Lebron v. Guzhavin

Defense Verdict

Date of Verdict: Oct. 17, 2018.

Court and Case No.: C.P. Bucks No. 2014-2292.

Judge: Robert O. Baldi.

Type of Action: Motor vehicle.

Injuries: Leg, back, neck injuries.

Plaintiffs Counsel: Jeffrey D. Schmidt and Robert A. Rovner, Rovner, Allen, Rovner, Zimmerman & Nash, Feasterville-Trevose.

Plaintiffs Expert: Randall N. Smith, orthopedic surgery; Philadelphia.

Defense Counsel: Geoffrey S. Peterson, Bennett, Bricklin & Saltzburg, Blue Bell.

Defense Experts: David E. Reinhardt, orthopedic surgery, Huntingdon Valley; Andrew H. Shaer, radiology, Jenkintown.

Comment:

On June 29, 2012, plaintiff Miguel Lebron, 34, a DJ, was stopped in traffic on Red Lion Road near Pine Road, in Lower Moreland Township, when his sport utility vehicle was rear-ended by a sedan. The sedan had been rear-ended by another a vehicle that had been rear-ended by an SUV driven by Mark Guzhavin. Lebron claimed back injuries that were a serious impairment.

Lebron sued Guzhavin, alleging that he was negligent in the operation of a vehicle. Guzhavin stipulated to negligence, and the case was tried on the issues of causation and damages.

Four days later, Lebron, complaining of neck and low-back pain, presented to his chiropractor, whom he had been treating with since 2011. In the ensuing years, and at the time of trial, Lebron treated with spinal manipulation, massage, heat and electrical stimulation. Lebron underwent MRIs and EMGs and was diagnosed with a herniation at lumbar intervertebral disc L5-S1, right-sided radiculopathy stemming from L5 and strains and sprains to his cervical and lumbar spine. Lebron further complained of numbness and tingling into his right leg. He consulted with an orthopedic surgeon and a physiatrist on one occasion, and treated with roughly hundreds of chiropractic visits. No further treatment was rendered.

Lebron's expert in orthopedic surgery causally related his injuries and treatment to the accident, and determined that he had suffered a serious impairment of a bodily function.

Lebron testified that his neck pain resolved early on in his treatment, but that he continues to experience back pain and radicular pain in his legs. This allegedly affected interacting with his daughter. According to Lebron, an avid pool player, he had to reduce his playing billiards from three times to once a week; additionally, he has to have someone help him carry his DJ equipment to gigs. Lebron sought damages for past and future pain and suffering.

The defense maintained that Lebron had been in two motor-vehicle accidents in 2011, in which he suffered neck and back injuries, and that his extensive treatment was solely the result of the two prior accidents, and not from the accident with Guzhavin.

The defense's expert in radiology compared Lebron's 2011 and 2012 imaging studies and determined that there were no interval changes. Specifically, an L5-S1 herniation was on both studies and remained unchanged, the expert noted.

The defense's expert in orthopedic surgery, who examined Lebron, testified that his complaints of back pain were unsupported by any objective findings. The expert identified an L5-S1 bulge in Lebron's 2011 and 2012 MRIs, which the expert concluded remained unchanged in both studies. The expert testified that Lebron did not suffer a serious impairment of a bodily function.

The jury rendered a defense verdict. It found that Guzhavin's negligence was a factual cause of injury to Lebron, but it also determined that Lebron did not suffer a serious impairment of a bodily function.

This report is based on information that was provided by plaintiffs and defense counsel.

—This report first appeared in VerdictSearch, an ALM publication.