Car Accident Injury

Published on: September 5, 2012

A complainant woman commenced an action for her claimed of personal injuries

by Stephen Bilkis

A complainant woman commenced an action for her claimed of personal injuries resulting from a motor vehicle accident.

According to the woman’s statement, after the accident the police responded to the scene but an ambulance did not arrive. The woman then exited her vehicle unassisted, without any pain in any part of her body and was capable of driving her vehicle from the scene to her workplace. The woman testified that she first sought medical attention when she felt some pain in her lower back and headaches. X-ray examinations were taken and chiropractic treatment was rendered by a physician. She further testified that she was treated by the same physician regularly until the winter and eventually discontinued the treatment. Thereafter, she received physical therapy two or three times per week for a few months. She also testified that she visited an orthopedist on three or four occasions.

The woman no longer receives medical treatment for injuries allegedly sustained as a result of the accident, nor does have any future medical appointments scheduled. She testified that she was confined to her bed for one day as a result of the accident and missed less than one week of work. The court notes that the testimony contradicts the woman’s bill of particulars.

Published on: September 3, 2012

The action for damages stems from personal injuries

by Stephen Bilkis

The action for damages stems from personal injuries allegedly sustained by the plaintiff as a result of an automobile accident occurred at westbound Jericho Turnpike approximately fifty (50) feet east of Wellington Road, in the County of Nassau, Town of North Hempstead, New York. The accident involved two vehicles, a 2004 Honda operated by plaintiff and a 2004 Jeep owned and operated by defendant.

A Nassau Injury Lawyer said that, at the time of the accident, plaintiff’s vehicle was traveling westbound on Jericho Turnpike. Defendant’s vehicle was also traveling westbound on Jericho Turnpike. Plaintiff contends that her vehicle was stopped in traffic in the left lane on Jericho Turnpike when the defendant’s vehicle struck her from behind, pushing her car forward approximately one car length. Plaintiff further contends that, as a result of the heavy impact, her body was caused to move forward and backward in her vehicle and said impact caused her neck and back to strike the headrest and seat. As a result of the collision, plaintiff claims that she sustained the following injuries:

Posterior disc bulges at C3-C4, C-4-C-5 and C6-C7 impinging on the anterior aspect of the spinal canal; Small joint effusion of the left knee; Menisci and ligament/ right knee; Posterior disc herniations at the L5-S1 impinging on the anterior aspect of the spinal canal and abutting the nerve roots bilaterally; Decreased range of motion of the cervical and lumbar spine; Decreased range of motion of the left knee; Left knee pain/sprain; Cervicalgia; Lumbar disc herniation at L5-S1; Pain in the limbs; Neuropathy; Cervical sprainand strain; Lumbar sprain and strain; Lumbargo; Weakness in muscles.

Published on: August 31, 2012

As a result of the collision, plaintiff claims that he sustained the following injuries

by Stephen Bilkis

The action for damages stems from personal injuries allegedly sustained by plaintiffs as a result of a pedestrian knockdown/automobile accident with defendants which at Albany Avenue, Amityville, County of Suffolk, State of New York. At the time of the accident, plaintiff Mariano Lopez was a pedestrian and defendant Ronnell Davis (“Davis”) was the operator of a 2009 Dodge Charger that was owned by rental a company, defendant ELRAC. Defendant Davis’ girlfriend had rented the vehicle from defendant ELRAC.

A Suffolk Lawyer said that, plaintiff alleged that at the time of the accident, he was a school security guard, and was struck by the front of defendants’ automobile when it was in the driveway in front of the school where he was working. It is alleged that defendants’ vehicle entered the school driveway to drop off a child and was unable to back out of said one-way driveway due to a school bus pulling behind it. Plaintiff contend that, when defendants’ vehicle was moving forward after being blocked by the school bus, it struck him in the area of his right knee, causing him to fall onto the hood of defendants’ vehicle. Defendant Davis argues that his vehicle never struck plaintiff and that the only contact between plaintiff and defendants’ vehicle was when plaintiff placed his hands on said vehicle to prevent defendant Davis from moving the vehicle any further.

