Notable Cases

Pedestrian Rights

Our firm represented an immigrant who was walking in the roadway and was struck by a car. He suffered extensive orthopedic injuries. Before this client came to us, he had already been turned down by two firms. Why? First, he was walking in the roadway when it would have been safer to walk on the sidewalk on the other side off the road. Second, he had been drinking at a local bar just before being struck by the defendant driver -- he was taken to the hospital immediately after being struck and the hospital’s test showed that our client’s blood alcohol was well over .30! (This is “knee walking” drunk, or that state where there is an “extreme loss of motor function”.)

When hearing this, other firms rejected this “hard” case. What did we do different? We listened. Our client admitted that he had been drinking and he decided to walk home, instead of getting behind the wheel. He also told us that what he had to drink and eat while at the bar. The defendant in the case insisted that our client was walking in the middle of her lane, that it was dark outside, and that she was in a curve. She would ask the jury to believe that she did not see our client in time to react to avoid hitting him. She also asked the jury to believe that our client was drunk.

We knew it would be an uphill battle but we were able to persuade the jury that (1) our client, while he had something to drink, was not too drunk to walk straight; (2) that our client was not so intoxicated that he would walk down the middle of a busy road; (3) that the defendant had taken her eyes off of the road and allowed her car to veer over the white fog line to the right where she struck our client and (4) that our client was within his right to be walking on a narrow strip of pavement that was outside of the white fog line. We employed the services of a toxicologist and an accident reconstructionist to help persuade the jury that our client was entitled to compensation for the defendant’s negligence. The jury ultimately awarded a significant six figure verdict to our client even though they did find him partially at fault for his own injuries.

What is a fair measure of justice for a “small case”?

What we can do with a “small” case: we had a recent win in traditionally conservative Rockdale County with a “small” case involving a woman whose car was struck by another vehicle. While this client received only “soft tissue” injuries and had only a few thousand dollars in chiropractic and medical bills, we were able to recover over $26,000 for her.

Dealing with a complex neurological condition

We also received a significant six figure settlement for a client who broke her wrist in a car wreck and later developed RSD (Reflex Sympathetic Dystrophy, also known as CRPS or Complex Regional Pain Syndrome) in the same wrist. RSD is a complex neurological condition that involves some initial traumatic injury to the nerve.

RSD is a chronic pain syndrome where a physical injury triggers the nervous system in a way that creates a continuing cycle of excruciating pain, which is the hallmark, or defining characteristic of the disease. RSD is a pain syndrome where the injury site and the sympathetic nervous system create a cycle of pain from the injury, to the brain and then back to the injury. This type of injury was first diagnosed in 1872 by a doctor treating soldiers from the Civil War. The soldiers had injuries, such as bullet wounds or bayonet injuries, that would heal completely, but the patients would continue to report excruciating pain. They would often show signs of swelling, discoloration, and temperature and skin changes. The syndrome was termed “Causalgia”. There are two types of RSD: Type 1 is the cycle of pain from the injury site through the sympathetic nervous system; Type 2 is the cycle of pain through the sympathetic nervous system but with a specific nerve injury.

The sympathetic nervous system has nerve fibers that run along your spinal cord. They control functions in “the background” – such as when your skin sweats from exercise or gets clammy and flushes from fear or anxiety. When your system functions normally and you get scared, anxious or tired, the “on switch” for your sympathetic nerve system opens or restricts the blood vessels in, for example, your hand, and your palms get sweaty, you may feel your heartbeat throb in your hands or they may get cool and clammy, but they don’t stay this way. Your body eventually “turns off” the switch and the blood vessels go back to normal. In a person who has RSD, the injury they have suffered – say from a broken wrist or nerve damage to the back of their hand causes the switch to be stuck in the “on” position. What this means is that throughout the day, the sympathetic nervous system will trigger the blood vessels to open and close for no reason in the area of the injury.

With RSD, you have (1) pain from the injury that hasn’t gotten a chance to go away, and (2) blood vessels opening and closing, “flushing” the skin, and irritating the site of the injury – like pouring fuel on a fire. The problem for people who have an injury that causes RSD is that the pain from the injury doesn’t go away, but “cycles” between the injury and the brain while the sympathetic nervous system throws “fuel” on the fire.

People who have RSD describe it as a burning, aching pain that can rise and fall throughout the day. When it “spikes” – because something touches the injury site, or the sympathetic nervous system throws fuel on the fire – the pain is excruciating. For men, it is compared to the pain of a kidney stone; for women, the pain of childbirth. In about half of people who develop RSD, the pain goes away – often in several weeks or months. In the other half, the pain does not go away and is expected to stay with them.

There are several different approaches to treating RSD, some involving pain medications and pain management and some involving surgical implants and / or nerve surgery. There is no real consensus in the medical community about one treatment method being more beneficial than another as each one has complications and risks.

Even in our case, there was disagreement between two doctors who both saw our client as a patient. While her anesthesiologist believed that the complications of surgical implants and nerve surgery were too risky for her, her neurologist believed he could help her more by implementing procedures such as spinal implants or nerve surgery.