Montco Jury Awards $800K in County's Largest Reported UIM Verdict
According to attorneys representing the plaintiff and a survey of The Legal archives, the award is apparently the largest UIM verdict from Montgomery County.
March 06, 2018 at 05:40 PM
3 minute read
Photo: Shutterstock.com
A Montgomery County jury has awarded $800,000 for an underinsured motorist claim after a woman was injured when her car was struck in a broadside collision. According to attorneys representing the plaintiff and a survey of The Legal archives, the award is apparently the largest UIM verdict from Montgomery County.
A jury in Montgomery County Court of Common Pleas Judge Gail Weilheimer's courtroom returned the verdict March 1 in Kady v. Encompass Insurance for breach of contract. Following the award, the lawsuit is now teed up for another trial on plaintiff Karin Kady's bad-faith claims.
Attorney Timothy Daly of Daly & Clemente, who, along with his partner Michael Clemente, represented Kady, said insurance companies generally don't see suburban juries as plaintiff-oriented, but ”Montgomery County is changing, I think that's fair to say, and Encompass Insurance and other insurance companies need to treat people fairly.”
“We are very much looking forward to prosecuting the bad-faith claim, given the size of the verdict,” Daly said.
The lawsuit stemmed from an October 2013 collision where Kady's car was struck in the passenger door by the front end of another vehicle. The crash, which took place in the parking lot of the King of Prussia Mall, caused more than $8,500 in damage, and the car could not be driven from the scene. Kady allegedly suffered back injuries that required surgery as a result of the accident, and eventually settled with the driver involved in the collision for $45,000.
Kady sued Encompass Insurance seeking recovery of underinsured motorist coverage, but the carrier balked and, according to Encompass' pretrial memo, contested Kady's claimed injuries, noting that she had a long history of back problems prior to the accident.
Encompass' pretrial memo contended that there was no indication the October 2013 accident aggravated or accelerated her spinal injuries, and that Kady only suffered sprains and strains that eventually resolved. Encompass further argued that the surgery was necessitated by her prior injuries.
Kady countered that, although she had pre-existing back injuries, she had been fine before the accident, and studies showed she suffered a lumbar disc bulge, spondylosis and bilateral stenosis. She treated with pain killers and physical therapy before undergoing surgery.
A unique factor in the case was that a doctor initially hired to perform an independent medical examination on Kady ultimately determined that she had suffered a serious injury and that she should undergo surgery. The doctor, Dr. Michael Kurd, eventually began treating Kady and performed the surgery on her.
Encompass sought to bar Kurd from testifying at trial about his prior independent medical examination, but the judge denied those efforts and allowed Kurd to testify about the issue.
That testimony, according to Clemente, was very persuasive to the jury.
“Seeing the insurance company not taking the word of their own doctor really made the jury want to send a message,” Clemente said.
The verdict was eventually molded to $750,000 to reflect the prior settlement.
Andrew Kramer of Kane, Pugh, Knoell, Troy & Kramer, who represented Encompass Insurance, did not return a message seeking comment.
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
© 2025 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 All'Taking the Best' of Both Firms, Ballard Spahr and Lane Powell Officially Merge
6 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Courts, Lawyers Press On With Business as SoCal Wildfires Rage
- 2Florida, a Political Epicenter, Is the Site of Brownstein Hyatt's 13th Office
- 3Law Firms Close Southern California Offices Amid Devastating Wildfires
- 4Lawsuit alleges racial and gender discrimination led to an Air Force contractor's death at California airfield
- 5Holland & Knight Picks Up 8 Private Wealth Lawyers in Los Angeles
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