West Palm Beach car accident Plaintiff’s Closing Argument—Automobile Collision
Thank you for the close attention you have paid to this case.
I remind you that this is not a criminal case where everything must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt. It is a case of negligence and as the court instructed you in Instruction No. 4, it is whether you believe certain propositions of fact submitted to you by the great weight of the evidence. That means that if the scales tip just 51% on Polly West Palm Beach car accident Plaintiff’s side and 49% on the side of the defendant, Polly West Palm Beach car accident Plaintiff is entitled to your verdict. It only takes a little finger’s weight to tip the scale in her favor—not 75%, not 100%, just anything over half.
Furthermore, I’ll remind you that we are not claiming that the defendant did any intentional act, but as the court has told you in Instruction No. 7, we believe that Mr. Head failed to use that degree of care that a very careful and prudent person would use under the same or similar circumstances.
Automobiles are dangerous and under our laws certain precautions and rules have been devised. Two of those rules are discussed in the Court’s Instruction No. 6 to you.
The first paragraph says that you must find for Polly if you believe that defendant failed to yield the right-of-way or failed to keep a careful lookout. Let’s stop a minute and talk about this. If you find the defendant did one of these 2 things from the evidence, it will support your verdict for Polly West Palm Beach car accident Plaintiff.
What was the eyewitness testimony except for Mr. Head that you heard on both of these two points? It was unanimous that Mr. Head pulled in front of Polly when she was only about 25 yards away and was traveling the speed limit.
Now the Manier girls were just standing in their yard and had this entire wreck unfold before their eyes, and they are entirely independent witnesses who have no interest in the outcome one way or the other.
Who, that was present at the time of the wreck, supported the defendant’s version of this wreck? No one, except the defendant himself. He’s got a distinct interest in this case. And what did he tell you? First, he didn’t even see Polly’s vehicle, so he doesn’t even know nor can he testify as to how close or far it was when he turned his vehicle left in front of it. I suggest to you that the defendant, by that very statement alone, has admitted that he didn’t exercise the highest degree of care.
I don’t believe there is any doubt under the evidence that the defendant either failed to yield the right of way or failed to keep a careful lookout.
Paragraphs Second and Third of the court’s instruction goes on to tell you that if you find the defendant was thereby negligent and as a direct result, Polly West Palm Beach car accident Plaintiff sustained damage, then your verdict must be for Polly West Palm Beach car accident Plaintiff.
Was the defendant’s failure to keep a careful lookout or failure to yield the right-of-way negligence, or in other words, a failure to use the highest degree of care? If he had done either of these two things, this wreck would not have happened and Polly West Palm Beach car accident Plaintiff would not be in the condition she is in today. Mr. Head must have been in a hurry to get to his son’s trailer in view of him later answering the call to nature when he left the scene of the wreck to go relieve himself. His mind apparently wasn’t totally on his driving. Had he spent just an extra second to look ahead of him, he could have just as easily have waited until the West Palm Beach car accident Plaintiff’s vehicle had passed before he made his turn—but he didn’t. Those negligent failures on his part cost Polly West Palm Beach car accident Plaintiff a lot.
Was she injured? There is no question about that. In view of the evidence I think you must and should return a verdict for Polly West Palm Beach car accident Plaintiff.
Now ladies and gentlemen—you’ve heard a lot of talk from defendant’s attorney, Mr. Gladhand, about this pre-existing arthritis condition of Polly’s.
One thing is certain from all the testimony—before the accident Polly’s head and neck were not in the position or shape they are in now. Polly’s neck was stiff and sure it gave her fits of pain at times, but it was nothing like she has now. She was able to work and she was able to hold her head and neck erect and look you in the eye. Not one witness has disputed the fact that the current condition of her neck was caused by the wreck.
In fact, Dr. Green, Dr. Ferguson, Dr. Myers, Dr. Schwartz, and Dr. Brown have all testified that within a reasonable degree of certainty, slipping forward and downward of the bones in her neck was caused by the trauma of the wreck, and this condition can and does cause severe pain and, as Dr. Green and Dr. Brown testified, this is what is causing Polly’s headaches, which she didn’t have before the accident.
Not one witness has told you that he or she believes that this condition of the subluxation was a natural result of the pre-existing arthritis. In fact, Dr. Schwartz testified he would be surprised to see this kind of a deformity resulting from arthritis alone. It required the whipping effect that the wreck produced.
And remember that none of Polly’s x-rays taken before the wreck showed either the subluxation or the fracture to which Dr. Brown, Dr. Schwartz, and Dr. Green refer in the post-wreck x-rays. The wreck was of a vehicle that had been going 50 miles per hour crashing into defendant’s car and throwing Polly’s head and neck violently into the dashboard and window area. She hit hard enough to knock her out, and her doctors believe she hit hard enough to cause a fracture and the subluxation. Not one witness has testified to the contrary.
