Case Results

Congratulations to Ivan Rodriguez for obtaining a $817,000.00 jury verdict for a teenage girl who had been a passenger in a mini-school bus involved in an intersection accident with another vehicle and sustained a fractured leg. The school bus driver denied responsibility for the accident claiming that the accident occurred when an unidentified car cut her off causing her to swerve and collide with another vehicle. The defense attorneys acknowledged the plaintiff’s leg injury but claimed that any monetary award should be limited because the plaintiff made a full recovery from her injuries. At trial we were able to demonstrate that the mini-school bus driver was fully responsible for the accident and that the plaintiff continued to have residual symptoms as a result of her leg injury. The Manhattan jury found in our favor and awarded our client a total of $815,000.00 for her injuries.

Congratulations to Ivan Rodriguez for obtaining a $760,000.00 jury verdict for a 63-year old livery taxi driver who was involved in a rear-end collision and sustained injuries to his lower back and knee. The defendant who rear-ended the plaintiff claimed that the impact was moderate. The defendant driver also claimed that the plaintiff was not really injured because immediately after the accident he exited his vehicle and removed several pieces of heavy luggage from the trunk for his passengers. She also claimed that the plaintiff picked up the plastic cover of from his rear-bumper and tied it to the vehicle. The defendant’s insurance company only agreed to pay for the damages to the vehicle and refused to offer any money for the plaintiff’s injuries. Right before the trial the defendant’s insurance company offered $50,000.00 to settle the case. We refused the offer and proceeded with the trial. In an effort to show that the plaintiff didn’t sustain any injuries, the defense attorneys hired numerous experts including an accident reconstructionist, a biomechanical engineer, a radiologist and an orthopedic surgeon. The accident reconstructionist and biomechanical engineer worked together to prepare extensive reports arguing that the impact was not severe enough to cause the back and knee injuries the plaintiff claimed to have sustained. The defendant’s radiologist reviewed the plaintiff’s MRI films and claimed that there were no accident/trauma related injuries and that the plaintiff was suffering from arthritis and other age-related degenerative conditions that existed for years before the accident. The defendant’s orthopedist examined the plaintiff prior to the trial and claimed that the plaintiff had no symptoms or limitations as a result of the accident. The orthopedist also claimed that the plaintiff had arthritis and age-related degenerative conditions that existed for years before the accident. At trial we were able to demonstrate that the calculations and conclusions of the accident reconstructionist and biomechanical engineer were flawed and that the impact was severe enough to have caused the lower back and knee injury that our client sustained. In addition, the orthopedic expert and pain management expert we hired for the trial testified and opined that the plaintiff’s injuries were caused by the accident. After the 10 day trial the Brooklyn jury found in our favor awarded our client a total of $760,000.00 for his injuries.

$475,000.00 recovered for a victim of a rear-end motor vehicle collision involving a tractor-trailer. The plaintiff sustained injuries to his back in the accident.

A 41-year-old male, on a business trip in New York from California, slipped and fell on a freshly mopped interior stairwell in a Manhattan hotel. As a result of his fall, he sustained an injury to his non-dominant shoulder which required two arthroscopic surgeries. The settlement was reached prior to trial in New York County.

Congratulations to Robin Halstrom for settling a difficult motor vehicle case for $290,000 during discovery.  Liability was problematic in that we represented a young man and inexperienced driver who testified that immediately before the accident that he was speeding and distracted by the defendant’s rare and collectible vehicle while driving on a curvy roadway in a terrible rainstorm. In addition to this excellent settlement for our client, we were able to completely extinguish a very large (almost $1,000,000) lien by proving to the lien holder’s attorney that 100% of this purported lien was not valid or recoverable.

$281,000.00 for a retired 71-year-old man who fell down a flight of interior stairs while visiting family and sustained a head injury. Although the defendant’s insurance company initially refused to pay due to the fact that our client was severely intoxicated, our thorough investigation and knowledge of medicine provided us with evidence that allowed us to demonstrate that the stairs were defective and that the defect contributed to our client’s accident, thereby forcing the insurance company to settle the case for $281,000.00 out of the available $300,000.00 insurance coverage.

