Connecticut Cases January 24, 2020: Vieira v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance

Case Description

UNPUBLISHED OPINION

Judge (with first initial, no space for Sullivan, Dorsey, and Walsh): Agati, Salvatore C., J.

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION

AGATI, J.

This matter was tried before the court on January 9, 2020.

This case arises from an automobile accident that took place on December 28, 2015. On that date at approximately 2:11 p.m., the plaintiff, Camilo Vieira, was operating a motor vehicle traveling eastbound on Bridge Street in Naugatuck, Connecticut. The tortfeasor, Robert Lavertue, was operating a motor vehicle westbound on Bridge Street. At said time and place the tortfeasor attempted a left-hand turn in front of the plaintiff’s vehicle striking the plaintiff’s vehicle. As a result of the collision the plaintiff’s front portion of the vehicle was damaged substantially and airbags deployed. The police investigated the accident and determined that the Lavertue vehicle was at fault for the accident. This action is an uninsured motorist claim brought against the defendant, State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company. The defendant, State Farm, has admitted liability.

The plaintiff did not seek medical attention at the scene of the accident. The plaintiff returned home after the accident. However, within hours of the accident, the plaintiff began to feel pain to his hips, chest, neck and back. The plaintiff presented to St. Mary’s Hospital emergency room the same evening at approximately 5:23 p.m. The plaintiff had x-rays taken and was evaluated by the emergency room physician. The diagnosis was strain/sprain to the lumbar and cervical spine. The plaintiff was discharged with medication for pain and advised to follow up with his primary care physician if his pain persisted.

The plaintiff left the following day to return to Florida where he was residing. The plaintiff on January 11, 2016, did follow up for treatment at OrthoSports in Florida where he was examined by a physician’s assistant. The evaluation and treatment consisted of lumbar sprain and left hip pain. On January 20, 2016, the plaintiff saw Dr. Rommel, his primary care physician, and also reported severe left hip pain that had been worsened by the automobile accident. On January 25, 2016, the plaintiff sought treatment from Dr. Pogonowski, a chiropractor, for treatment for the cervical/thoracic/lumbar strain/sprain. On January 29, 2016, the plaintiff also commenced a course of treatment for physical therapy at Mease Countryside Hospital, again related to cervical and lumbar pain and progressively worsening pain to the left hip. Also, on February 8, 2016, an MRI of the lumbar spine was performed again at Mease Countryside Hospital, which indicated severe stenosis at L4-5 and mild stenosis at L2-3 and L3-4. The plaintiff also had a consult with Marino and Joseph Spine & Scoliosis, on February 17, 2016, who again confirmed lumbar strain/sprain.

The plaintiff continued his treatment with both physical therapy and with Dr. Pogonowski through June 2016. On June 14, 2016, Dr. Pogonowski determined that the plaintiff had reached maximum medical improvement and opined that the plaintiff had a residual 5% permanent partial disability to his cervical spine which also equated to a 5% whole body disability. Within months of the evaluation by Dr. Pogonowski, the plaintiff returned with continuing complaints of neck pain and left hip pain. The plaintiff also reestablished treatment with physical therapy at Mease. Both the chiropractic treatment and physical therapy treatment continued intermittently through December 2017.

In October 2017, the plaintiff presented at the University of Miami Hospital for evaluation regarding his persistent left hip pain. An MRI was performed on the left hip which indicated no signs of aggravation to either hip replacement. These results led to the plaintiff treating with Dr. Grayson at Florida Orthopedic Institute. Dr. Grayson diagnosed bilateral hip bursitis and gluteal tear. He then provided injections to the hips to help reduce inflammation. Dr. Grayson concluded that the plaintiff is not a surgical candidate in view of his diagnosis.

It is noted that upon review of the plaintiff’s prior medical records, the plaintiff underwent a right hip replacement in 2006 and a left hip replacement in 2010. It is also noted that approximately eight months after the 2010 left hip replacement the plaintiff fell and aggravated his left hip. Once again, in July 2012, the plaintiff suffered another fall down where he re-injured the left hip and also the left knee which had been replaced in 2008. There is also another fall incident that took place in 2014 which re-aggravated the left hip. The indication from treatment at that time is that the plaintiff had suffered an abductor tendon rupture. The injury was such that no other medical treatment could be provided to be beneficial to the plaintiff. There was indication in an August 23, 2014 note that the plaintiff was intermittently using a cane at that time.

The plaintiff testified that subsequent to the accident and the treatment he has received from this accident that his quality of life has deteriorated. The plaintiff’s testimony at the time of trial indicated that his back pain has resolved from the treatment he obtained subsequent to the accident. He continues to complain of neck pain which occurs intermittently and is substantiated by the disability rating provided by Dr. Pogonowski. The plaintiff’s major complaint is with the worsening of the pain in his left hip. He is not a surgical candidate and the injections provided temporary relief. The plaintiff is now using a cane daily for support and balance. The plaintiff also testified that he can no longer take long hikes or walks as he did prior to the accident. He no longer can assist in doing household chores either indoors or outdoors. He can no longer fish or hunt due to stability and balance problems caused by the left hip pain.

After review of all the medical records and the testimony of the plaintiff, the court concludes that the plaintiff suffered exacerbations to injuries to his cervical spine, lumbar spine and left hip. The IME doctors, Dr. Duffy and Dr. Goldsmith, confirmed exacerbations to those body parts. The two IME doctors differ as to the extent and need for the treatment that the plaintiff obtained. Both IME doctors also disagree as to the causation of the exacerbations being related to the automobile accident of December 28, 2015. The court awards the plaintiff damages as follows.

Economic damages: The court awards the plaintiff all the medical bills listed on Exhibit 47 at numbers 1 through 15 for the total amount of $27, 418.18.

Non-economic damages: The court awards the plaintiff noneconomic damages for all pain and suffering, past and future, loss of enjoyment of life’s activities and permanent/residual effects to the injuries sustained and exacerbated by this accident in the total amount of $60, 000.

The court awards the plaintiff total judgment of $87, 418.18. The court will stay entry of judgment in this matter until February 28, 2020.