Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

let me put my money where your mouth is

Expand Messages
  • Jurydoctor@aol.com
    Lo, and behold I have another case for your review. Please feel free to give your opinion (for a worthy cause), Now that we have established (hopefully) that
    Message 1 of 1 , Apr 6, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      Lo, and behold I have another case for your review. Please feel free to give
      your opinion (for a worthy cause), Now that we have established (hopefully)
      that this psychologist is not crazy enough to perpetuate a fraud on a site for
      fraud investigators, I hope you can give me your valued opinion.
      Amy


      I will donate $5 per opinion to the Schiff liver institute
      Thanks in advance,
      Amy


      Plaintiff’s Statement of the Facts

      The Plaintiff, a laser eye surgeon from New York, was a passenger
      on a Cruise Ship attending a medical seminar. On April 29, 2000, the
      Plaintiff stepped from carpeting onto a wood floor just outside the seminar
      conference room and slipped and fell, injuring his wrist. The wood floor on which the
      Plaintiff slipped was coated with a very slippery substance with the result
      that it was dangerously slick. In fact, approximately one hour and 20 minutes
      before the Plaintiff’s fall, the seminar coordinator slipped and nearly fell
      in the same area. There were no cones or signs warning of the slippery
      condition of the floor. After her slip, the seminar coordinator immediately reported
      the dangerous condition to the cruise line but the cruise line did nothing to
      address the problem before the Plaintiff’s fall. After the Plaintiff’s fall,
      the cruise line cordoned off the area of the fall.

      The Plaintiff partially tore a ligament in the wrist of his
      dominant hand. Although the Plaintiff still has use of his wrist, he experiences
      pain on certain movements. Due to the delicate hand and wrist motions which
      his occupation as a laser eye surgeon requires, the wrist injury has
      significantly impacted his ability to perform certain surgical procedures (operations).
      The Plaintiff has decided against having surgery on his wrist because a
      surgeon has stated that he does not think that wrist surgery will fix the problem
      and could possibly even worsen it.

      The Plaintiff is a very high wage earner. His income was
      $1,870,500.00 in 1998; $1,800,000.00 in 1999; $2,200,000.00 in 2000 (the accident
      occurred on April 29, 2000); $1,500,000.00 in 2001; $1,800,000.00 in 2002; and
      $1,850,000.00 in 2003. His 2004 tax return is currently unavailable. At the
      time of the accident, the Plaintiff’s surgical practice had not peaked and was
      on the upswing. The tax returns show that his income has declined since the
      accident. This is supported by the records which show a decline in certain
      surgical procedures performed by the Plaintiff after the accident which were
      affected by his wrist injury.

      Specifically in the 12 months before this accident, the Plaintiff
      performed 2,916 of the effected procedures for total fees of $1,980,000.00.
      In the first 12 month period following his accident, the Plaintiff performed
      1,963 of these procedures for total fees of $1,351,000.00. In the second 12
      month period following his accident, the Plaintiff performed 1,780 of these
      procedures for total fees of $1,160,000.00. In the third 12 month period
      following the accident, the Plaintiff performed 2,060 procedures for total fees of
      $1,299,000.00. In the fourth 12 month period following the accident (through
      April 22, 2004), the Plaintiff performed 1,982 procedures for total fees of
      $1,142,000.00. These numbers show that the affected procedures have dropped
      significantly following the accident as well as the income generated by those
      procedures.




      DEFENDANT’S STATEMENT OF THE FACTS

      The Plaintiff was running late to the seminar which was underway
      and allegedly slipped and fell on the floor outside of the seminar room. His
      claimed fall was unwitnessed. The Plaintiff testified that he did not observe
      any foreign substance on the floor or on his skin or clothing after the
      claimed fall.

      Upon entering the seminar room, the Plaintiff did not report that
      he had fallen or was injured to the coordinator at the sign-in desk when he
      signed in. The seminar coordinator testified that she did not recall anything
      unusual about the Plaintiff when he signed in. The Plaintiff did not seek
      immediate medical attention but instead sat through the seminar.

      The Plaintiff sustained a very minor injury to his wrist. The
      x-rays performed were negative. The MRI showed a very small partial tear of a
      ligament in the wrist. In fact, the Plaintiff did not miss a single day of
      work as a result of the minor injury to his wrist.

      The Plaintiff admittedly can do everything with his wrist after
      his fall that he could do before the fall. There are no surgical procedures
      that the Plaintiff could perform before the injury that he can no longer
      perform. He has full range of motion in the wrist. He refused arthroscopic surgery
      which his doctor testified could alleviate the occasional pain which he claims
      to experience in the wrist. He can perform all of the wrist motions
      necessary to the eye surgeries that he performs. The pain that he sometimes claims to
      feel in his wrist can also be addressed with medication.

      The Plaintiff still works fulltime in his surgical practice
      performing thousands of procedures a year. The Plaintiff’s income in the years
      after the claimed accident is virtually identical to his income in the years
      before the accident, in the close to $2,000,000 per year range.

      PROBLEM AREAS FOR THE PLAINTIFF

      (1) The Plaintiff anticipates that the Defendant cruise
      line will deny that it was warned of the slippery condition of the floor before
      the Plaintiff’s fall. The Defendant claims that if the floor was, in fact,
      wet and slippery, the Plaintiff should have noticed it and avoided it or
      proceeded more cautiously.

      (2) The wrist injury is a relatively minor injury. The
      Plaintiff resumed his surgical practice full time, performs thousands of
      surgeries a year and has on average made about the same money since the accident as
      he made in 1999, the year before the accident took place.


      PROBLEM AREAS FOR THE DEFENDANT

      (1) The seminar coordinator testified that she slipped and
      nearly fell before the Plaintiff did and immediately reported the dangerous
      condition of the floor to the cruise line.

      (2) The fact that the person who sustained the wrist
      injury is a laser eye surgeon who requires highly refined coordination and delicate
      movements of the hand and wrist.

      (3) The records showing a decrease in the numbers of
      certain surgical procedures performed by the Plaintiff after the accident.




      QUESTIONS

      (1) Was the Defendant negligent?

      (2) Was the Plaintiff negligent?

      (3) How much in damages would you award to the Plaintiff,
      if anything?






      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.