Low Verdict For Soft Tissue Injury Is Typical : The Result Of Insurance Industry Propaganda

 A Harnett County jury on September 12, 2007 returned a verdict in the amount of $22,500.00 for the claimant, a female teacher in her early 20s who had been injured in a motor vehicle collision as a result of the defendant driver’s negligence.

 The defendant driver was not present in court.  He was represented by his insurance company’s lawyer.

 The defendant violated a stop sign and pulled into the intersection and struck the claimant’s car in the side.

 At trial, the insurance company lawyer admitted the obvious, that the collision was the fault of the defendant.

 The teacher suffered injury to the muscles, tendons and ligaments of her neck and back.  Because there were no broken bones, insurance companies like to refer to this type of injury as a “soft tissue” injury.

 After the collision, the teacher was taken to the emergency room for treatment.  She was later seen by an orthopedist and underwent physical therapy.  Her medical bills totaled $11,719.00.  She had lost wages of $205.00.

 The teacher’s lawyer demanded $25,000.00 to settle the claim.

 Nationwide Insurance Company who insured the careless defendant had offered $15,000.00 to settle, an amount just $3,076.00 above the teacher’s out-of-pocket expenses and losses.  The amount demanded by the teacher’s lawyer was a mere 2.10 times the teacher’s out-of-pocket losses and expenses.

 The next time you hear when someone say that you can always get at least three times your medical bills and expenses in a personal injury case, keep this case in mind.

 Although the jury’s verdict was far too low, it was better than a lot of verdicts in similar cases and consistent with verdicts usually obtained in these so-called “soft tissue” injury cases.

 Jurors this day in time are highly skeptical of any personal injury claimant.  This skepticism, fanned in no small part by sophisticated insurance company propaganda machines, have resulted in verdicts far lower than would have been expected 10 to 15 years ago.  Fifteen years ago a similar case would likely have resulted in at least a $35,000.00 verdict.

 After this unfortunate teacher pays her lawyer and her medical bills she will only have $3,280.99 to compensate her for what was undoubtedly a long and painful period of suffering and her lost wages.

 This is another case of justice denied to the innocent victim of motor vehicle carelessness.