CTA Bus Driver Awarded Nearly $400,000 by Jury for His Injuries
G.K. was a 28 year-old CTA bus driver referred to us by another law firm. G.K. claimed he sustained a serious right shoulder injury in a minor automobile-bus collision in 2007. At the time of the incident, G.K. as seated in a disabled and empty bus, waiting for a mechanic, when the bus was sideswiped on the driver’s side by an 89 year-old woman.
G.K. complained of shoulder pain at the accident scene to the Chicago Police Department and a CTA supervisor. When he got home, he told his wife about his shoulder pain. The next day, he visited a local emergency room, and a day or two later the CTA’s doctor, and an orthopedic surgeon.
He was diagnosed with a torn labrum, tissue that protects the socket of the shoulder, and ultimately underwent arthroscopic surgery and physical therapy. G.K. missed six and a half months of work as a result and was left with permanent pain in his dominant should when lifting his arm above shoulder level.
The defendant admitted responsibility for the crash, but her insurance company rejected the idea that G.K.’s shoulder injury resulted from this minor impact collision. The insurance company hired an expert witness, an orthopedic surgeon, who testified at trial that his shoulder injury was due to arthritis existing prior to the crash, and not the crash.
G.K.’s surgeon testified that the accident aggravated his pre-existing arthritic condition, making it symptomatic and needing surgery. Defendant offered $80,000 to settle the case before trial, which we believed was insufficient. So did G.K. After a three day trial the jury agreed with us awarding G.K. $395,857.75.
The car accident attorney’s at Lipkin & Higgins believed the facts were on our side, believed we had prepared a winning case, and believed the case had significant upside potential to warrant trial rather than settlement. Ultimately the decision to proceed to trial was G.K.’s, which he made after lengthy discussions with us.
It is important and beneficial for G.K. to be involved with the litigation process, to know the strengths and weaknesses of his case. We were frank in telling G.K. that the potential weakness, which had to be overcome, was the claim that a minor impact could cause a major injury.
We were able to over come this weakness by carefully eliciting from G.K. the outstretched position of his arm at moment of impact, and gaining his surgeon’s opinion that even a minor collision with his arm in a vulnerable position could lead to a torn labrum, and need for surgery. A jury trial is a contest of competing stories. Through care planning, the car accident attorneys at Lipkin & Higgins were able to sell G.K.’s story to the jury.
