Parties Dispute the Severity of Plaintiff's Alleged Spinal Injuries
On Jan. 17, 2014, plaintiff Darlene Davis, 52, was a passenger in a sedan that was stopped in traffic on New Falls Road, at its intersection with Oxford Valley Road, in Levittown. Her car was rear-ended by another car.
June 20, 2019 at 01:55 PM
4 minute read
Davis v. Andrews
$1,000 Verdict
Date of Verdict: April 3.
Court and Case No.: C.P. Bucks No. 2015-08630.
Judge: Robert O. Baldi.
Type of Action: Motor vehicle.
Injuries: Spinal injuries.
Plaintiffs Counsel: Danielle L. Duffy, Spivack & Spivack.
Plaintiffs Expert: Robert F. Sing, family medicine, Springfield.
Defense Counsel: Geoffrey S. Peterson, Bennett, Bricklin & Saltzburg, Blue Bell.
Defense Expert: David E. Reinhardt, orthopedic surgery, Huntingdon Valley.
Comment:
On Jan. 17, 2014, plaintiff Darlene Davis, 52, was a passenger in a sedan that was stopped in traffic on New Falls Road, at its intersection with Oxford Valley Road, in Levittown. Her car was rear-ended by another car. Davis claimed neck and back injuries. Her daughter, plaintiff Sarah Davis, in her late 20s, was the driver and asserted injuries.
The Davises sued the driver, James Andrew, alleging that he was negligent in the operation of a vehicle.
Sarah Davis settled with Andrews for an undisclosed amount prior to trial. Andrews stipulated to liability, and the case was tried on the issue of damages as to Darlene Davis' claim.
Following the accident, Davis was driven to an emergency room and was examined and released. On Feb. 11, she sought treatment from her primary care physician, complaining of pain to her neck and back. Davis underwent MRIs and was diagnosed with strains and sprains to her neck and low back, and with an exacerbation of degenerative disc disease to her cervical, thoracic and lumbar spine. On March 27, Davis began a course of physical therapy that consisted of massage and exercise. She treated through January 2015. Following the therapy, Davis continued to consult with her primary care physician and complained of ongoing neck and back pain. In the fall, she presented to a pain-management doctor and received three epidural injections to her lumbar spine. Davis underwent no further treatment until April 2016, when she treated with a course of chiropractic care. Through November 2017, Davis treated with 60 sessions, which included massage and spinal manipulation. No further treatment was rendered, and Davis sought to recover a medical lien of $4,000.
Davis' expert in family medicine causally related her injuries and treatment to the accident. According to the expert, Davis suffers permanent pain and stiffness in her neck and back, and her prognosis is poor.
Davis testified that her ongoing neck and back pain has altered her life. She alleged that she is unable to travel as she had been used to and that she can no longer engage in motorcycle riding, a hobby that she and her husband shared. She sought damages for past and future pain and suffering. Davis' husband testified about her condition, which has caused him to take on more household chores. He sought damages for his claim for loss of consortium.
The defense questioned Davis' alleged injuries given her gaps in treatment. According to the defense, she waited nearly a month before seeking further medical attention after the accident, and then more than a month until she started formally treating. There were additional gaps between the completion of her physical therapy and injections, and a further gap in starting chiropractic care, the defense asserted.
The defense's expert in orthopedic surgery, who examined Davis, testified that, at most, she suffered strains and sprains that resolved within weeks of the accident. The majority of her treatment was the result of her long-standing degenerative disc disease, which was unaffected by the accident, the expert concluded.
The jury determined that Darlene Davis was entitled to $1,000.
—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
© 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 AllPa. Federal District Courts Reach Full Complement Following Latest Confirmation
The Defense Bar Is Feeling the Strain: Busy Med Mal Trial Schedules Might Be Phila.'s 'New Normal'
7 minute readFederal Judge Allows Elderly Woman's Consumer Protection Suit to Proceed Against Citizens Bank
5 minute readJudge Leaves Statute of Limitations Question in Injury Crash Suit for a Jury
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Morgan Lewis Shutters Shenzhen Office Less Than Two Years After Launch
- 2Litigating the Written Word: Parol Evidence Rule and the Gist of the Action Doctrine in Fraud Claims
- 3Why Wait? Arbitrate! The Value of Consenting to Arbitrate Your SUM Cases at NAM
- 4The Legal Status of Presidential Diaries Must Be Clarified
- 5Litigators of the Week: Shortly After Name Partner Kathleen Sullivan’s Retirement, Quinn Emanuel Scores Appellate Win for Vimeo
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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