The
court additionally ruled that the Plaintiff was not barred from seeking damages
for pain and suffering under the Tort Claims Act on the basis that she
allegedly did not have evidence of a permanent injury. In this regard, the court again noted that
issues of fact remain and also emphasized that the expert reports were not yet
due in the case.
This
matter arose out of a motor vehicle accident during which the Plaintiff struck
by an operator who was responding to an emergency at the time of the
accident.
Among
other injuries, the Plaintiff suffered a fractured ankle and bruising along the
right side of her back. The Plaintiff primarily treated with an orthopedic
surgeon and underwent physical therapy.
After
reviewing the settled law pertaining to the need of a Plaintiff to prove a
permanent injury in a case against a government agency, as well as the current
status of limited tort law in Pennsylvania, the court denied the Defendant’s
Motion for Summary Judgment in these respects.
Anyone wishing to read this case may click this LINK.
I
send thanks to Attorney Garth Gartin, Esquire of the Pittsburgh office of Simon and
Simon, P.C. for bringing this case to my attention.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.