$275,000.00 settlement obtained for an undocumented immigrant who sustained a head injury as he was riding a bike and was struck by a vehicle. At the time of the accident, the bicyclist, was legally intoxicated, he was riding the wrong way in traffic and was not wearing a bicycle helmet. Our investigation revealed that the defendant driver was partially responsible for failing to avoid striking the bicyclist. In addition to the $275,000.00 we obtained payment of approximately $98,000.00 for payment of his medical bills and an additional $15,000.00 for his lost earnings.

$250,000.00 jury verdict, after a three-day trial, for a middle-aged woman who was struck by a car as she crossed the street and sustained a fractured arm and back injuries. The defendant’s attorneys and insurance company claimed that our client was partially at fault for the accident, that her injuries were minor and that she had made a full recovery. Our attorneys refused to accept the $35,000.00 settlement offered by the defendant’s insurance company and proceeded to trial where we proved that the accident was 100% the defendant’s fault and that her injuries were substantial. The Brooklyn Jury saw the case our way and awarded our client $250,000.00 for her injuries.

$250,000.00 jury verdict, after a three day trial, for a middle-aged woman who was struck by a car as she crossed the street and sustained a fractured arm and back injuries. The defendant’s attorneys and insurance company claimed that our client was partially at fault for the accident, that her injuries were minor and that she had made a full recovery. Our attorneys refused to accept the $35,000.00 settlement offered by the defendant’s insurance company and proceeded to trial where we proved that the accident was 100% the defendant’s fault and that her injuries were substantial. The Brooklyn Jury saw the case our way and awarded our client $250,000.00 for her injuries.

$225,000.00 settlement obtained by Rosenberg & Rodriguez for a woman who tripped and fell on a raised portion of a city sidewalk and sustained a fractured non-dominant wrist. The City of New York denied liability and payment on this case for several years based on their claim that the City had not received any prior written complaints of the broken sidewalk as required by law for a municipality to be responsible. Our attorneys would not take “no” for an answer and conducted a thorough investigation that included interviewing neighbors and reviewing the archives maintained by the Department of Transportation and other city agencies. We ultimately discovered that an elderly man had fallen and injured himself on that same defect approximately a year before our client’s accident and that the City was in fact aware of the broken sidewalk. After being confronted with the evidence we discovered, the City of New York was forced to settle the case shortly before trial.

$225,000.00 for a woman who tripped and fell on a raised portion of a city sidewalk and sustained a fractured non-dominant wrist. The City of New York denied liability and payment on this case for several years based on their claim that the City had not received any prior written complaints of the broken sidewalk as required by law for a municipality to be responsible. Our attorneys would not take “no” for an answer and conducted a thorough investigation that included interviewing neighbors and reviewing the archives maintained by the Department of Transportation and other city agencies. We ultimately discovered that an elderly man had fallen and injured himself on that same defect approximately a year before our client’s accident and that the City was in fact aware of the broken sidewalk. After being confronted with the evidence we discovered, the City of New York was forced to settle the case shortly before trial.

$220,000.00 settlement obtained for a man who was struck in the head with debris from a collapsing ceiling. The plaintiff, a security guard, was at his job site when the ceiling in the building’s office partially collapsed striking him in the head and shoulders. The defendants initially denied causing or having any reason to know of the condition of the ceiling. The defendants also denied the severity of the plaintiff’s injuries. Our investigation revealed that there had been an on-going leak in the building that weakened the ceiling and that the defendant owners were aware of the condition. Our findings resulted in a settlement of $220,000.00 for our client.

$125,000.00 settlement obtained by Rosenberg & Rodriguez for a passenger of a car that went out of control and crashed on a highway in the State of Maryland. The plaintiff sustained a fractured leg in the accident. The defendant’s attorneys argued that the accident was not the defendant’s fault because the crash was caused by an unexpected blown tire. R&R was able to demonstrate that the defendant had failed to properly maintain the vehicle and that he was speeding prior to the accident. The defendant’s insurance company ultimately settled and tendered its entire policy.