As a result of the collision, plaintiff claims that he sustained the following injuries: Lumbar radiculopathy; Cervical radiculopathy; MRI of the lumbosacral spine reveals subligamentous posterior disc herniations at L4/L5 and at L5/S1 impinging on the anterior aspect of the spinal canal and on the neural foramina bilaterally; Right hip sprain; Right knee medial meniscus tear; Surgical recommendation for right knee arthroscopy; Lumbar spine lumbago;Lumbar spine HNP; EMG/NCV testing to the lower extremities revealed right S1 radiculopathy; MRI of the right knee revealed: synovial effusion knee joint, lateral patellar tilt and lateral patellar subluxation with patellofemoral chondromalacia spurring and narrowing lateral patellofemoral joint compartment, medial femorotibial joint compartment narrowing with chondromalacia, strain medical collateral ligament and motion artifact noted. Knee Chondromalacia; Knee internal derangement; Right joint effusion.

Published on: August 29, 2012

When a person is injured in a vehicle accident in New York

by Stephen Bilkis

When a person is injured in a vehicle accident in New York, they are limited by the language of the laws that apply to personal injury as far as filing for a compensable lawsuit. There are boundaries that must be adhered to as far as claims of injury are concerned. The injury must be severe as defined by the statutes and it must be permanent as defined by the statute. In order for a person to be able to prove that the injury that they have incurred is both severe and permanent, they are required to have medical proof that can be presented in a court of law.

This can be in the form of a doctor’s testimony, but that doctor must be able to provide specifics on the medical tests that were performed to back up his contention that the injury is both severe and permanent. If the doctor only provides an opinion, then the court may or may not be impressed to agree with him. However, if the doctor provides specific tests that demonstrate that the person has restricted or lost use of a member of their body, then they have probably met the criteria for the injury to be considered severe and permanent. That is not always the case.

On August 8, 2008, a woman was in the intersection of Middle Neck Road and Northern Boulevard. This intersection is located in Nassau County, New York. She was a passenger in a 2007 Lexus that was struck from behind by another vehicle. At the time of the injury, the woman got out of the car and proceeded to walk around the accident scene unaided. She even drove away from the accident scene. However, later, she went to a local hospital to receive treatment because she stated that she began to have pain in her right knee. When her right knee was examined by an orthopedist, he diagnosed her as having a meniscus tear of her right knee. The orthopedic doctor also stated that she had several other soft tissue injuries to her knee. She also claimed that she was getting headaches since the accident. She was examined by the doctor to determine if there was a spinal injury that would account for the symptoms. The doctor determined that she had suffered from a lumbar strain that restricted the range of motion to the cervical and lumbar spines.

Published on: August 27, 2012

On June 10, 2007, a woman, driving a Nissan was rear-ended by a BMW

by Stephen Bilkis

On June 10, 2007, a woman, driving a Nissan was rear-ended by a BMW as it was stopped at the intersection of Merrick Road and East Shore Drive. As a result of this accident the woman sustained a spinal injury: she had swollen discs and a severe sprain of the lumbar spine. She asserts that two weeks after the accident occurred, she was ordered to rest in bed by her Manhattan doctor. She was also confined to her home and could not go to work until after another four weeks.

She claims that after the accident, she could no longer play volleyball or do gardening. She cannot stand or sit for more than thirty minutes. Fifteen months after the accident, the woman joined a local gym where her favourite workout was on the recumbent bicycle.

The defendant owner and driver of the BMW that allegedly rear-ended her Nissan filed a motion for summary judgment. He claims that the complaint should be dismissed because the woman failed to state that the spinal injury she sustained is a serious injury. She also failed to state which classification of serious injury she falls under. There are five categories of serious injury under the Insurance Law: death, dismemberment, significant disfigurement, fracture or loss of a fetus, total loss of use of a body organ, function or system.

Published on: August 25, 2012

A man and his girlfriend rented a car from a car company and brought their kids to school

by Stephen Bilkis

A man and his girlfriend rented a car from a car company and brought their kids to school. The school’s driveway allowed cars to go only one way. When they neared the entrance and the children had gotten off, their rental car was sandwiched between two school buses that were also letting children off. When the bus in front of their rental car went forward, the couple moved their car but hit the school security guard who was standing near the front of the rental car driven by the couple.

The security guard was hit in his right knee for which reason he fell on the hood of the couple’s rental car. The defendants claim that they never struck the security guard. He stood in front of their rental car and struck the hood of the car with his palm to stop them from moving.

