Haskins v. Park

Defense Verdict

Date of Verdict: Jan. 9.

Court and Case No.: C.P. Philadelphia No. 180602017.

Judge: Frederica A. Massiah-Jackson.

Type of Action: Motor vehicle.

Injuries: Back, neck injuries.

Plaintiffs Counsel: Michael A. Pungitore, Spear, Greenfield, Richman, Weitz & Taggart.

Plaintiffs Expert: Michael R. McCoy, family medicine; Philadelphia.

Defense Counsel: Catherine F. Maloney, Amy F. Loperfido & Associates, Philadelphia.

Defense Expert: Richard D. Lackman, orthopedic surgery; Camden, New Jersey.

Comment:

On Jan. 13, 2017, plaintiff Meredith Haskins, 48, was driving on Roberts Avenue, near its intersection at Wissahickon Avenue, in North Philadelphia. While she was stopped in traffic, her car's rear end was struck by a trailing car that was being driven by Chiyna Park. Haskins claimed that she suffered injuries of her back and neck.

Haskins sued Park. The lawsuit alleged that Park was negligent in the operation of her vehicle. During court-mandated arbitration, Haskins was determined to receive $3,500. Haskins appealed the decision. At the ensuing trial, Haskins testified that the impact from Park's car pushed her car into the rear of a preceding vehicle.

The defense maintained that the impact from Park's vehicle did not cause Haskins' car to strike another vehicle. The defense did not dispute that the front bumper of Haskins' car made contact with a preceding vehicle, but it contended that the impact was not a result of the collision caused by Park's vehicle.

A few days after the accident, Haskins, complaining of neck and back pain, visited an emergency room. She was examined and released.

Haskins was ultimately diagnosed with bulges of her C2-3, C4-5 and C5-6 intervertebral discs, protrusions of her L4-5 and L5-S1 discs, lumbar radiculopathy, and cervical and lumbar strains and sprains.

Within a week of the accident, Haskins commenced a course of physical therapy. Through July 2017, Haskins treated with massages and exercises. She also underwent MRI scans and electromyographies.

Haskins' treating family doctor opined that Haskins suffered serious impairment of a bodily function of her neck and lower back.

Haskins testified that her continuing neck and back pain makes it difficult for her to perform household chores, take long walks or ride a bicycle. She sought damages for past and future pain and suffering.

The defense's expert in orthopedic surgery testified that his examination of Haskins was normal and that Haskins may have suffered cervical and lumbar strains and sprains, but that they would have resolved within weeks with treatment. The expert concluded that Haskins' treatment was excessive and that she did not suffer serious impairment of a bodily function.

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

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 in VerdictSearch, an ALM publication