Successes

$1.16 Million for Complex Four Car Accident Reconstruction

Lawyers at Adelman Hirsch & Connors represented the estate of an elderly gentleman who was killed (and his widow, who was seriously injured) in a four-car collision.

The car in front of our client’s car, traveling in the same lane, collided with the first of two vehicles racing towards our client’s car. As a result of that first collision, the oncoming car skidded along the road and crashed head-on into our client’s car.

The issue in the case was which of the two cars that collided in front of our client’s car was slightly over the centerline of the road. Because each of the parties had a different claim as to how the collision occurred, each presented testimony from accident reconstruction experts who, based on the physical evidence, offered their opinions as to how the collision occurred.

Because of the complexity of the case the trial lasted 16 weeks. The jury returned a verdict in favor of our clients totaling $1.16 million.

Jury Awards $228,000 in Highway Collision: Defendant’s Final Offer to Settle Was $6,500

Our Connecticut Personal Injury Attorneys represented a Connecticut attorney who was injured as a result of a motor vehicle collision that occurred on April 19, 2016 on 1-84 East in Plainville. The defendant crossed the entire three lanes of travel, from the left lane to the right lane, and struck, head on, Plaintiff’s vehicle on its driver’s side. Our client’s vehicle sustained heavy damage and Defendant’s vehicle was totaled. Defendant admitted liability only after jury selection, the afternoon before trial.

The issue in this case was the extent and value of our client’s injuries. Our client testified that all of her injuries had resolved except for the left shoulder injury which persists to this day.

Defendant challenged the extent and the value of these injuries.

Though there was no permanency rating by a treating physician, the jury was free to infer permanency based on evidence that the effects of her injuries continue up to the present day. Our client sought only non-economic damages as she did not seek compensation for medical bills, lost wages or property damage. This means that the client was solely seeking recovery for past and future pain and suffering, the loss or reduction of the enjoyment of life’s activities and mental and emotional distress caused by the collision. There is no mathematical formula that the law prescribes on the jury to calculate these non-economic damages.

The case was tried by Joseph Krevolin, one of our Connecticut Personal Injury Lawyers. Jury selection, which proved to be the most important part of the trial lasted two days, and evidence lasted one day. Our client was the only person to testify at trial, except for one question asked to the defendant on cross examination. Defense counsel opted to not call a single witness.

At the close of evidence and argument, the jury deliberated, and returned their verdict in about 45 minutes, in favor of the plaintiff in the amount of $228,000, which was $221,500 greater than the insurance company’s final offer of $6,500.

Our Connecticut Personal Injury Attorneys work as a team to achieve all of our notable successes. One trial tactic that is always approached with a team mentality is filing an “offer of compromise”, which is an official offer to settle with the defense that is filed with the court. If the specific guidelines of the offer of compromise are followed, a jury verdict that is greater than the offer of compromise imposes an additional 8% interest on the total award. This means that, in this case, because the jury’s verdict was greater than our offer of compromise, our Connecticut Trial Lawyers were able to collect over $15,000 on top of the $228,000 verdict for our client.

$12 Million Verdict for Failure to Obtain Informed Consent

We represented a couple who were looking forward to having their first child. When our client was in her 18th week of pregnancy, she went to her doctor’s office for a routine prenatal visit. It is the standard of care that at this stage of a woman’s pregnancy her health care provider should offer her an Alpha-Fetoprotein (AFP) test.

The Alpha-Fetoprotein test is a test which may detect birth defects. Most women elect to have the test because it enables them to consider ending the pregnancy if their child has severe birth defects; or, in order to better prepare for the child birth process. Some women elect not to have the test. The health care provider should get the patient’s informed consent to have or not have the test. Informed consent is a duty imposed by law on health care providers that requires them to inform a patient of the risks and benefits of a medical test or procedure so that the patient can make an informed decision about whether or not to have the test or procedure.