$120,000.00 jury verdict for a man in his mid-30s who was involved in a two-car intersection accident with a van and sustained shoulder, neck, and back injuries. The defendant’s attorneys, insurance company, and medical experts all claimed that the case should be dismissed because our client’s injuries were minor and that he had made a full recovery. The defendant’s attorneys pointed to the fact that our client did not miss significant time from work and was able to return to his job without restrictions. At trial we were able to demonstrate that, although our client returned to his job as a swimming pool installer on a full-time basis, his injuries were nevertheless substantial and the Queens Jury awarded our client $120,000.00 for his injuries.

$100,000.00 awarded in an arbitration stemming from a two-car accident. The plaintiff, who was a passenger in the vehicle, sustained a knee injury as a result of the accident. The defendant’s insurance company argued that the knee condition was not related to the accident and that the plaintiff was not entitled to compensation for his injury. During the arbitration, R&R proved the meritorious nature of the plaintiff’s claim and secured a total award of $100,000.00 (the entire insurance coverage available) on behalf of the plaintiff.

$100,000.00 settlement obtained for an elderly lady who tripped and fell on a raised portion of a city sidewalk and sustained a fractured wrist. The City of New York denied liability and payment based on their claim that the City had not received prior complaints of the broken sidewalk. The City, relying on a notation in the plaintiff’s hospital records, claimed that the plaintiff fell because she “slipped” on ice and not because she tripped on the broken sidewalk. Notwithstanding the City’s position, R&R continued with the case and ultimately secured a $100,000.00 settlement on behalf of the plaintiff.

$100,000.00 settlement obtained for a pedestrian that was knocked down by a mini school bus. The defendants claimed that there was no contact between the bus and the plaintiff and that if contact did occur it was solely the plaintiff’s fault because she improperly crossed in the middle of the block from between two stopped vehicles. Notwithstanding the defendant’s position, R&R was able to obtain a $100,000.00 settlement on behalf of the plaintiff.

$75,000.00 for an 89-year-old man with severe dementia who was unable to provide a clear account of what happened when he sustained a hip fracture at a nursing home. This case was particularly challenging because our attorneys had to construct a theory of liability based solely on the records without the benefit of our client’s version of the occurrence. Our attorneys were able to demonstrate that the nursing home did not follow the proper safety precautions with our elderly client without the need for our client to testify in Court.

$72,500.00 awarded in an arbitration stemming from a two-car accident that occurred in midtown Manhattan. The plaintiff sustained a knee injury as a result of the accident. The defendant argued that the accident was the plaintiff’s fault for failing to avoid the defendant’s turning vehicle. The defendant also argued that the plaintiff was not injured in the accident; that the plaintiff’s knee condition was “degenerative” in nature (in other words, that it was not caused as a result of the accident); and that the minimal amount of medical treatment undergone by the plaintiff demonstrated that his injuries were insignificant. R&R represented the plaintiff and presented evidence proving that the defendant was responsible for the accident and demonstrating the serious nature of the injuries sustained by the plaintiff. The arbitrator agreed with the plaintiff and awarded him $72,500.00

Congratulations to Robin Halstrom for settling a motor vehicle case for $35,000 (out of 50,000k available insurance) during discovery. According to the medical records, the plaintiffs, a husband and wife in their late 80s/early 90s, suffered back and neck injuries, although both had prior back and neck problems and excessive degeneration. They went for minimal treatment for these conditions. Our clients were so happy about this settlement that the husband, in his 90’s, couldn’t wait to take his wife out for a nice dinner (and buy himself new tires for his car)! These are the people and situations that make coming to work every day a pleasure. We are so happy for the two of you!

Yvrose Morin v Sandra Y. Torres, Index # 502272/19 Congratulations to Ivan J. Rodriguez for his successful summary judgment motion in this personal injury case. This case stems from a two car accident that occurred in Queens, New York.  The defendant claimed that this rear-end accident was caused when the plaintiff unexpectedly stopped short while driving causing the defendant to hit her in the rear.  We were able to demonstrate that the defendant was following too closely at the time of the accident and that she gave contradictory statements to the police immediately following the accident. The court determined that the plaintiff was not responsible for the accident and deemed that the accident was 100% the fault of the defendant.

