Significance: This case is significant because the jury awarded significant money for psychological suffering in addition to pain and suffering.

FEATURED CASE FILE: Hall v. VWX Corporation

Significance: The major issue prior to settlement was whether the expert testimony of defendant’s toxicologist was admissible because the testimony purported that Lunn was not visibly intoxicated while at the restaurant, an opinion based solely on Lunn’s blood alcohol count at the time of the accident. Citing New York Court of Appeals decision, Romano v. Stanley, 90 NY2d 444, 450 (1997), holding that a toxicologist’s opinion as to whether a person was visibly intoxicated is speculative, unreliable, and inadmissible when the opinion is based solely on a person’s blood alcohol count, plaintiff successfully argued the toxicologist’s testimony should not be admitted.

FEATURED CASE FILE: John v. Getz

Significance: This Winning Case illustrates the use of the discovery process in learning and utilizing parties’ characterizations of facts in an adversarial setting. By citing instances where the defendant may have failed to follow the New York Vehicle and Traffic Law, the plaintiff positioned her case to create an air of negligence per se. Given that the defendant may have violated provisions of this statute, the issue of which party was at greater fault for the accident became muddied over the course of discovery, thereby settling due to heightened uncertainty as to what a jury would find.