Claimant passenger not wearing seat belt when car hit by underinsured motorist. Arb award of $809K.

Summary

Twenty percent contributory negligence assigned to claimant.

Gross Verdict or Award: $1,011,800
Net Verdict or Award: $809,440
Settlement Amount: $15,000 with underinsured driver (in addition to arb award)
Contributory/Comparative Negligence: Claimant: 20%; Respondent: 80%
Economic Damages:
After 20% contributory negligence:

Past medical: $163,000

Future medical: $388,800
Non-Economic Damages:
After 20% contributory negligence:

Non-economic damages: $460,000
Trial or Arbitration Time: 5 days
Post Trial Motions & Post-Verdict Settlements: Memorandum of costs for $100,000 to $200,000 of costs by claimant to be filed. Respondent intends to file a motion to tax costs and is considering a motion to vacate the arbitrator’s award based upon the arbitrator’s bias and failure to consider material evidence.

Attorney for the Plaintiff:
Wilshire Law Firm by Jonathan C. Teller, Los Angeles.
Attorney for the Defendant:
Selman Breitman LLP by Todd R. Haas, San Diego.

Selman Breitman LLP by Ryan M. Sellers, Santa Ana.

Plaintiff’s Medical Expert(s):
Jan Roughan, life care planning.

Todd Gravori, M.D., neurosurgery.
Defendant's Medical Expert(s):
Michael Weinstein, M.D., orthopedic surgery.
Plaintiff's Technical Expert(s):
Rami Hashish, PhD, DPT, biomechanics.
Defendant's Technical Expert(s):
Bryan C. Randles, M.S., biomechanics.

Facts and Background:
On June 14, 2019, claimant, Renzo Tarazona, 30 years old, was a passenger in a car driven by a rideshare company driver, who was attempting to make a left turn from Artesia Blvd to Normandie Blvd in the city of Gardena. At the same time, an underinsured driver, drove through a red light at the intersection, causing the subject collision. Claimant was not wearing a seatbelt at the time of the subject collision.

Claimant settled with the underinsured driver and sought the remaining UIM policy limit from his own insurer, Indian Harbor Insurance Company.
Plaintiff's Contentions:
That subject collision caused injury to claimant.
Defendant's Contentions:
Respondent argued claimant’s failure to wear his seatbelt was a substantial factor in his injuries, and argued that the shoulder injury would not have occurred if claimant had been wearing his seat belt.

Respondent also argued that the need for claimant’s surgeries was not caused by the accident, but conceded that if the injuries were caused by the accident, claimant would need a future adjacent level cervical fusion surgery.

Physical Injuries claimed by Plaintiff:
Claimant was taken to the hospital. He sustained a disc protrusion at C6-7 and claimed pain to his shoulder. He underwent a cervical fusion surgery at C6-C7 and a shoulder arthroscopic surgery. Claimant claims he has ongoing pain that comes and goes in his neck. He claims he will require future medical care, including follow up with orthopedic, pain management, chiropractor/physical therapy, imagings and a future cervical spine surgery for adjacent segment disease.
Claimant sought recovery for his past and future pain and suffering and past and future medical costs. Claimant claimed he was unable to continue working full time because of the severe pain he suffered, and claimed past lost earnings and future lost earnings as he became dependent on his mother for virtually all support.