Michael Myers, et al. vs. Sharif M. Khan, Index #:  716938/2018 Congratulations to Ivan J. Rodriguez for his successful summary judgment motion in this personal injury case. This case stems from a three car accident that occurred on the Southern State Parkway.  It was our position that the defendants were fully responsible for causing this accident  this case. The defendants disagreed claiming that the plaintiff bore some responsibility for the accident. The court agreed with our position and granted our motion. The trial of the case will proceed solely on the issue of the extent of the plaintiffs’ injuries. Here is a copy of the court’s decision.

Nelson Viruet v. American United Transportation, Inc. – NY Civ. Ct., Index #: TS-300035-18/NY Congratulations to Ivan J. Rodriguez for his successful liability verdict on this disputed intersection accident. This is a two car accident in an intersection. The jury rejected the defendants’ claims that the plaintiff was either fully or partially to blame for the accident and determined that the defendants were 100% responsible.

Della Scruggs v. MVAIC – Kings Civ. Ct., Index #: TS-300257-16/KI Congratulations to Ivan J. Rodriguez for his successful liability verdict on this disputed pedestrian knock-down case. This is an accident involving a pedestrian who was struck by a vehicle. The defendant claimed that the plaintiff stepped off the curb into the path of a moving vehicle. The jury rejected the defendants’ claims that the plaintiff was to blame for the accident and determined that the driver was 100% responsible.

Jose A. Rodriguez v. Jose Batista, Bx. Sup. Ct., Index #: 22187/15 Congratulations to Ivan J. Rodriguez for successfully defending the defendants’ motion to dismiss the plaintiff’s case. Rosenberg & Rodriguez represents the plaintiff in this personal injury case stemming from a motor vehicle accident. The defendants recently made a motion to dismiss the plaintiff’s case arguing that the plaintiff had not sustained a serious injury and that the plaintiff’s complaints are the result of a prior accident that the plaintiff had been involved in. Rosenberg & Rodriguez opposed the defendants’ motion and demonstrated that sufficient evidence existed to allow the case to proceed to trial, thereby defeating defendants’ motion to dismiss. The case is on-going and the trial is expected to take place in 2019 in the Bronx County Supreme Court.

Nelson Viruet v. American United Transportation, Inc. – NY Civ. Ct., Index #: TS-300035-18/NY Congratulations to Ivan J. Rodriguez for his successful trial motion to preclude bio-mechanical engineer Kevin Toosi, Ph.D. from testifying at the trial of this motor vehicle accident case. This is a low-impact car accident case resulting in injuries to the plaintiff. The defendants hired a bio-mechanical engineer who reviewed certain accident related materials and prepared a report on behalf of the defendants, opining that the relatively low impact of this accident could not have resulted in the plaintiff’s claimed injuries. Mr. Rodriguez, after analyzing the expert’s report and conclusions, determined that the expert was relying on incomplete and inadmissible evidence. Mr. Rodriguez filed a motion on behalf of the plaintiff to prevent the expert from testifying at the trial. The defendants vigorously opposed the motion. The trial judge, after reviewing the papers submitted by both sides, agreed with our position, granted the motion and prevented the expert from testifying at the trial. The court’s decision is attached here.

Fausto Ortiz v. Luis A. Almonte, Index #: 23847/15 Congratulations to Ivan J. Rodriguez for his successful summary judgment motion in this personal injury case stemming from a 2015 motor vehicle accident. It was our position that the accident was caused solely by the negligence of the defendant in this case. The defendant claimed that he was not responsible for the accident and/or that plaintiff bears some responsibility for the car accident. The court agreed with our position and granted our motion. Having proven that the accident was solely the fault of the defendant, the trial of the case will proceed solely on the issue of the extent of the plaintiff’s injuries.

