Deep understanding of medical imaging and injury claims paired with diligent research yields win for transportation client

Where we started: Our client, a transportation company and firm client for decades, faced allegations of negligence after one of its trucks rear-ended the Plaintiff. Plaintiff’s medical experts testified that the Plaintiff sustained a traumatic brain injury (TBI) due to the collision and would require both neck and back surgery, with projected future medical expenses totaling $4.7 million. Brain injury claims are currently a hot area in the world of law, and the Plaintiff supported the TBI claim based on Diffusion Tensor Imaging (DTI).

Our strategy – plus more: The McGlinchey team countered the Plaintiff’s TBI claim with expert medical testimony explaining that DTI is an experimental technique appropriate for analyzing group comparisons in a medical research context but is not suited for individual patient diagnoses. In this case, the Plaintiff’s scan was compared to a neurotypical control group whose members had to attest that they had no previous head injuries, concussions, or drug use. Our team completed discovery on the control group and revealed that just 30% of the group matched the Plaintiff’s age for comparison. Our team uncovered a previous conviction of cocaine possession and presented medical records wherein the Plaintiff stated his passion for boxing – indicating that he likely sustained head injuries or concussions before the accident with the garbage truck occurred. Moreover, we uncovered medical records from a previous auto accident with scans that signaled a suspected TBI. McGlinchey team’s of medical experts reviewed the DTI scan, along with all the additional medical records and documentation, and testified that the factual evidence comparing the Plaintiff to a neurotypical control group was “apples and oranges,” and that the current DTI scan could not successfully prove that any brain injury the Plaintiff alleged was solely due to the accident involving our client.

Furthermore, McGlinchey’s surveillance revealed the Plaintiff participating in many activities that he claimed he could not do as a result of the accident, including running, working on cars, changing tires, and carrying his child.

Upshot: McGlinchey’s team of attorneys and paralegals put their extensive experience defending allegations of brain injuries, and a particular familiarity with brain and medical imaging, specifically DTI, to work in predicting what damages opposing counsel would allege, determining the best line of questioning for the Plaintiff’s medical experts, and identifying the most effective factual evidence to defeat this claim against our client. Our team’s surveillance evidence, along with our strategically-timed presentation of information regarding the Plaintiff’s occupation about which his doctors were not even aware, cast sufficient doubt on his TBI claim. The judge specifically mentioned a lack of credibility in rejecting the brain injury and future surgery claims. The Plaintiff was awarded only $45,000 total: $10,000 for past medical expenses and $35,000 in general damages.