Drag-Racing Case That Brought $39 Million Verdict Settles After Trial
Hussein Agiz was 18 when he went out for an evening with friends to watch drag racing in the 10-acre Heller Industrial Park. But as he rode his bike down one of the straight, flat roads, he found himself between two cars speeding in opposite directions. The one that hit him exploded into a ball of fire, as did his bike, according to the complaint he filed against the owner of the property, Heller Industrial Parks Inc.
August 05, 2019 at 12:09 PM
4 minute read
After multiple verdicts and appeals, a young man who was run over on his motorcycle by a drag-racing car in an Edison industrial park six years ago has decided to end the litigation for a $6.3 million payment, according to documents.
Hussein Agiz was 18 when he went out for an evening with friends to watch drag racing in the 10-acre Heller Industrial Park. But as he rode his bike down one of the straight, flat roads, he found himself between two cars speeding in opposite directions. The one that hit him exploded into a ball of fire, as did his bike, according to the complaint he filed against the owner of the property, Heller Industrial Parks Inc.
Agiz went through 10 surgeries, and the loss of an arm and a leg. He suffered broken bones all over his body. He still suffers from phantom pain from the amputations that can’t be relieved with medication, according to court filings.
Yet Agiz recovered enough to continue his education, graduating with an engineering degree from Rutgers University. He earned praise even from judges who reviewed appeals and noted his desire to learn biomedical engineering so he could design better prosthetic devices for himself and other amputees.
Agiz’s suit included a claim against Heller, alleging that the company failed to take steps to address a known, yearslong issue of after-hours drag racing on the property.
In February 2019, Agiz won a $39 million jury verdict following a two-day damages trial in Middlesex County Superior Court. The sum was for noneconomic damages. In accordance with prior trial proceedings in the case, only 40% of the award was apportioned to Heller, with the other 60% apportioned to the drag-racing driver who struck him. (In the prior trial, in 2016, the jury found Heller was negligent and proximately caused the accident. Included in the sum awarded to Agiz at that time was $4.5 million for medical expenses.)
Appeals were still pending until Agiz signed the agreement with Heller on July 23, according to a copy of the settlement agreement obtained by the Law Journal.
The terms included releasing Heller of all liability, which the company continued to dispute. In the document, Heller denied all allegations of negligence or other responsibility for drag racing on the property. Heller and its related entities are insured by Travelers, the document noted.
In a phone call Thursday, Agiz’s attorney, Bruce Nagel of Nagel & Rice in Roseland, confirmed that the case had settled but declined to comment further, citing a confidentiality agreement.
Steven Haddad of the Haddad Law Firm in Woodbridge, who originated the case, said, “I’m happy for my client.”
Heller was defended by David Dering of Leary, Bride, Mergner & Bongiovanni in Cedar Knolls. He didn’t return calls seeking comment.
After winning the $39 million verdict in February, Nagel called Agiz “one of the most inspirational men I’ve ever met in my life.”
“He’s worked to put himself through college. He wants to be an advocate for disabled people,” Nagel said at the time. “He’s an inspiration to everyone who meets him. He’s an absolutely extraordinary human being.”
In the first trial in the case, in 2016, the jury found Heller liable and awarded Agiz $4.5 million for medical expenses. The jury also awarded noneconomic damages, but Agiz’s counsel challenged that portion of the verdict—$2.3 million—on the basis that the jury failed to consider some of the judge’s instructions regarding calculating the present value of pain and suffering. The judge agreed, and granted a new trial. The defense appealed, but the Appellate Division in May 2018 affirmed and upheld the order for a new trial on noneconomic damages only. That led to the February 2019 trial.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllSocial Media Policy for Judges Provides Guidance in a Changing World
3 minute readBank of America's Cash Sweep Program Attracts New Legal Fire in Class Action
3 minute read'Something Really Bad Happened': J&J's Talc Bankruptcy Vote Under Attack
7 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Commission Confirms Three of Newsom's Appellate Court Picks
- 2Judge Grants Special Counsel's Motion, Dismisses Criminal Case Against Trump Without Prejudice
- 3GEICO, Travelers to Pay NY $11.3M for Cybersecurity Breaches
- 4'Professional Misconduct': Maryland Supreme Court Disbars 86-Year-Old Attorney
- 5Capital Markets Partners Expect IPO Resurgence During Trump Administration
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250