CT Court Upholds $0 Award for Plaintiff's Exaggerated Claims

Contact the personal injury attorneys at Maya Murphy, P.C. today. We can help you get the just compensation you deserve for your injuries or those of a loved one. For a free initial consultation, call 203-221-3100 or email JMaya@Mayalaw.com.

At 4:20 p.m. on April 12, 1989, the plaintiff was hit by the defendant after his car moved over a highway lane divider and struck the right front bumper of the plaintiff’s car. Costs of repair to the front bumper was $250. At trial evidence was introduced to show that the plaintiff’s injuries were subjectively exaggerated. The plaintiff was awarded 1,400 for the coverage of economic damages, including medical and vehicular repair costs. The jury awarded $0 in non-economic damages (i.e. damages for pain and suffering).

Plaintiff, a party involved in a car accident, sought damages from defendant, the colliding party, for personal injuries, medical expenses, and loss of earning capacity as a result of the accident. The jury returned a verdict in plaintiff's favor but awarded only certain medical expenses and found zero non-economic damages. Plaintiff moved to set aside the verdict as to amount of damages.

This case arose from a minor car accident that appeared not to cause injuries to either party. Plaintiff, who had experienced headaches prior to the accident, claimed that she sustained significant head and back pain and reduced mobility as a result of the accident. However, even her own doctor testified that he did not believe her immobility claims. The court found that the jury could reasonably have found that plaintiff suffered no pain as a result of the accident. Her complaints were all subjective. She had been treating for similar complaints prior to the accident and the contact between vehicles was minimal. She even testified that she was unhurt after the accident. According to the court, it was entirely consistent for the jury, following the charge given them, to award the treatment expenses which were largely diagnostic, i.e., to discover whether there was any relation between her complaints and the accident, and not to award damages for pain and suffering, because they simply did not believe plaintiff suffered any pain or suffering from the accident as she was not hurt. The court denied plaintiff's motions to set aside the verdict that failed to award her any non-economic damages in her personal injury case arising out of a car accident.

At Maya Murphy, P.C., our personal injury attorneys are dedicated to achieving the best results for individuals and their family members and loved ones whose daily lives have been disrupted by injury, whether caused by a motor vehicle or pedestrian accident, a slip and fall, medical malpractice, a defective product, or otherwise. Our attorneys are not afraid to aggressively pursue and litigate cases and have extensive experience litigating personal injury matters in both state and federal courts, and always with regard to the unique circumstances of our client and the injury he or she has sustained. 

Please contact Joseph C. Maya, Esq., at 203-221-3100, or at JMaya@mayalaw.com, to schedule a free consultation.

Source: Abdulqader v. Solek, 1992 Conn. Super. LEXIS 3102 (Conn. Super. Ct. Oct. 30, 1992)