all of which he pled guilty to), and he was sentenced to a prison term, which he served. The plaintiff was extracted from the vehicle and taken to aMedical Center’s trauma unit, where she was treated for fractures to her L2, L4 and L5 vertebrae, right clavicle, sternum and right femur, as well as a lacerated patellar tendon. She received a rod in her femur which resulted in differentiation in leg length that caused her to limp and rely upon a cane. In addition, Mee sustained impairment to her cognitive abilities, primarily compromise of her short-term memory. After her hospitalization she was transferred to a rehabilitation center where she underwent extensive physical and cognitive treatment. The plaintiff sought to recover an approximately $61,000 department of public welfare lien.
The victim sued the driver and, the van driver and corporate entity and another man (who the driver had picked up after stealing the vehicle), alleging negligence. Plaintiff and defendant settled prior to trial for his insurance policy limits of $100,000. During trial, the plaintiff settled confidentially with the vans corporation. The plaintiff then dismissed the drivers friend (who was not represented) at trial. The remaining defendant, did not attend the trial and did not file any responses; as a result, a directed verdict was entered against him on negligence, and the case was tried on the issue of causation and damages.
The plaintiff’s treating physiatrist discussed the plaintiff’s injuries and the treatment that she underwent. Although there are no immediate plans to remove the rod in her femur, he said it could be removed in the future. The physician further testified that the plaintiff would most likely develop post-traumatic arthritis and her gait disturbance would affect her back.
The plaintiff’s life-care planning expert said that she would need future diagnostic testing for the rest of her life and requires a home-health aide to assist her in caring for her 13-year-old autistic son (her other is son is 15). At the time of trial, the plaintiff relied upon the assistance of her mother, who is in her 60s, to care for her son. Permanently disabled, she sought to recover $400,000 to $800,000 in past and future lost earnings. She also sought to recover damages for past and future pain and suffering.
If you, a family member or a friend has been injured by others call my offices at 1-800-320-0080 in Rockville or Baltimore for an initial free consultation. We will not receive a fee unless we recover.