A Carluzzo Rochkind & Smith note: Following is an excellent article by Virginia Lawyers Weekly. We did not handle this case, but it brings up important points your personal injury lawyers should be familiar with. For more than 30 years our personal injury lawyers in Manassas have helped clients with such matters in Prince William County, Fairfax County, Woodbridge, and throughout Northern Virginia. If you have any questions or would like to schedule an appointment, please contact our law firm at (703) 361-0776.
Negligence: Defense verdict in car accident lawsuit is affirmed
By Virginia Lawyers Weekly – 2/24/2025
Where a man presented evidence of pain, suffering and inconvenience following a car accident, and an orthopedic surgeon related those injuries to the collision, the trial court erred in finding that evidence insufficient to establish a prima facie case of damages.
Background
Leon Strom Sr. appeals the trial court’s order granting Rizalito Del Rosario’s motion to strike his personal injury suit. He argues that evidence of unliquidated damages—pain, suffering and inconvenience—is sufficient alone, without accompanying medical bills, to establish a prima facie case of damages.
Analysis
The trial court erred in finding that Strom did not present sufficient evidence of damages. Strom testified that after the collision, he experienced neck and back pain that radiated into his arms and legs. He experienced numbness in his hand, which made it difficult for him to hold objects. The symptoms disrupted his normal activities, caused stress in his marriage and impeded his mobility.
The pain continued through trial, and his treatment provided only temporary relief. Dr. Hajeer Sabet, an orthopedic surgeon, diagnosed Strom’s symptoms and related those injuries to the collision. This evidence establishes a prima facie case of damages.
Appellee’s argument that evidence of pain, suffering, and inconvenience is too “speculative” without accompanying medical bills is inconsistent with settled precedent. Medical expenses are only one factor for assessing damages within a comprehensive list that the jury is permitted to consider. Appellee cites no Virginia law or precedent that requires plaintiffs to introduce medical bills in order to establish pain, suffering or inconvenience.
Although Strom presented no evidence of past or future medical expenses, he nonetheless established a prima facie case that he suffered bodily injuries as the result of the accident and consequently damages related to physical and mental pain, suffering and inconvenience. As such, the trial court was obligated to grant Strom the reasonable inference that, notwithstanding the absence of medical expenses, a jury issue was presented.
Whether that evidence ultimately would have persuaded the jury was neither for the trial court nor this court to decide. The trial court therefore erred in finding that Strom failed to present evidence of damages and dismissing his case.
Reversed and remanded.
Strom Sr. v. Del Rosario. Record No. 0083-24-4, Feb. 11, 2025. CAV (unpublished opinion) (Fulton III). From the Circuit Court of Fairfax County (Gardiner). Ashley E. Strandjord (Luke T. Needleman; ChasenBoscolo, on brief), for appellant. Wm. Tyler Shands (Kerrigan O’Malley; Carter & Shands, PC, on brief), for appellee. VLW 025-7-023. 6 pp.
If you are in need of experienced personal injury lawyers who get results, please contact us online or by calling 703-361-0776.
Personal injury lawyers in Manassas serving Prince William County, Fairfax County, Woodbridge, and all of Northern Virginia.
