Attorneys who handle catastrophic injury cases resulting from motor vehicle accidents know that there are times when it is necessary to retain specific experts in order to establish liability. This is not done in every case. Experts are expensive. Thus, if there is minimal insurance coverage and minimal or no assets that can be applied toward a recovery it may not make economic sense to retain one. When there are sources available for a significant recovery and the defense is disputing liability, however, retaining the right expert can make all the difference.
Consider the following reported case. The car involved in this motor vehicle accident case was driven by an elderly man. He somehow lost control of the car, struck a 40 year-old male who was riding his bicycle in the bike path adjacent to the road, then hit a telephone pole. The driver suffered extensive trauma to the chest area and died from his injuries.
The victim bicyclist suffered a head injury that put him in a coma and left him with permanent brain damage. He is a father with two daughters but was never able to return home due to the resulting disability and will most likely require lifelong care in a rehabilitation facility or institution. His medical expenses at the time came to more than $500,000. He will in all likelihood never be able to work again.
The defense claimed that the
driver lost control of his car because of a sudden heart attack. This would mean that a medical emergency, not the driver's negligence, was the cause of the accident and there would be no liability for the injuries to the accident victim.
With the availability of sufficient insurance for a significant recovery, a permanent devastating injury to the victim and his family, and the defense disputing liability by claiming that a medical emergency caused the accident, this is one of those cases where the attorney needs to seek out an expert who can definitively establish liability.
The law firm that handled this matter did exactly that by having slides of the driver's heart tissue analyzed by a medical expert who was able to demonstrate that the heart attack did not take place before the accident. Rather it occurred after the accident as a result of the trauma suffered when he struck the pole. The law firm reported that the defense settled the case for $3.5 million, including $1.0 million on behalf of the victim's wife on her claim for loss of consortium.
Insurance company adjusters do not settle cases for amounts like those recovered in this matter unless they are persuaded that it is not worth the risk of taking the case to trial. This case illustrates the factors that determine when identifying and retaining an expert to definitively establish liability can make all the difference in the outcome of the case.
![[Valid RSS feed]](http://cdnimages.articlefriendly.net/images/icon_Rss.png "XML Feed For RSS"){kind=icon}
Category Rss Feed
Print This Article
Add To Favorites