They talk about the fact that maybe this all wouldn’t have been so bad if Polly didn’t have the arthritis. But that doesn’t reduce the defendant’s obligation to Polly, because she did have the arthritis. And the law requires that you take the West Palm Beach car accident Plaintiff as you find her, arthritis included, and you compensate her for the injuries she sustained in the wreck. If that includes the aggravation of her pre-existing arthritic condition then so be it.
You don’t cast aside someone and say she can’t recover because she was more fragile than her neighbor who might not have been injured as badly under the same circumstances. Because you have arthritis in your neck doesn’t mean it’s open season on you. If you break an egg you pay for the egg. You don’t say well had it been a golf ball it wouldn’t have broken. And yet that seems to be the attitude of the defendant and his lawyer. The law is designed to protect the weak more than the strong. Polly West Palm Beach car accident Plaintiff is entitled to that protection.
Then they question the chiropractic treatments—they suggest that maybe Dr. Brown, by manipulating Polly’s neck, caused the fracture and the subluxation and it was not the wreck. What medical evidence do they put before you to support this inference? Absolutely none. Nobody but Mr. Gladhand has suggested this. The only thing that he has to support it is the fact the subluxation didn’t appear in the x-ray taken the night of the wreck. But Dr. Greene and Dr. Ferguson gave a very simple explanation of why it didn’t show up. They had Polly lying down on the x-ray table so it wouldn’t appear when the x-ray was taken. However, as Dr. Green pointed out, the fracture area does appear in that x-ray. The fracture area that was not present in her pre-wreck x-rays did appear in the x-ray taken that night after the wreck. That rules out Dr. Brown’s manipulations. Nobody but Mr. Gladhand has attempted to blame the condition of Polly’s neck on anything but the wreck that defendant caused. Furthermore, Dr. Brown didn’t render any treatment to Polly before the x-ray he took on January 2, only 4 days after the wreck. In that x-ray, you can already see the subluxation. The Defendant’s negligence caused the subluxation, not Dr. Brown or anything else. The physical evidence proves it.
What is Polly West Palm Beach car accident Plaintiff entitled to recover?
She is entitled to recover her medical expenses that are related to her injuries from the wreck. They total $39,000.
She is entitled to recover her loss of wages from the date of the wreck to the present time. They total $70,000.
She is entitled to recover her future loss of wages because of her unemployability as a result of the condition of her neck from the accident. Assuming Polly would have worked to a normal retirement age of 65 from her 45th birthday this August, she will lose an additional $15,000 per year for each of those 20 years. That doesn’t consider any increase in her wages over the years for inflation—just what she made in 2004. That’s an additional loss of $300,000. She will suffer in the future. She will never be able to work again. She had worked regularly and steadily for the 13 years before the wreck. She has not been able to work since. She isn’t some bum who doesn’t want to work. She wants to work and earn her own way. But she can’t. Her doctors have told her that. Dr. Whipple told you that she isn’t qualified to do any kind of work other than the type she was doing, and she can’t physically do that now or ever in the future. Her condition won’t get better. She won’t wake up some day and be able to hold her head up. It just won’t happen. If anything, her condition will get worse. Polly is entitled to recover what she would have earned. She is entitled to recover what she was entitled to earn.
Polly is entitled to recover for the deformity in her neck, her disability, her mental anguish, and her pain and suffering that are attributable to the injuries from the wreck.
Ladies and Gentlemen, it is human nature to turn our minds from mental anguish, just as we turn our minds away from eventual death. If we didn’t do this, we would all go crazy from the anxiety and concern.
There is no yardstick to measure pain and mental suffering but, if you are a religious person, God thought nothing worse as punishment than to make hell a place of pain and suffering.
The law forbids cruel and unusual punishment. We have heard a lot about the death penalty, but we still have it. The law says you can do away with life but you cannot hurt or cause mental anguish. Mental anguish is nothing but a cancer—it constantly gnaws away. Pain is not bought and sold, but relief of pain can be bought. A person thinks nothing about paying $500 or more for anesthesia for an hour. How many hours has West Palm Beach car accident Plaintiff endured mental anguish and what about the future?
One of the most important things in this life is dignity. If you lose your dignity, you have lost just about everything important in life. What goes through Polly’s mind and stays on her mind when she cannot hold her head erect and look you in the eye?
Ladies and Gentlemen, this then is the case of a deformity with humiliation, embarrassment, and loss of dignity. This says nothing of the mental anguish, medical expense and loss of wages. I can do no more than present it. The solemn task of tallying it up must be reserved to you and to you alone. You cannot give Polly West Palm Beach car accident Plaintiff her health, but you can compensate her so she can face the future without fear of economic catastrophe. When you have done this, you will have done all that God or man can ask of you. You will have done all that we humans are permitted to do to redress people who have been injured.
What you do here today will be a part of you forever. When this case is over and you go to your homes, you will reappraise your actions in this case in your own minds many times as the years go by. Now and again the thought of this case will cross your mind. Perhaps you will wonder what has happened to Polly. When this happens, you will be at ease with your conscience. You will smile, for you will remember that on this day you were the instruments of justice. When you go home tonight and lie down on your pillow you will say I did the right thing, I gave her the full measure of damages that she deserved.