In today's case (Wright v. Bower) the Plaintiff was involved in a motor vehicle collision and alleged chronic back
pain as a result of the crash.
Not exact matches
However, in this case the defense team was betting on the 50 % rule, which works like this: if the defense team could convince the jury that the plaintiff (my client, the injured motorcyclist) is more than 50 % at fault for the
crash, the defendant (the negligent minivan driver) would not have to pay for non-economic damages, which include
pain and suffering, loss
of enjoyment
of life, scarring and disfigurement, and other long - term problems
as a
result of the
crash.
However, the concept
of who is at fault only applies when considering the «
pain and suffering» an individual experiences
as the
result of a motor vehicle
crash.
The Plaintiff led medical evidence that he suffered from «mechanical lower back
pain» amongst other injuries
as a
result of this
crash.
These claims can help a rider recover for the medical expenses he or she has incurred
as well
as other damages like lost wages,
pain and suffering, and the permanency
of the injuries that
result from the
crash.
If your or someone you love are suffering from whiplash injury following your auto accident, you may be eligible for compensation based on the
pain and suffering you experienced
as a
result of the
crash.
As a
result of crash the court found that the Plaintiff suffered from a fracture at T12 and a disc injury to T11 / T12 and perhaps T9 / T10 (basically fractures to the mid back) and that the Plaintiff «has gone on to develop a chronic
pain syndrome with discomfort, sleep disturbance and depression.
Reasons for judgement were released today awarding a Plaintiff $ 50,000 for non-pecuniary loss (
pain and suffering)
as a
result of injuries sustained in a 2004 rear - end BC car
crash.
She allegedly suffered from PTSD and a chronic
pain disorder
as a
result of the
crash.