Driver Blamed Spine Injuries, Nerve Damage on Rear-Ender
On Sept. 20, 2015, plaintiff Abdelaziz Ewis, 32, owner of an electronics store, was driving a sedan on N. Roosevelt Boulevard in Philadelphia. After he stopped at a red light at Woodward Avenue he was rear-ended by a pickup truck. He claimed neck and back injuries.
December 21, 2017 at 04:21 PM
4 minute read
Ewis v. Koehler
$225,000 Settlement
Date of Verdict: Nov. 2.
Court and Case No.: C.P. Philadelphia 161202594.
Judge: Eileen P.G. Katz.
Type of Action: Motor vehicle.
Injuries: Neck and spine injuries.
Plaintiffs Counsel: Feeda R. Musitief, Fine and Staud, Philadelphia.
Plaintiffs Experts: Aaron Shapiro, plastic surgery/reconstructive surgery, Philadelphia, Steven Valentino, orthopedic surgery, King of Prussia and Steven Grossinger, neurology, Ridley Park.
Defense Counsel: Greg A. Ray, Mancheski & Bunker, Philadelphia.
Defense Expert: Harvey Smith; neurosurgery; Philadelphia.
Comment:
On Sept. 20, 2015, plaintiff Abdelaziz Ewis, 32, owner of an electronics store, was driving a sedan on N. Roosevelt Boulevard in Philadelphia. After he stopped at a red light at Woodward Avenue he was rear-ended by a pickup truck. He claimed neck and back injuries.
Ewis sued the other driver, Robert Koehler, alleging that he was negligent.
Koehler stipulated to negligence, and the suit proceeded on the issues of causation and damages.
Ewis was taken by ambulance to an emergency room, where he was treated for a head laceration, having struck the windshield at impact. The wound was debrided and required about 16 staples.
In the ensuing days, Ewis, complaining of neck and low-back pain, presented to a rehabilitation facility, where he treated with nine months of physical therapy, including massage and exercise. He consulted with an orthopedic surgeon, who via MRIs and EMGs diagnosed cervical and lumbar sprain; herniations at cervical and lumbar intervertebral discs C5-6 and L4-5; a C5-6 protrusion; bulging at C3-4 and C4-5; a closed head-injury; post-concussion syndrome; bilateral radiculopathy stemming from L5-S1; stenosis; and facet syndrome in his cervical and lumbar spine.
Ewis, who also complained of headaches and numbness in his legs, further treated with a series of epidural injections of a steroid-based painkiller. He sought to recover $6,462.70 in medical costs and about $4,000 in lost wages, having missed 35 days of work.
Ewis' orthopedic surgeon causally related his injuries and treatment to the accident. According to the physician, Ewis requires future epidural injections, medial-branch blocks, ongoing office visits, and radiofrequency ablation, all of which was estimated at $20,000 to $25,000 annually. The physician determined that Ewis was a candidate for a cervical discectomy and decompression, estimated at $95,000, and a lumbar discectomy and decompression, estimated at $100,000 to $120,000.
Ewis' expert in neurology also attributed his injuries and treatment to the accident, and confirmed that he would need future lumbar surgery.
Ewis' expert in plastic surgery opined that he suffered a permanent scar from the laceration, which resulted in a noticeable 11-centimeter scar above the hairline. The expert recommended a follicular unit extraction/transplantation, which would help to camouflage the scarred area. Ewis would require about four transplant procedures, which were estimated at $4,000 per treatment.
Ewis alleged that he cannot sit or stand for extended periods without significant pain, which prevents him from driving for extended hours. He does not sleep as well and is unable to run, exercise, or play soccer. His restrictions have affected his ability to interact with his children, whom he can no longer play with. He sought damages for past and future pain and suffering.
Koehler's expert in neurosurgery opined that any injuries suffered by Ewis were soft-tissue in nature and had resolved within months of treatment.
The parties entered into a mediated settlement for $224,958.86, prior to trial. Koehler had an insurance policy limit of $300,000.
This report is based on information that was provided by plaintiffs counsel. Defense counsel did not respond to the reporter's calls for comment.
—This report first appeared in VerdictSearch, an ALM publication
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 AllMatt's Corner: RPC 8.4(d)—Conduct Prejudicial to the Administration of Justice
2 minute readWhile Data Breaches May Lead to Years of Legal Battles, Cyberattacks Can Be Prevented
4 minute readThe Growing PFAS Morass: Why Insurance Should Cover These Products Liability Claims
9 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Less Is More: The Risks of Excessive Data Collection from Mobile Devices
- 2New Reporting Requirements in the Cybersecurity and Critical Infrastructure Sectors
- 3State Court Denies Firm's Attempts to Arbitrate Late Attorney's $10M Life Insurance Dispute
- 4Remote Work and Cybersecurity: Keeping Law Firm Data Safe Beyond the Office
- 5Prisoners Get Education Support, How About Victims?
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