We represented three Canadian family members who were injured in an automobile accident.  One of them had seen a chiropractor on a continuing basis for years prior to the accident.  None of them suffered broken bones.  Their injuries were limited to sprains and strains of soft tissues such as muscles, ligaments, etc.

Typically soft tissue cases result in small verdicts.  They aren’t valued very highly for settlement purposes by insurance companies.

Like most soft tissue cases, we didn’t have any “objective evidence” regarding the client’s injuries.  For instance, we didn’t have an x-ray showing a broken bone.  But this case was different from most “soft tissue” cases.

It was different because all three clients excelled at their depositions.  Their character, work-ethic and the value they placed on “family” came through loud and clear.

These were people that a jury would like and opposing counsel was astute enough to recognize that fact.  Despite what anyone else says I firmly believe that jury trials are popularity contests.  Juries, like other groups of people, absorb information through a filter.  The filter can be positive, neutral or negative.  In this case, the jury’s filter for the information it received about the family’s claims would have been very positive.

Settling soft tissue claims for $150,000.00 – a figure well over five times the cost of treatment – definitely qualifies this case as a success story.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *