Merrill v. Palys

$32,212.55 Verdict

Date of Verdict: Aug. 8.

Court and Case No.: C.P. Philadelphia No. 171102873.

Judge: Vincent L. Johnson.

Type of Action: Motor vehicle.

Injuries: Neck and back injuries.

Plaintiffs Counsel: Michael F. McCartin, Murray L. Greenfield & Associates.

Defense Counsel: Paul G. Kirk, Gerolamo McNulty Divis & Lewbart, Philadelphia.

Comment:

On June 10, 2016, plaintiff Paul Merrill, 60, a driver, was driving on Clark Street, near its intersection at Lott Street, in Philadelphia. While he was proceeding through the intersection, his car's right side was struck by a car that was being driven by Peggy Palys, who was traveling on Lott Street. Merrill claimed that he suffered injuries of his back and neck.

Merrill sued Palys. He alleged that Palys was negligent in the operation of her vehicle.

During court-mandated arbitration, Merrill was determined to receive $22,610.80, which Palys' counsel appealed. The parties agreed to try the case pursuant to Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1311.1. Under the rule, a verdict is capped at $25,000 and expert witness reports are submitted into evidence instead of live testimony by the expert witnesses.

At trial, Merrill testified that he stopped at a stop sign and ensured a clear, safe distance before entering the intersection. He claimed that he was about halfway through the intersection when Palys' vehicle broadsided him. His counsel cited the initial statement that Palys gave about the accident, in which she said that she had stopped at the stop sign, looked left and then looked right, but did not look to her left again before entering the intersection.

The defense maintained that Merrill was negligent. Palys testified that she had entered the intersection before Merrill did and that Merrill failed to yield to her, thereby causing the collision.

Merrill was taken by a family member to an emergency room. He was examined and released.

Merrill was ultimately diagnosed with an aggravation of herniated discs at C7-8 and L4-5 and bulging at L2-3.

A few days post-accident, Merrill presented to a chiropractor, with whom he treated for approximately nine months. His treatment consisted of massages and spinal manipulation. During that time, Merrill underwent MRIs of his neck and lower back. No further treatment was rendered.

Merrill testified that, in the months following the accident, his neck and back pain prevented him from performing certain activities of daily living, such as mowing the lawn. He claimed that he continues to experience pain in his cervical and lumbar spine. He sought recovery of damages for past and future pain and suffering.

The defense cited Merrill's medical records that documented three prior accidents in which Merrill complained of neck and lower back pain. The defense argued that Merrill's complaints and treatment following his accident with Palys were solely due to pre-existing conditions. In a report, the defense's expert in radiology concluded that Merrill's post-accident MRIs showed pre-existing pathology that was absent of traumatic injury.

The jury found that Palys was negligent with regard to the accident and that her negligence was a factual cause of injury to Merrill. The jury determined that Merrill's damages totaled $32,212.55, which was reduced to the agreed-upon cap of $25,000.

This report is based on information that was provided by plaintiff's counsel. Defense counsel did not respond to calls for comment.

—This report first appeared in VerdictSearch, an ALM publication