Leo A. Bohanski

Obtained a non-suit in a trip and fall jury trial on behalf of a nationwide franchisee of a fast food restaurant.  Plaintiff claimed insufficient lighting from the restaurant caused her to trip and fall over a curb. On cross examination, Plaintiff admitted to knowing the curb was present and that the photos used at trial all showed the curb. Her boyfriend also admitted to seeing the curb in the photos took for the purposes of “in case things got ugly” with litigation. The restaurant’s incident report and ER records from a local hospital both failed to reference any complaint of insufficient lighting but instead noted that she misjudged the sidewalk.  At the close of Plaintiff’s case-in-chief, a Motion for Non-suit was asserted on behalf of the restaurant for Plaintiff’s failure to present evidence of a dangerous condition that was necessary for their point for charge on liability.  The Judge agreed and granted the Motion for Non-suit. 

Obtained a defense verdict of no serious impairment of a body function with no recovery of economic damages in a rear-end motor vehicle accident case, where Plaintiff claimed that she sustained serious injuries to her cervical and lumbar spine.  Her first year of treatment involved prescription medications from her primary care physician and 33 chiropractic treatment sessions. As her treatment was weaning down, she was involved in a more serious second motor vehicle accident that resulted in increased treatment to both her cervical and lumbar spine. Plaintiff's physiatrist opined that Plaintiff's ongoing cervical and lumbar pain was attributable to the first accident, and that the second accident was a minor exacerbation of her prior condition. Her expert boarded $60,800.00 in future medical expenses. The jury determined that Plaintiff did not sustain a serious impairment of a body function and awarded $0.00 for future medical expenses.

Obtained a defense verdict of no serious impairment of a body function, where Plaintiff aggressively treated with his physiatrist, pain management specialist and physical therapist for several years. Plaintiff boarded $203,000.00 of past and future medical expenses and since our expert conceded a sprain injury, the jury awarded $5,000.00 for past and future medical expenses.

Obtained a defense verdict of no serious impairment of a body function, where Plaintiff claimed serious injuries to his cervical and lumbar spine sustained from a motor vehicle accident.  Plaintiff had the right-of-way with no stop sign and Defendant had a stop sign.  The jury found Plaintiff 45% liable for speeding through the intersection and awarded the molded amount of $8,250.00 for future medical expenses of the projected $153,000.00 opined as reasonable and necessary by Plaintiff’s medical expert. 
 

Obtained a summary judgment in a 12-vehicle pile-up accident in dense fog on a major interstate highway involving a fatality and numerous claims for personal injuries and subrogation of property damages.

Obtained a summary judgment dismissing the bad faith count against a carrier and dismissing all claims for structural property damage, personal property damage, mold remediation and alternative living expenses on a large flood loss to the plaintiffs' residence. The only remaining claim involved a small roof damage claim.

Secured an award in an Underinsured Motorist arbitration that fell below the third-party tortfeasor credit of $65,000, where the plaintiff claimed a cervical disc herniation at the level above the prior fusion surgery.  Plaintiff's medical expert opined of the possible future fusion surgery at the herniated level and highlighted the great expense for recovery.  In addition, the plaintiff sought wage loss and future earning capacity damages in excess of $250,000.  As a result, the UIM carrier was not required to make payment based upon the UIM arbitration award.

Obtained a defense judgment in a binding arbitration forum for a dog bite case involving a young teenager and a pit bull.  The landlord defendants prevailed as the plaintiff could not establish sufficient evidence that the landlords both knew of the dog's presence on the property and that they had actual knowledge of the vicious propensities of the dog.  All of the evidence presented by both sides proved that the dog was not vicious, and therefore, the plaintiff could not recover against the landlords.

Obtained a defense judgment in a binding arbitration forum for a trip and fall case, where the plaintiff sustained a fractured ankle that necessitated surgical intervention.  The plaintiff had a large six-figure boardable economic claim.  The evidence presented at the proceeding revealed that the plaintiff had no evidence of any actual or constructive knowledge of the allegedly defective condition of the stair tread that failed, as plaintiff descended the stairs.