Motorcyclist Said He Took Evasive Steps to Avoid Hitting Vehicle
On Aug. 31, 2015, plaintiff Thomas Modafferi, 58, a high school football coach, was riding his motorcycle on Lower Mountain Road in New Hope. He laid down his bike.
April 16, 2020 at 03:56 PM
4 minute read
Modafferi v. Morrison
$10,000 Verdict
Date of Verdict: Oct. 29, 2019.
Court and Case No.: C.P. Bucks No. 2016-02913.
Judge: C. Theodore Fritsch Jr.
Type of Action: Motor vehicle.
Injuries: Shoulder, hip and leg injuries.
Plaintiffs Counsel: Larissa K. Staszkiw, Swartz Culleton.
Plaintiffs Expert: Bruce J. Menkowitz, orthopedic surgery, East Norriton.
Defense Counsel: Jason M. Harmon, Bennett Bricklin & Saltzburg, Blue Bell.
Defense Expert: David E. Reinhardt, orthopedic surgery, Huntingdon Valley.
Comment:
On Aug. 31, 2015, plaintiff Thomas Modafferi, 58, a high school football coach, was riding his motorcycle on Lower Mountain Road in New Hope. He laid down his bike. Modafferi claimed that a vehicle exited a driveway and drove into the road, which forced him to lay down his motorcycle to avoid striking the vehicle. He claimed injuries to his shoulder, hip and leg. Modafferi sued the vehicle's driver, Charlotte Morrison. Modafferi alleged that she was negligent in the operation of a vehicle. Modafferi's counsel argued that Morrison was negligent for exiting her driveway improperly and for failing to yield to Modafferi, who had the right of way.
The defense maintained that Modafferi was contributorily negligent, as there was no reason for him to lay down his motorcycle. Morrison testified that she was backing up and had stopped at the end of her driveway in response to Modafferi. She stated that she did not enter the road and that Modafferi laid down his bike on his own accord. The defense relied on the testimony of the responding police officer, who said that Modafferi told him that he thought Morrison was going to pull out of her driveway, prompting him to take evasive measures. However, Modafferi admitted to the officer that Morrison did not leave her driveway, the defense asserted.
Modafferi was taken by ambulance to an emergency room. He was diagnosed with a facial laceration and abrasions to his face, right shoulder and right leg. He was treated and released.
Modafferi was ultimately diagnosed with a tear of his right iliotibial band. Within a week of the accident, Modafferi presented to rehabilitation facility; he complained of pain in his right hip. He came under the care of an orthopedic surgeon, who, via an MRI, diagnosed an iliotibial band tear. For the next six months, Modafferi treated with regular physical therapy, which consisted of massage and exercise. Following the treatment, and through February 2017—a year and a half after the accident—Modafferi treated with periodic physical therapy, consulted his orthopedic surgeon and received a series of cortisone injections in his right hip. He received no further treatment.
Modafferi's orthopedic surgeon testified that the accident caused him to suffer a tear of his iliotibial band, and that he will require future physical therapy if his condition flares up. The physician determined that Modafferi suffered a permanent injury.
Modafferi testified that he continues to suffer from pain in his right hip, and that he is no longer as physically active, as he is unable to stand for long periods. Modafferi sought damages for past and future pain and suffering. His wife sought damages for her claim for loss of consortium.
The defense maintained that Modafferi was solely liable for his injuries. The defense's expert in orthopedic surgery, who examined Modafferi, testified that Modafferi made a full recovery from his injuries and that he had no ongoing limitations. The expert based his opinion on an MRI, taken sometime post-accident, showing that Modafferi's iliotibial band had healed fully.
The jury found that Morrison was negligent and her negligence was a factual cause of injury to Modafferi. Modafferi was determined to receive $10,000.
This report is based on information that was provided by defense counsel. Plaintiffs counsel did not respond to the reporter's phone calls.
—This report first appeared on 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. 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 readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Decision of the Day: Administrative Court Finds Prevailing Wage Law Applies to Workers Who Cleaned NYC Subways During Pandemic
- 2Trailblazing Broward Judge Retires; Legacy Includes Bush v. Gore
- 3Federal Judge Named in Lawsuit Over Underage Drinking Party at His California Home
- 4'Almost an Arms Race': California Law Firms Scooped Up Lateral Talent by the Handful in 2024
- 5Pittsburgh Judge Rules Loan Company's Online Arbitration Agreement Unenforceable
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