Motor Vehicle Motorist claimed air bag inflicted ear injuries

Case Type: Rear-ender, Motor Vehicle ~ Multiple Impact, Motor Vehicle - Multiple Vehicle, Motor Vehicle Uninsured Motorist, Alternative Dispute Resolution - Arbitration
Case: Number unavailable.
Venue: American Arbitration Association, NY
Date: 01-27-2006

PLAINTIFF(S)
Attorney: Lawrence Breslow; Rutberg & Associates, P.C.; Poughkeepsie, NY

DEFENDANT(S)
Attorney: Anonymous

Facts: On Sept. 22, 2004, Plaintiff, 20, a student, was driving on Route 9, near its intersection at St. Andrews Road, in Hyde Park. When he reached the intersection, he stopped at a red traffic signal. Before he could resume travel, his car’s rear panel was struck by a trailing vehicle that was being driven by Defendant. Plaintiff’s car was pushed forward, and it struck the rear of a preceding vehicle. Plaintiff claimed that his car’s air bag deployed and inflicted ear injuries. Defendant was not insured, so Plaintiff sued his insurer, New York Central Mutual Fire Insurance Co. He sought recovery from his policy’s supplementary - uninsured-motorist coverage. He alleged that Defendant was negligent in the operation of her vehicle. The matter proceeded to an arbitration hearing. Plaintiff claimed that Defendant could have avoided the collision. Respondent’s counsel contended that the second collision occurred because Plaintiff was tailgating.

Injury: Later that day, Plaintiff was driven to St. Francis Hospital, in Poughkeepsie. He underwent minor treatment. Plaintiff claimed that he suffered tinnitus that affected both ears. He contended that his right ear’s symptoms resolved quickly, but that his left ear’s symptoms have not subsided, despite therapy. He contended that he suffers moderate loss of that ear’s hearing ability. He claimed that his tinnitus disturbs his sleep and his ability to concentrate and that it has doubled the time that he must devote to his studies. He further claimed that he cannot clearly hear in certain noisy social settings and that, as such, it has lessened his enjoyment of settings such as bars and movie theaters. He sought recovery of a total of $250,000 for his past and future pain and suffering. Respondent’s counsel contended that Plaintiff exaggerated the extent of his hearing loss. He claimed that Plaintiff’s school grades are better than the grades that he achieved prior to the accident.

Verdict Information: Plaintiff was awarded $100,000, all for his pain and suffering.