Plaintiff doesn't go to ER after rear-ender that aggravated pre-existing condition; later suffers neck and back pain leading to disc replacement.
The Case
- Case Name: Alfredo Mendoza v. Rhonda Rothstein
- Court and Case Number: Los Angeles Superior Court / 20STCV49503
- Date of Verdict or Judgment: Thursday, December 11, 2025
- Date Action was Filed: Thursday, June 03, 2021
- Type of Case: Vehicles - Auto vs. Auto
- Judge or Arbitrator(s): Hon. Michael Levanas
- Plaintiffs:
Alfredo Mendoza, 51
- Defendants:
Rhonda Rothstein
- Type of Result: Jury Verdict
The Result
- Gross Verdict or Award: $1,975,000
- Net Verdict or Award: $1,975,000
The Attorneys
- Attorney for the Plaintiff:
Kramer Trial Lawyers APC by Daniel Kramer and Teresa Johnson, Los Angeles.
Saeedian Law Group by Michael Saeedian and Daniella Saeedian, Los Angeles.
- Attorney for the Defendant:
Rashtian Law Group APC by Daniel Rashtian, Irvine.
The Experts
- Plaintiff’s Medical Expert(s):
Stepan Kasimian, M.D., orthopedic surgery.
Srinath Samurdala, M.D., neurosurgery.
- Defendant's Medical Expert(s):
None.
Facts and Background
- Facts and Background:
This case arose from a motor vehicle collision on January 9, 2019, in East Los Angeles. Plaintiff, wearing his shoulder restraint, was the driver of a Chevy van stopped in a left-turn lane at an intersection. His vehicle was rear-ended by a Porsche coupe. Although the airbags did not deploy and the vehicle was not totaled, plaintiff reported a significant jolt from the impact and experienced a “crack” sensation in his back upon exiting the vehicle. Within a day of the collision, he began experiencing neck and lower-back pain.
- Plaintiff's Contentions:
Plaintiff contended that defendant negligently failed to stop before colliding with his vehicle, causing the crash. Further, that the collision aggravated previously asymptomatic and stable degenerative spinal conditions, triggering ongoing pain and radiculopathy.
Plaintiff presented evidence of objective findings on imaging, including herniations and nerve impingement, consistent with his symptoms.
- Defendant's Contentions:
That the collision was minor and insufficient to cause significant injury, emphasizing the absence of an emergency-room visit and limited immediate objective findings. Defendant argued that plaintiff’s complaints were attributable to pre-existing degenerative conditions. Defendant further contended that the artificial disc replacement surgery was elective and not medically necessary, challenged the reasonableness of the medical billing, and disputed the need for any future care as speculative.
Injuries and Other Damages
- Physical Injuries claimed by Plaintiff:
Plaintiff underwent conservative care, including chiropractic treatment and diagnostic imaging, followed by pain management interventions such as lumbar and cervical epidural steroid injections.
When those measures failed to provide relief, he underwent a C5–C6 artificial disc replacement, followed by postoperative physical therapy.
Additional Notes
Insurer: Voyager Indemnity Insurance Co.