New York County Supreme Court, Index # 104843/08 Rosenberg & Rodriguez successfully moved for summary judgment on the issue of liability and for the dismissal of the defendants’ liability related affirmative defenses. This personal injury and wrongful death case stems from a two-car accident that resulted in the tragic death of a two-year-old child who was a passenger in one of the involved vehicles. The child’s mother, also a passenger, sustained psychological and emotional injuries from witnessing the death of her child. The defendants claimed that they were not responsible for either the child’s death or the mother’s resulting psychological injuries because the mother allegedly failed to restrain the child with a seat belt or in a car seat. The defendants also moved to have the mother’s claims dismissed based on her alleged failure to sustain a “serious injury” pursuant to the NYS Insurance Law. R&R moved to have the defendants’ liability defenses dismissed and opposed the defendants’ motion to dismiss the mother’s case. R&R succeeded in having all of the defendant’s liability defenses dismissed by convincing the New York County Supreme Court that, under the current law, a passenger has no duty to restrain another passenger in a motor vehicle and cannot be held accountable for failing to do so. R&R also successfully obtained summary judgment on the issue of liability. Finally, R&R successfully opposed the defendants’ motion to dismiss the mother’s case by demonstrating that there is significant evidence of the “serious” nature of her psychological injuries. The case is scheduled for trial in early spring of 2012.

Richmond County Supreme Court, Index # 100099/09 Rosenberg & Rodriguez, representing an injured plaintiff, successfully defeated the defendants’ motion to dismiss the plaintiff’s case. The defendants made a motion before the Richmond County Supreme Court to dismiss the plaintiff’s case arguing that she had failed to sustain a “serious injury” as that term is defined by the NYS Insurance Law. The defendants contended that the plaintiff’s injury were minor and had fully resolved thereby warranting dismissal of her personal injury lawsuit. R&R opposed the defendants’ motion and demonstrated that sufficient evidence existed to allow the case to proceed to trial, thereby defeating defendants’ motion to dismiss. The case is on going and the trial is expected for later this year in the Richmond County Supreme Court.

Richard Pu v IAR Apple Optical – NY Civ. Ct., Index # 057407/08 Rosenberg & Rodriguez successfully defended an optical store in a consumer transaction lawsuit. This unusual case arose out of the sale of a pair of custom-made designer eyeglasses. The plaintiff, a suspended attorney, alleged that IAR Apple Optical was engaged in wide-scale consumer fraud because it allegedly failed to honor a lowest price guaranty offered to all of its customers. The plaintiff sued for fraud, breach of contract, deceptive business practices and defamation. After several years of contentious litigation, R&R was able to obtain the dismissal of the entire lawsuit.

Rodriguez v. United Health Corporation, Fair Hearing # 5916974P Rosenberg & Rodriguez represented a patient in a dispute with United Health Care Insurance Co. (UHC) stemming from UHC’s denial of health insurance benefits. The patient was scheduled to undergo a surgical procedure and the patient’s physician requested approval of a 2 – 3 day hospital stay following the surgery. UHC, while approving insurance coverage of the surgery, denied the physician’s request for the in-patient hospital stay. UHC argued that the procedure was ambulatory and that an in-patient stay was unnecessary. R&R, on behalf of the patient, appealed the decision. During a recent administrative hearing, R&R provided medical studies and other evidence to successfully demonstrate that the in-patient stay was appropriate and necessary. The administrative judge agreed with R&R’s position and the denial of coverage was reversed.

Rosenberg & Rodriguez successfully argued before the Appellate Division of the First Department on behalf of Plaintiff Wilson Castillo, a victim of a motor vehicle accident. The defendants had made a motion to dismiss Mr. Castillo’s case before the Bronx County Supreme Court arguing that Mr. Castillo had failed to sustain a “serious injury” as that term is defined by the Insurance Law of the State of New York. The defendants contended that Mr. Castillo’s knee injury was pre-existing and was not caused by the accident involving the defendants’ vehicle. R&R opposed the defendants’ motion and demonstrated that sufficient evidence existed to allow the case to proceed to trial, thereby defeating defendants’ motion to dismiss. The defendants appealed the decision to the Appellate Division of the First Department of the State of New York. R&R partner Ivan J. Rodriguez argued the appeal on behalf of the firm and was able to defeat the defendants’ request to overturn the lower court’s decision. The case is on-going and the trial is expected to take place later this year in the Bronx County Supreme Court.