Facts and Background

• Facts and Background:

  Liability was admitted. The accident occurred on September 27, 2018 at the Chamlian Armenian School in Glendale. This was a four-car accident in which plaintiff was rear-ended by defendant’s vehicle. The impact from defendant’s vehicle pushed plaintiff’s vehicle into the two vehicles in front of plaintiff, a 2007 Chevrolet Tahoe and a 2012 Mercedes Benz GL550, causing plaintiff to feel three impacts. Plaintiff’s vehicle was at a complete stop when it was rear-ended by defendant’s vehicle.

  Plaintiff testified her body moved back and forth several times. Plaintiff did not have any warning of the accident. The seat belt left a mark on plaintiff’s body. Property damage was significant. All four vehicles sustained frame damage and all four vehicles were declared total losses.

  Plaintiff’s vehicle, a 2017 Maserati Ghibli, sustained damages in the amount of $69,246.93. Defendant’s 2011 Honda Odyssey sustained damages in the amount of $8,674.87. All four vehicles involved were declared "total losses." The plaintiff was shocked and dazed at the scene of the accident. She alleged she was helped out of her car by a security guard. She testified that she had to ask another parent at the school to take her young daughter home and she called her husband from the scene of the accident.

• Plaintiff's Contentions:

  Plaintiff, a dentist of 20 years, alleged that she could never work as a dentist again because of excruciating back pain, numbness and tingling in her feet and hands and balance/vestibular problems. She underwent three lumbar spine epidural injections and ultimately underwent a lumbar spine microdiscectomy, a year after the accident.

  Plaintiff alleged she needed the following treatment in the future: lumbar spine epidural injections; cervical spine injections; lumbar spine fusion; cervical spine fusion; lumbar spine trial and permanent spinal cord stimulator; and vestibular therapy. Plaintiff did not have a delay in treatment; she presented for chiropractic treatment on the day after the accident and she treated with the chiropractor for eight months. In October 2018, plaintiff underwent an MRI of the lumbar spine that allegedly showed a disc herniation on L5-S1. One year later, in September 2019, plaintiff underwent a second MRI of the lumbar spine which showed a new 8 mm herniation at L5-S1. Plaintiff also argued the MRIs showed an annular fissure which was caused by the accident.

  Plaintiff’s husband provided testimony. He and the plaintiff own their dental practice. He testified that his wife has not been able to work as a dentist since the accident. He also testified that plaintiff took pain medication and was always sleepy and in bed in pain. Plaintiff’s college-aged daughter also testified as a damages witness. Her testimony was emotional. She testified about the changes she witnessed in her mother and explained that her mother was tired and in pain all of the time and that she missed out on a lot of things in her daughter’s life. Plaintiff’s babysitter also provided damages testimony. Plaintiff had a baby at the age of 50, six months before the accident. The babysitter testified that she was only hired to work for a number of months, but that her contract was extended to years due to plaintiff’s injuries from the accident. The babysitter also testified that plaintiff’s infant adhered to the babysitter and considered the babysitter his mother, which was devastating to the plaintiff. The babysitter explained that the plaintiff was unable to bond with her infant due to the injuries and the pain plaintiff suffered in the accident.

• Defendant's Contentions:

  Defendant and the plaintiff knew each other before the accident and she was actually a patient of the plaintiff’s dental practice. Defendant argued that plaintiff had low back pain and dizziness before the accident of September 27, 2018 and that these conditions were not made worse by the accident. Defendant also argued plaintiff had ulnar neuropathy complaints involving the elbow, hands and thumb/fingers, which was unrelated to the accident. 

  Defendant provided evidence that plaintiff and plaintiff’s husband hired a hygienist after the accident and even bought another dental practice. Defendant also offered evidence that plaintiff continued to work after the accident.