PMT Delivers a Win – Exaggerated Claims Doom Plaintiff’s Case

PMT Delivers a Win – Exaggerated Claims Doom Plaintiff’s Case

By Shawn M. Weakland and Thomas M. Bona. Court: Supreme Court, Kings County Judge: Hon. Wayne P. Saitta Case Type: Automobile – Rear-end Accident Caption: Jerry Gonzalez v. Jaquan Hinson Index No.: 1108/2015 Decision Date: March 6, 2020 Decision: Jury 6 – 0 / All Issues Many people are prone to exaggeration and that also includes plaintiffs at trial. Contrary to some opinions, jurors are skeptical and they really  do evaluate and weigh the claims that are given to them by plaintiffs. However, a skilled trial attorney who has thoroughly prepared his case, can guide the jury to show where the plaintiff is exaggerating his claims. A recent case where we received a defense verdict at trial demonstrates how this is done. In Gonzalez v. Hinson, the plaintiff was struck in the rear by our client. Because a person is almost always at fault when this happens, plaintiff won summary judgment on liability and the trial proceeded on damages only. Plaintiff claimed serious injuries to his neck including a herniated disc which required fusion surgery and other herniated and bulging discs. Plaintiff claimed that because of his injuries, he had to leave the Marine reserves and could no longer participate in routine social activities including salsa dancing. He continued, however, to work in a warehouse operating a crane. Plaintiff claimed that his special damages were $100,000 which would be needed for future surgery. Plaintiff did not admit to any pre-existing back injuries and there was no proof of this. Our trial attorney argued the plaintiff’s injuries were non-existent and that his multiple level traumatic spinal injuries could not be...