National Verdicts

Find out about the most important recent cases nationwide selected by VerdictSearch regional editors from coast to coast. Choose a winning strategy based on the latest outcomes and trends in your practice area Pricing Options

Vision impaired by eyelash extension glue, patron claimed

Amount:

$9,000

Type:

Settlement

State:

Illinois

Venue:

Cook County

Court:

Cook County Circuit Court

Injury Type(s):

eye; sensory/speech-vision, impairment;
sensory/speech-vision, partial loss of

Case Type:

Professional Negligence

Case Name:

Sherie Johnson v. Jackie Nguyen and Vicky Nail Spa Inc.,
No. 2016-M1-300210

Date:

July 14, 2017

Parties

Plaintiff(s):

Sherie Johnson (Female, 60s)

Plaintiff Attorney(s):

Yao O. Dinizulu;
Dinizulu Law Group, Ltd.;
Chicago,
IL,
for
Sherie Johnson

Defendant(s):

Jackie Nguyen,

Vicky Nail Spa Inc.

Defense Attorney(s):

Margaret M. Henneman;
James M. Hoffman & Associates;
Chicago,
IL,
for
Jackie Nguyen, Vicky Nail Spa Inc.

Insurer(s):

American Family Insurance Co. for both defendants

Facts:

On Feb. 3, 2014, plaintiff Sherie Johnson, 60s, retired, went to Vicky Nail Spa on East 83rd Street in Chicago to undergo eyelash extensions. She claimed that she sustained an eye injury from glue used in the procedure. Johnson sued Vicky Nail Spa Inc. and its owner, Jackie Nguyen, alleging that the defendants were negligent in the use of an improper product, specifically the glue, while placing her eyelash extensions. Johnson‘s counsel argued that while there are appropriate types of glue typically used by spas for eyelash extensions, the defendants were using an inappropriate glue.

Injury:

Johnson claimed that the glue used by the defendants caused a loss of vision in one of her eyes. She claimed that the loss of vision, as well as blurred vision, lasted for about two weeks. Johnson treated her eye injury with three visits to a hospital and physician. Johnson claimed that she regained full vision and that her medical expenses totaled $2,639.10. She sought recovery of damages for her past medical expenses and for her past pain and suffering. Defense counsel did not actively dispute the extent of the damages. Defense counsel maintained that the plaintiff’s claimed injuries were not a result of the product used by the defendants.

Result:

The matter was settled prior to trial. The defendant’s carrier agreed to pay Johnson $9,000. The matter was settled after an arbitration, but prior to trial.

Trial Information:

Judge:

Daniel P. Duffy

Editor’s Comment:

This report is based on information that was provided by plaintiff’s counsel. Defense counsel did not return the reporter’s phone calls.