Car Passengers Attributed Injuries to Parking-Lot Collision
In March 2014, plaintiff Rafeeq Smith, a construction site supervisor in his 30s, and plaintiff Keith Mouzon were passengers in a sport utility vehicle in a parking lot in Philadelphia.
February 22, 2018 at 05:00 PM
4 minute read
Mouzon and Smith v. Howie
$140,000 Verdict
Date of Verdict: Jan. 25.
Court and Case No.: C.P. Philadelphia No. 160202963.
Judge: Kenneth J. Powell Jr.
Type of Action: Motor vehicle.
Injuries: Neck, hip and shoulder injuries
Plaintiffs Counsel: Vincent F. Presto, Master Weinstein Moyer, Philadelphia.
Plaintiffs Expert: Matthew Marcus, chiropractic; Elkins Park.
Defense Counsel: Justin A. Schluth; Hubshman, Flood, Bullock & Dorn, Plymouth Meeting; Samuel T. LeHew, Law Office Andrew McGee; Philadelphia.
Defense Expert: Michael Brooks, neuroradiology, Thornton.
Comment:
In March 2014, plaintiff Rafeeq Smith, a construction site supervisor in his 30s, and plaintiff Keith Mouzon were passengers in a sport utility vehicle in a parking lot in Philadelphia. The SUV was driven by Lavalle Carter. As she drove past a parked sedan, the sedan reversed out of a parking space and struck the driver's side rear-quarter panel of the SUV. Smith claimed injuries to his neck, left hip, and left shoulder. Mouzon also claimed injuries.
Smith and Mouzon sued both Carter and the driver of the sedan, Sharon Howie, alleging they were negligent. They also sued Keiera Anderson, Michelle Anderson Long, and Spencer Long, who were the owners of Howie's car, and Blue Flame Group Inc., the owner of Carter's vehicle. These defendants were dismissed, prior to trial.
During court-mandated arbitration, Smith was determined to receive $33,000 against Howie, and Mouzon was determined to receive $12,500 against Howie. Howie rejected the decision, and Mouzon and Howie settled for an undisclosed amount, prior to trial.
At trial, Smith's counsel faulted Howie for not keeping a proper lookout and for not ensuring a clear, safe distance before reversing out of the space. Counsel also argued that Carter was driving too close to Howie's parked car.
Carter denied that she was driving too closely to Howie's vehicle and argued that it was Howie who caused the accident by improperly reversing and hitting his vehicle.
Howie blamed Carter for accident. Howie contended that before backing up she did not see any vehicle, so she believed the path was clear. However, as she did, Carter had stopped abruptly, which caused her to strike his vehicle.
In the days following the accident, Smith, complaining of pain to his neck, left shoulder, and left hip, presented to an emergency room, where he left without being examined, due to the long wait. In the coming days, he presented to a chiropractor, and treated for 30 visits, through October.
The majority of his care was through August. He had only one visit in September and one visit in October. Treatment included spinal manipulation and massage. Smith underwent a cervical MRI and was diagnosed with herniations to cervical intervertebral discs C3-4 and C6-7.
He was further diagnosed with strains and sprains to his neck, upper back, left shoulder, and left hip. Smith treated with pain medication and consulted with a physician on two occasions. No further treatment was rendered.
Smith's chiropractor causally related his injuries and treatment to the accident. According to the chiropractor, Smith suffered permanent weakening of the intervertebral discs surrounding the herniated discs.
Smith testified that he continues to experience of instances of throbbing and shooting pain in his neck, upper back, and left hip. He said that he has difficulty interacting with his children. Smith's wife testified that he complains of pain after sitting too long and exercising. He sought damages for past and future pain and suffering.
Howie's expert in neuroradiology opined that the alleged herniations indicated degenerative disc disease, and that Smith's imaging showed no evidence of an injury related to the accident.
The jury found Howie 80 percent liable and Carter 20 percent liable. Smith was determined to receive $140,000.
This report is based on information that was provided by plaintiffs counsel. Defense counsel did not respond to the reporter's phone calls.
—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 AllPa. Supreme Court Taps New Philadelphia Family Division Administrative Judge
3 minute readDemocrats Give Up Circuit Court Picks for Trial Judges in Reported Deal With GOP
A New State Law Is a Positive Step Forward for Judicial Security in Pennsylvania—But More Action Is Needed
5 minute readCommentary: Sen. Casey's Critical Role in Keeping Pa. Federal Courts Full
Trending Stories
- 1Getting Cameras in Federal Courts Will Take More than Logic
- 2Emerson Electric Opens Wallet to Reward New CLO for Fast Start
- 3Kirkland Hires Real Estate Finance Partners in New York
- 4Delaware Governor Names Magistrate Judge as Next Vice Chancellor
- 5Hagens Berman Accused of Withholding Share of $13M Award in Pharmaceutical Settlement
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