At the critical office visit our client was seen by a midwife. The midwife did not inform our client about the AFP test and did not offer her the test. The day after the office visit a nurse from the doctor’s office called our client and offered her the AFP test. However, the nurse did not properly inform our client about the risks and benefits of the test. Our client declined to have the AFP test.

Our client gave birth to a baby with birth defects. We brought suit against the doctor’s office claiming that the midwife had failed to properly inform our client about the risks and benefits of the AFP test and that our client’s decision not to have the AFP test was therefore not an informed decision.

The jury returned a verdict in favor of our clients, the mother and father, in the amount of $12,000,000.

Read an article in the Connecticut Law Tribune about this verdict.

$6 Million Verdict for Failure to Diagnose Throat Cancer

We represented the Estate of a man whose doctor failed to diagnose his throat cancer. Our client had gotten a Positron Emission Tomography [PET] scan which showed an area of increased uptake, which is a sign of cancer. His doctor performed a fiberoptic examination of the inside of our client’s throat, but this type of fiberoptic examination does not always reveal a small growth. The standard of care, in order to rule out cancer, is to do a follow-up PET scan and fiberoptic examination within three months. The doctor failed to recommend such follow-up.

A year later our client’s cancer became symptomatic. The cancer was diagnosed and aggressively treated, but it was too late. He died two years later, at age 71.

The jury awarded $6 million to our client’s Estate and his wife in compensation for his wrongful death.

Read an article in the Connecticut Law Tribune about this verdict.

$2.2 Million Verdict for Botched Gall Bladder Surgery

We represented the estate and widow of a 64-year-old artist who died following gallbladder surgery.

Our client went to the hospital emergency room with severe abdominal pain. He was diagnosed with gallstone pancreatitis. Three days later, a surgeon performed a laparoscopic cholecystectomy to remove his gallbladder. As part of the surgery, the cystic duct, which connects the gallbladder to the common bile duct, had to be cut and clipped to prevent bile from leaking into his abdomen.

Our client was discharged from the hospital the day after surgery. A week later, he went to his surgeon’s office for a post-operative visit. He complained of pain and his blood tests showed his liver function tests were above normal limits. His surgeon instructed him to return to the office the following week.

When our client returned the following week, his liver function tests were still abnormal, and he was admitted to the hospital. A CT scan done in the hospital showed that a large collection of bile had leaked into his abdomen. Despite the presence of fever, the surgeon did not react promptly and drain the bile collection until five days after admission. By that time, it was too late: our client died from an infection that had grown in the bile. On autopsy it was found that the clip which the surgeon had placed on the cystic duct to prevent bile from leaking into the abdomen had fallen off.

Adelman Hirsch & Connors presented expert testimony that the treating surgeon, was negligent in four ways: 1) failing to properly clip the cystic duct during the surgery; 2) discharging our client from the hospital the day after surgery; 3) failing to start a workup on the cause of the abnormal liver function tests the week after the surgery; and 4) failing to drain the bile collection and commence appropriate antibiotics sooner.

The jury returned a plaintiffs’ verdict in the amount of $2.2 million to compensate for the wrongful death of our client and his widow’s loss of consortium.

Read an article in the Connecticut Law Tribune about this verdict.

$2,250,000 Settlement for Motorcycle Collision

Our clients, a husband and wife, suffered severe disabling crush injuries to their legs necessitating extensive surgeries when the motorcycle they were driving was struck by a car turning directly into their path. The motorcycle driver suffered severe comminuted fractures from his ankle up to his knee. The leg fractures to his tibia and fibula resulting in the use of an external fixator. The motorcycle passenger suffered fractures of her hips, crush injuries to her left thigh and calf, a torn knee ligament, a pelvic fracture as well as a fractured jaw and teeth. Both clients underwent multiple surgeries with a long painful recovery and rehabilitation and sustained permanent disabilities of their left lower extremities. We prepared a video settlement brochure that included an accident simulation as well as documentation of their extensive surgeries, medical treatment and rehabilitation with interviews from their health care providers. The case resolved after mediation for $2,250,000.00.

