In the non-precedential Memorandum decision in the case of Hernandez-Lerch v. Gray, No. 842 MDA 2015 (Pa. Super. May 17, 2016 Panella, Lazarus, Platt, J.J.)(Op. by Lazarus, J.), by Pennsylvania Superior Court ruled that a trial court erred in denying the Plaintiff’s Motion for a New Trial on the issue on damages after the jury awarded an automobile accident Plaintiff damages for medical bills and wage loss but nothing for pain and suffering. The court found that uncontested evidence of the Plaintiff’s injuries showed that she had suffered compensable pain that amounted to more than a mere transient rub of life.
According to the Opinion, the Plaintiff alleged soft issue injuries along with wage losses and medical expenses. The Superior Court noted that uncontested evidence revealed that the Plaintiff’s injuries were treated with an epidural steroid injection, physical therapy, along with the use of a TENS unit and a home traction unit. The court reiterated that the evidence of the injury was uncontested and that the Plaintiff’s treating doctor and physician’s assistant offered testimony in records to substantiate the Plaintiff’s alleged injuries.
More specifically, the court noted that the evidence showed that the Plaintiff suffered cervical and lumbar sprain and strain injuries with resultant pain, along with an aggravation of a pre-existing back injury. The court also noted that the injuries took at least four (4) months to heal.
Anyone wishing to read a copy of this decision online may click this LINK.
Source: “Digest of Recent Opinions.” Pennsylvania Law Weekly (May 31, 2016).