Case details

Defense: Low impact rear-ender not cause of aggravation

SUMMARY

$10000

Amount

Verdict-Plaintiff

Result type

Not present

Ruling
KEYWORDS
back, lower back, neck
FACTS
On July 25, 2011, plaintiff Lee Rider, a pool contractor, was traveling in his work truck on Highway 1 in Santa Cruz when he was rear-ended by a Cadillac CTS operated by Rosaura Medina. Rider claimed to his neck and back. Rider sued Medina, alleging the defendant was negligent in the operation of the Cadillac. Medina conceded liability, but her counsel noted that the only visible damage to Rider’s truck was a slight dent to the left rear bumper, whereas Medina’s right front was damaged. Defense counsel noted that the plaintiff’s accident reconstruction expert estimated Rider’s work truck to weigh 6,800 pounds. Counsel contended that, specifically, Rider’s truck was a three-quarter ton vehicle with a steel reinforced bumper, while Medina’s Cadillac was estimated to only weigh around 3,300 pounds. Thus, the defense’s biomechanical expert opined that the collision was the equivalent of a mosquito hitting a brick wall., Rider claimed an aggravation/exacerbation of pre-existing conditions to his neck and lower back. He subsequently presented for medical treatment two weeks after the collision. Rider contended that as a pool contractor, he would hire subcontractors to do certain aspects of the job, but in order to save money he would perform some of the subcontracting work himself. He claimed that he previously planned on working for the next 10 years, but that due to his aggravated , he was no longer able to do the work himself. Rider alleged that as a result, he was unable to recovery his full earnings since 2011. For example, he claimed he paid approximately $35,000 to the subcontractors for work he could not perform in 2012. Thus, Rider sought recovery of $350,000 in lost wages and just over $6,000 in medical expenses, which included $6,000 in diagnostic studies and about $640 for some acupuncture treatment. He also sought recovery of damages for his pain and suffering. Defense counsel noted Rider’s previous medical history, including a 2000 incident, in which Rider’s head and neck were shoved into a trailer tire after a 2,800-pound pool tethered to a crane that he was guiding slipped from its moorings and dropped on his back; a 2004 surgery, in which Rider underwent a cervical fusion at the C5-6 level; a 2006 incident, in which Rider fell off a ladder and suffered a compound fracture in a hand; a 2007 incident, in which Rider was admittedly injured in a side collision motor vehicle accident; and a 2009 surgery, in which Rider had a lumbar discectomy at the L3-4 level. Defense counsel also noted that in each incident that occurred prior to the 2011 rear-ender, Rider was eventually able to return to work after some duration of treatment and rest. However, counsel contended that after the subject accident, Rider’s wife forbid her husband to any more manual labor. Thus, defense counsel asserted that Rider was not working because he was paying heed to his wife and that it was not due to any medical justification not to work. Defense counsel contended that MRIs were completed for Rider’s 2009 back surgery, after which Rider was diagnosed with disc disease/degeneration at C6-7, but that Rider never addressed the condition. Defense counsel noted that Rider’s treating orthopedic surgeon had given Rider work limitations after each surgery prior to the 2011 accident, which Rider admitted he did not adhere to. Counsel asserted that Rider had a limited range of motion in his neck due to his prior fusion surgery and noted that the plaintiff’s physical medicine expert opined that Rider’s problems with his neck were due to his pre-existing C6-7 condition, which Rider never addressed. However, defense counsel contended that Rider could continue working now by rotating his body, instead of his neck, and noted that the plaintiff’s physical medicine expert opined that despite Rider’s reduced range of motion in his neck (from left to right and up and down), Rider could still perform plumbing and electrical work, as well as excavation work using an excavator or a Bobcat. In addition, defense counsel noted a letter to a physician in 2004, after Rider’s neck surgery, where Rider stated that he has pain after he does work and where the physician responded that Rider was not to push, pull, carry or lift 50 pounds, as well as other limitations on his work. Counsel also noted an e-mail found in Rider’s medical records, in which he wrote, “We just got done work at job site. Come out and do yours.” In response, Rider admitted that he did not follow his physician’s instructions from 2006 to 2008, but that in reference to the e-mail in his medical records, he denied he did any work.
COURT
Superior Court of Santa Cruz County, Santa Cruz, CA

Recommended Experts

NEED HELP? TALK WITH AN EXPERT

Get a FREE consultation for your case