$1.16 Million Verdict for Gas Explosion That Destroyed Woman’s House

We represented a woman whose house was blown up in a gas explosion. Although our client escaped physical injury by running from the house before it was engulfed in flames, as a result of the explosion, the fire and losing all of her worldly possessions, she developed post traumatic stress disorder.

We sued a construction company which had been installing a sewer line in the street outside our client’s home. The construction company had bent a gas line while digging to lay a sewer line nearby. Eighteen months later, during a freezing spell, the gas line cracked where it had been bent and gas leaked into our client’s house.

The jury returned a verdict of $1.16 million dollars against the construction company.

Federal Court Jury Holds GM Liable for Dangerous 2004 Suburban

On July 18, 2017, after three days of deliberations, a federal court jury in New Haven, Connecticut brought in a verdict of $2,875,000 in a wrongful death product liability case against General Motors. The lawsuit claimed that General Motors failed to adequately warn its customers of a hidden danger in its 2004 Suburban. More specifically, the lawsuit claimed that customers should have been warned that the 2004 Suburban could be shifted out of park without the driver’s foot on the brake when the key was in the accessory position allowing the vehicle to rollaway without the engine running. An eight-year-old girl was killed when the Suburban unexpectedly rolled down a hill in 2011.

GM declared bankruptcy in 2009, returning to business as “new GM”. GM takes the position in courts across the United States that even if they know of a dangerous condition in a GM car, if it was manufactured before 2009, “new GM” has no duty to warn customers of “old GM” about a problem with their car.

We strongly believe that GM has the legal duty to warn its current customers of defective conditions in its vehicles, whether they were manufactured by “old GM” or new GM.

Exploding Aerosol Can Results in Loss of Eye

We represented a man who was working in the kitchen of a diner when an aerosol can of window spray exploded and rocketed into his right eye.

The manufacturers of the window spray claimed that the can must have been placed near a stove. However, our client swore the window spray was on a cutting board, not near the stove. Analysis of the water used to make the window spray showed that it had a high chlorine content. The chlorinated water reacted with the inside surface of the can and triggered a chemical reaction which caused pressure to build up inside the can. The excessive internal pressure caused the bottom of the can to push out and disengage from the can body, turning the can into a rocket.

Our client lost his right eye as a result of the accident. The jury awarded our client and his wife $2 million dollars in compensation.

$1,450,000 Settlement for Amputation of Hand From Defective Product

Our client, a machine operator, was permanently disfigured when his hand was amputated at the wrist after being crushed and burned while operating a rubber injection-molding machine that produced rubber fasteners. The product manufacturer, a German corporation, manufactured the product without an interlocked safety guard on the rear of the machine. After purchasing the product, the employer modified the machine to remove the safety guard from the rear of the machine. While using the product, the machine jammed. Our client tried to clear the jam by switching the machine to manual mode and putting his hand in. He thought that as long as the machine was on manual, it would not move unless he pushed another button. As he cleared the jam, the unloading device activated, and pulled his master hand into the machine, crushing and subjecting it to heat so long it was literally baked and had to be amputated at the wrist. We sued the German manufacturer of the product on the theory that the product should have been manufactured with an interlocked safety guard that could not be removed after the sale. There also should have been warnings on the product to warn of the removal of the guard. Working with a team of experts in product engineering which involved guarding and hydraulic and pneumatic pressures, we were able to establish the product defect. Following mediation the case resolved for $1,450,000.00.

$10 Million Awarded in Segway Fall Resulting in Brain Damage

We represented a young man who was asked to volunteer to ride a Segway Personal Transporter at a charity event and was not provided with a helmet. He fell off the Segway Personal Transporter and hit his head, resulting in the permanent loss of his sense of smell and a traumatic brain injury.