The security guard filed a suit in damages against the couple and against the rental car company and their insurers. He claims to have sustained serious spinal injury especially of the lower back, the hip and his right knee joint.

Published on: August 23, 2012

A man was involved in a car accident in 2002 and he sustained injury in his shoulders

by Stephen Bilkis

A man was involved in a car accident in 2002 and he sustained injury in his shoulders, neck and back. According to an MRI report his spinal injury involved bulging discs that impinged his spinal canal. He received treatment and therapy for his injury and he also received compensation for the spinal injury he sustained when he missed work for the days of his confinement until he recovered from his injury.

In 2008, the man figured in another motor vehicle accident in The Bronx. He filed a suit for damages from a personal injury he sustained when he injured his back, shoulders and neck. He claims that he is in constant pain; he has lost strength in his arms; he has lost the full range of motion in his back and neck; and cannot perform his regular daily tasks and perform his regular work.

The man sued the defendants who were owners of the motor vehicle that figured in the accident as well as their insurer. He claims that he sustained serious injury for which he demands compensation under the Insurance Law.

Published on: August 20, 2012

A police officer was finishing his shift in 1953

by Stephen Bilkis

A NYC police officer was finishing his shift in 1953. He opened the passenger door of the police car he was driving when he got to the precinct and was removing his shotgun from the car when it suddenly fired. It wounded him and he needed an operation to remove the bullet which had lodged in his abdomen.

He eventually recovered after treatment. He received compensation from the Workmen’s Compensation Board for his loss of earnings during the time of his confinement, treatment and recovery from the gunshot wound. The case was closed in 1957 when the physicians who treated him declared that there was no more disability flowing from the gunshot accident.

Nine years later, in 1962, as he was riding in his police car, he figured in a motor vehicle accident. He sustained injury to his neck and spine. The police officer was paid his salary for the several weeks of his confinement, treatment and recovery from the automobile accident. The police officer sued the owner and driver of the motor vehicle that had caused his spinal injury and the case was settled by them and compensation was duly paid for his spinal injury.

Published on: August 15, 2012

A man, age 24, alleges that at approximately 11:20 a.m., a motor vehicle

by Stephen Bilkis

A man, age 24, alleges that at approximately 11:20 a.m., a motor vehicle he owned and operated collided with another vehicle owned by a woman and operated by a man. The woman and the driver moved for an order to dismiss the man’s complaint against them.

In support of their motion to dismiss the complaint, the opponents submit an affirmed report of examination of orthopedist, neurologist, and radiologist. The opponents also submit an un-affirmed report of the man’s radiologist. The MRI’s were purportedly performed on the dates of the reports. The court notes that the report of a physician which is not affirmed or subscribed before a notary or other authorized official is not competent evidence.

The Queens orthopedist found normal range of motion, comparing the results to normal, of the man’s spine, lower extremities, left elbow and left and right hands and shoulders and found no muscle spasms. He also found normal muscle strength, sensation and reflexes. He also provides results from numerous other orthopedic tests. He diagnosed the man’s cervical radiculopathy, resolved. The thoracolumbosacral radiculopathy, bilateral shoulder contusion, left elbow contusion and bilateral hand contusion were all resolved. He noted that the MRI of the cervical spine revealed a preexisting malformation which could affect recovery.

Published on: August 9, 2012

A woman was involved in a motor vehicle accident sometime on October 9, 2009

by Stephen Bilkis

A woman was involved in a car accidentsometime on October 9, 2009 at the corner of Bellmore Avenue and Sunrise Highway in Nassau County, New York. The police arrived at the scene but no ambulance responded. The woman alighted from her car all by herself and after the initial investigation by the police the woman drove her car from the scene of the accident to her office.

The woman said she felt pain in her lower back and she experienced headaches. She went for an x-ray and consulted a doctor who recommended that she undergo treatment from a chiropractor. She went and saw the chiropractor for about a year and then she stopped seeing the chiropractor and went instead for physical therapy for a few months. She eventually stopped the physical therapy.

As of the time she filed this suit in damages, she was no longer receiving treatment for her injury. She claims that as a result of the accident, she lives in constant pain and she suffered spinal injury particularly, injury to her cervical and lumbar spine. She claims that she has lost significant motion in her spine and she asserts that this spinal injury qualifies as “serious injury.” She claims that the spinal injury has caused a limitation on her use of her spine which prohibits her from her customary daily activities.