On August 10, 1997, Christy Hughes
was driving her car around a narrow curve of Old Missouri 210
Highway in Missouri City, Clay County. Coming uphill around the
curve, from the opposite direction, was a 1997 International semi-trailer
operated by DOT Transportation, Inc. The evidence showed that
the truck crossed over the centerline and hit the Hughes vehicle.
Vic Bergman represented the Hughes family. The unusual feature
of the case is that it came to our firm just before expiration
of the Missouri five-year statute of limitations, and by then
Mrs. Hughes had made a remarkable recovery from her initially
severe injuries
Mrs. Hughes had multiple musculoskeletal injuries including blunt
chest and abdominal trauma, comminuted fracture of the left humerus,
comminuted fracture of the left ulna, multiple fractures of the
pelvis and pubic bone, and a hip dislocation. She also sustained
a closed head injury with intracranial bleeding and swelling of
the brain for which she was kept unconscious by medication. After
a 37-day initial hospitalization she spent 23 days at Mid-America
Rehabilitation Hospital, and then attended outpatient speech and
cognitive rehabilitation. The total medical expenses were approximately
$200,000.
Mrs. Hughes, who was 27 years old with one child at the time of
the incident, recovered almost completely from the musculoskeletal
injuries to the point where she was not experiencing any appreciable
pain or discomfort, and in fact she had two more children since
the |
collision without any problems associated
with the injuries to her pelvis and hip.
The long-term consequences of the closed head injury became the
challenge in the case. There was no question about the original
traumatic brain injury and hemorrhage, but within 16 months Mrs.
Hughes was released to go back to work. Initially she experienced
stress and headaches with full-time work. Neuropsychological testing
over time, however, demonstrated performance in the average range,
with only mild problems noted in select cognitive functions. These
testing results were interpreted without information establishing
Mrs. Hughes’ “baseline” functioning before her
injury. There was a question about whether there was any significant
deterioration in Mrs. Hughes’ ability to perform her job functions.
She was turned down twice for Social Security disability benefits.
Before this could be resolved in the workplace, however, Mrs. Hughes
had her second baby and desired to be a stay-home mother, so it
was difficult to establish that she would lose more earnings as
a result of the injury.
Our efforts were focused on establishing that the neuropsychological
testing only showed part of the story, and that there was a dramatic
transformation and diminution from baseline in Mrs. Hughes’
personality, relationships, and abilities as a result of her head
injury. This was done through interviews with family, friends and
co-workers who knew Mrs. Hughes both before and after the collision.
Through the observations of these |
people, we were able to identify and demonstrate
that there were significant changes in Mrs. Hughes that
were directly attributable to the injuries she sustained
in the collision. We were prepared to demonstrate that the
“normal” findings on the neuropsychological
testing, while accurate, did not and could not measure the
true losses that Mrs. Hughes experienced.
The case settled for $2,000,000.
This case is another example of the challenge of demonstrating
the losses sustained by a person with a traumatic brain
injury, who may present as “normal” to people
who did not know her personally before the fact. Often the
healthcare providers, who did not know the plaintiff before
the injury, and have no baseline from which to measure loss,
are not the best witnesses to establish the damages. Family
members and close friends of the injured person are often
the key witnesses on the damages questions.
|
|
 |
|
