Note: The following material was originally published in VerdictSearch.com.
MEDIATION: $605,000
CASE TYPE: Negligent Repair and/or Maintenance, Premises Liability - Dangerous Condition, Premises Liability - Failure to Warn, Premises Liability - Trip and Fall, Premises Liability - Parking Lot
VENUE: Kings Supreme, NY. JUDGE: Harold I. Braff. DATE: 09-15-2006
PLAINTIFF'S ATTORNEY: Stuart Wagner; Morrison & Wagner, L.L.P.; New York, NY
DEFENDANT'S ATTORNEY: Leslie F. Ruff; Biedermann, Hoenig & Ruff; New York, NY, for Strauss Discount Auto, Strauss Discount Auto/WSR Corp., Manufacturers Traders Trust Co., Pennsylvania Avenue Associates, LLC.
EXPERT: None
INSURER: Gerling Insurance Co. for all defendants
FACTS: On Nov. 7, 1999, plaintiff, age, 47, an insurance underwriter, dropped her car off to be repaired at the Strauss Discount Auto repair shop that is located at 832 Pennsylvania Ave., in Brooklyn. When she returned to pick up her vehicle, the plaintiff was directed to where she could get it. As she headed over to her car, she tripped over a speed bump and fell. The plaintiff claimed that she sustained fractures to her teeth resulting in tooth loss and other dental problems.
The plaintiff sued the property's owner, Pennsylvania Avenue Associates, LLC; Strauss Discount Auto; and its business entities, Strauss Discount Auto/WSR Corp. and Manufacturers Traders Trust Co. She alleged that the defendants were negligent in their repair and/or maintenance of the parking lot, that they negligently failed to warn of the speed bump, and that their negligence created a dangerous condition.
Strauss Discount Auto went into bankruptcy, so a stay was put on the case until recently.
The plaintiff claimed that she was directed to where she could get her car and that the defendants were negligent in failing to warn her of the speed bump. She also contended that the defendants failed to paint the speed bump, making it difficult to see and creating a dangerous condition.
The defendants contended that the speed bump was painted, but that the paint had faded. They also claimed that the plaintiff should not have been in that area because it was adjacent to a work area where non-employees were not allowed.
INJURY
The plaintiff presented to the emergency room of the Brookdale University Hospital and Medical Center, in Brooklyn. She was diagnosed with an edema of her lower lip, with skin abrasions; a loosening of her right central maxillary incisor (tooth No. 8); and a traumatic avulsion of her left central maxillary incisor (tooth No. 9). Tooth No. 9, which had been knocked out during her fall, was reimplanted, and she was treated with surgical splinting of her teeth, debridement, and cleansing of the lip abrasion. The plaintiff was also given prescriptions for antibiotics and analgesics. Eventually it was determined that tooth No. 8 had to be extracted and that teeth Nos. 9 and 10 required endodontic therapy. A prosthesis was applied.
The plaintiff returned several times with complaints of pain and discomfort. In February 1999, it was discovered that she had a fracture of the alveolar bone in the area of teeth Nos. 8 and 9, requiring repair and autogenous bone grafting. Tooth No. 7 was later discovered to be fractured and needed to be removed. The plaintiff continued to experience bone and soft-tissue loss, and tooth No. 9 eventually had to be removed. A bridge was constructed.
The plaintiff's dental expert determined that the plaintiff is left with poor jawbone/alveolar density and that the bridge would not last the remainder of her life. He concluded that she would require at least two more revisions, grafting, implants and prosthetics.
The plaintiff claimed that she experienced continued pain, requiring several extensive surgeries and prosthetic care. She claimed that she has difficulty chewing as a result of her injuries and that she missed about a month of work after the accident. She sought recovery of damages for her past and future pain and suffering.
Defense counsel disputed the causation of the plaintiff's continued dental treatment. The defendants acknowledged that the plaintiff lost her two front teeth, but they claimed that her subsequent injuries and treatments were not related to this accident
VERDICT INFORMATION: The parties agreed to a $605,000 settlement, which was established via the guidance of mediator Harold Braff.
EDITOR'S COMMENTS: This report is based on information that was provided by plaintiff's counsel. Defense counsel did not respond to the reporter's phone calls.
