Partner Dan Stewart persuaded a Brooklyn jury to return a verdict with 50% comparative fault against the plaintiff in a car accident case with decidedly unfavorable facts – the insured defendant was speeding and hit plaintiff’s vehicle from behind, after which plaintiff underwent a lumbar fusion surgery.
Plaintiff maintained he was trying to make a left turn and was properly stopped in the designated turning lane waiting for the light to change, when he was hit from behind. The insured defendant admitted he was speeding when he noticed plaintiff’s car stopped partially in his moving lane, and could not stop before hitting the rear of plaintiff’s car. By emphasizing factual inconsistencies in plaintiff’s description of the accident and the intersection, Dan presented the jury with a plausible alternative scenario in which plaintiff’s conduct was the more substantial factor in the accident.
While the jury was deliberating, plaintiff’s counsel agreed to a high/low settlement arrangement, subject to the jury’s liability verdict. Applying plaintiff’s 50% fault resulted in an extremely favorable settlement for our client.
To learn more about this result, or other ways Fleischner Potash can help your claims team, please contact Dan at 646.520.4255 or email@example.com