The “Segway Challenge” was an obstacle course with four legs. Each of four team members was asked to ride a Segway Personal Transporter through one leg of the obstacle course. Different handicaps were incorporated into each leg of the course. For instance, in one leg the rider would wear “drunk goggles”, which simulate the disorientation caused by being drunk. During the leg that our client rode, the rules called for him to be blindfolded.

In its owner’s manual and instructional video, Segway recommends that anyone riding a Segway Personal Transporter always wear a helmet. On the day in question, two Segway representatives who helped plan the event, and who brought the Personal Transporters to the event, forgot to bring helmets. When the Segway representatives instructed the volunteers on how to ride the Personal Transporters, the representatives did not tell the volunteers that Segway recommended they wear helmets. The Segway representatives then allowed the volunteers to ride through the obstacle course without helmets. Our client was almost finished with his leg of the course when he fell backwards off the Segway Personal Transporter and smashed the unprotected back of his head on the floor.

Our client suffered a subdural hematoma and subarachnoid hemorrhage (bleeding inside the skull), which resulted in encephalomalacia – softening of the brain. These injuries caused mild traumatic brain damage: trouble maintaining attention, problems with tasks requiring mental flexibility, and difficulty processing complex information at a normal rate.

The fall also caused our client to lose his sense of smell, which he will never regain, and left him with a reduced sense of taste.

At trial, we demonstrated that the Segway representatives were not just negligent, but reckless, because even though they realized the riders should not ride through the obstacle course without helmets, they allowed the event to go forward. Through the testimony of a biomechanical engineer, we showed that a helmet would have prevented our client’s injuries. Since our client’s injuries are not apparent to a casual observer, we hired a neuropsychologist, who evaluated and measured his injuries. The neuropsychologist explained to the jury our client’s cognitive deficits. A specialist in taste and smell explained how our client had lost his sense of smell.

The jury returned a verdict of $10 million, for our client’s non-economic (quality of life) damages. No economic damages were claimed.

Connecticut Law Tribune link:

Ex-Student Awarded $10M After Fall From Segway 1

1 Please note that the CT Law Tribune article, dated December 26, 2011, Vol. 37, No. 52 erroneously listed Mark Herceg, Ph.D. as the defense expert when in fact he was the Neuropsychologist Expert Witness for the plaintiff.

$1.25 Million Verdict for Wrongful Death From Truck Partially Obstructing Right Lane

In a case we tried in federal court, the defendant truck driver was operating a tractor-trailer on Route 84. He started to notice brake problems, but continued to drive for over a mile, with his brakes smoking, trying to make it to the next exit. During this time, he passed several places where he could have pulled entirely off the road. When his brakes finally froze and he was forced to stop, he did not pull fully off the road and was partially blocking the right lane of the highway.

Making matters worse, after he stopped, he failed to put out his reflective safety triangles, as required by federal regulations. Rather than dragging his rig off the roadway and ruining his tires, he decided to leave his truck where it was. About 30 minutes later, our client’s husband, driving a flower van, crashed into the rear of the truck and was killed.

An expert human factors engineer we hired testified about studies showing that, without reflective safety triangles, drivers have trouble perceiving that a tractor-trailer in front of them is actually stopped until it’s too late. While many people can perceive that a vehicle is stopped from 400 feet away, this visual cue is not reliable for all drivers until they are 200 feet away. At highway speeds, this doesn’t leave enough room to avoid a collision.

After a trial in federal court, we obtained a verdict of $1.25 million for the van driver’s estate and widow.

$6 Million Verdict for Failure to Diagnose Throat Cancer

We represented the Estate of a man whose doctor failed to diagnose his throat cancer. Our client had gotten a Positron Emission Tomography [PET] scan which showed an area of increased uptake, which is a sign of cancer. His doctor performed a fiberoptic examination of the inside of our client’s throat, but this type of fiberoptic examination does not always reveal a small growth. The standard of care, in order to rule out cancer, is to do a follow-up PET scan and fiberoptic examination within three months. The doctor failed to recommend such follow-up.

A year later our client’s cancer became symptomatic. The cancer was diagnosed and aggressively treated, but it was too late. He died two years later, at age 71.

