Grose v. Progressive Advanced Insurance

$15,000 Verdict

Date of Verdict: Feb. 12.

Court and Case No.: C.P. Washington No. 2017-0470.

Judge: Katherine B. Emery.

Type of Action: Motor vehicle.

Injuries: Hip injury.

Plaintiffs Counsel: Ryan M. Flaherty, Simon & Simon, Pittsburgh.

Plaintiffs Expert: John M. Gibbons, orthopedic surgery, Washington.

Defense Counsel: Aaron H. Weiss, Zimmer Kunz, Pittsburgh.

Defense Expert: Brian F. Jewell, orthopedic Surgery, Pittsburgh.

Comment:

On July 31, 2015, plaintiff Darlene Grose, 59, was driving on West Beau Street, near its intersection at Jefferson Street, in Washington. While her car was stopped, its rear end was struck by a trailing vehicle. Grose claimed that she suffered an injury of a hip.

The other motorist's insurer paid $50,000 to settle Grose's claim stemming from the accident, but Grose claimed that her accident-related damages exceeded that amount.

Grose sued her insurer, Progressive Advanced Insurance Co., a subsidiary of Progressive Casualty Insurance Co. Grose alleged that the other motorist was negligent in the operation of his or her vehicle. She sought recovery of underinsured-motorist benefits. Defense counsel conceded liability. The trial addressed damages.

Grose visited an emergency room. She complained of pain in her neck and left hip. She underwent minor treatment.

Grose was ultimately diagnosed with an aggravation of preexisting arthritis in her left hip.

Within days of the accident, Grose commenced a course of physical therapy, which consisted of massages and exercises. The treatment lasted about six months. Grose also underwent administration of a painkilling injection.

In April 2016, Grose underwent a left hip replacement. Following the treatment, she underwent approximately three months of physical therapy, at which point she fully recovered.

Grose testified that, before undergoing the hip replacement, she suffered pain and difficulty walking. She claimed that the surgery improved her condition, but that she continues to experience pain and limitations in her left hip. Grose's treating surgeon opined that Grose suffered serious impairment of a bodily function in her left hip.

Grose sought recovery of damages for past and future pain and suffering.

The defense maintained that Grose had long-standing issues with her left hip. On the morning of the accident, she had presented to a pain clinic and complained of excruciating hip pain, which she rated 10 out of 10 in severity.

The defense's expert orthopedist testified that, irrespective of the accident, Grose would have needed a hip replacement due to her preexisting arthritis.

The jury found that the underlying tortfeasor's negligence was a factual cause of Grose's injury. It also found that Grose suffered serious impairment of a bodily function. Grose was determined to receive $15,000, but the award was completely offset by the money recovered via the settlement with the underlying tortfeasor.

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

—This report first appeared in VerdictSearch, an ALM publication