The jury awarded $6 million to our client’s Estate and his wife in compensation for his wrongful death.

Read an article in the Connecticut Law Tribune about this verdict.

$2.2 Million Verdict for Botched Gall Bladder Surgery

We represented the estate and widow of a 64-year-old artist who died following gallbladder surgery.

Our client went to the hospital emergency room with severe abdominal pain. He was diagnosed with gallstone pancreatitis. Three days later, a surgeon performed a laparoscopic cholecystectomy to remove his gallbladder. As part of the surgery, the cystic duct, which connects the gallbladder to the common bile duct, had to be cut and clipped to prevent bile from leaking into his abdomen.

Our client was discharged from the hospital the day after surgery. A week later, he went to his surgeon’s office for a post-operative visit. He complained of pain and his blood tests showed his liver function tests were above normal limits. His surgeon instructed him to return to the office the following week.

When our client returned the following week, his liver function tests were still abnormal, and he was admitted to the hospital. A CT scan done in the hospital showed that a large collection of bile had leaked into his abdomen. Despite the presence of fever, the surgeon did not react promptly and drain the bile collection until five days after admission. By that time, it was too late: our client died from an infection that had grown in the bile. On autopsy it was found that the clip which the surgeon had placed on the cystic duct to prevent bile from leaking into the abdomen had fallen off.

Adelman Hirsch & Connors presented expert testimony that the treating surgeon, was negligent in four ways: 1) failing to properly clip the cystic duct during the surgery; 2) discharging our client from the hospital the day after surgery; 3) failing to start a workup on the cause of the abnormal liver function tests the week after the surgery; and 4) failing to drain the bile collection and commence appropriate antibiotics sooner.

The jury returned a plaintiffs’ verdict in the amount of $2.2 million to compensate for the wrongful death of our client and his widow’s loss of consortium.

Read an article in the Connecticut Law Tribune about this verdict.

$1.16 Million for Complex Four Car Accident Reconstruction

Lawyers at Adelman Hirsch & Connors represented the estate of an elderly gentleman who was killed (and his widow, who was seriously injured) in a four-car collision.

The car in front of our client’s car, traveling in the same lane, collided with the first of two vehicles racing towards our client’s car. As a result of that first collision, the oncoming car skidded along the road and crashed head-on into our client’s car.

The issue in the case was which of the two cars that collided in front of our client’s car was slightly over the centerline of the road. Because each of the parties had a different claim as to how the collision occurred, each presented testimony from accident reconstruction experts who, based on the physical evidence, offered their opinions as to how the collision occurred.

Because of the complexity of the case the trial lasted 16 weeks. The jury returned a verdict in favor of our clients totaling $1.16 million.

$1.25 Million Verdict for Wrongful Death From Truck Partially Obstructing Right Lane

In a case we tried in federal court, the defendant truck driver was operating a tractor-trailer on Route 84. He started to notice brake problems, but continued to drive for over a mile, with his brakes smoking, trying to make it to the next exit. During this time, he passed several places where he could have pulled entirely off the road. When his brakes finally froze and he was forced to stop, he did not pull fully off the road and was partially blocking the right lane of the highway.

Making matters worse, after he stopped, he failed to put out his reflective safety triangles, as required by federal regulations. Rather than dragging his rig off the roadway and ruining his tires, he decided to leave his truck where it was. About 30 minutes later, our client’s husband, driving a flower van, crashed into the rear of the truck and was killed.

An expert human factors engineer we hired testified about studies showing that, without reflective safety triangles, drivers have trouble perceiving that a tractor-trailer in front of them is actually stopped until it’s too late. While many people can perceive that a vehicle is stopped from 400 feet away, this visual cue is not reliable for all drivers until they are 200 feet away. At highway speeds, this doesn’t leave enough room to avoid a collision.

After a trial in federal court, we obtained a verdict of $1.25 million for the van driver’s estate and widow.