Boston Partners, Gareth Notis and Peter Monaco, obtained a defense verdict for a national transportation company and its driver after a 12-day jury trial in Worcester Superior Court. The defendant driver was operating a tractor-trailer and made a left hand turn into a delivery location across three lanes of traffic. The 42-year-old plaintiff was operating a motorcycle in the opposite direction, and collided with the turning trailer. Plaintiff alleged that he was forced to dump his motorcycle due to the defendant’s failure to yield and illegal turn from the furthest righthand lane of the state highway. The accident was captured on drive-cam video and video from the delivery location.
Plaintiff alleged catastrophic, permanent injuries to his lower extremity and a traumatic brain injury. Plaintiff’s medical expert opined that he was permanently disabled with no work capacity, and plaintiff presented vocational and economic experts alleging a diminished earning capacity as a result. At a pre-trial deposition, Peter effectively cross-examined plaintiff’s economist expert such that the plaintiff elected not to call the expert at trial. At trial, Gareth impeached plaintiff and introduced evidence of surveillance showing post-accident work, a subsequent accident with head injury, and loss of license. Gareth elicited testimony on cross-examination of plaintiff’s medical expert agreeing that plaintiff could do at least part-time work, and defense counsel utilized an expert podiatrist and expert neurologist to counter plaintiff’s expert opinions as to work capacity and permanent disability.
Plaintiff’s accident reconstructionist was also defused by cross-examination showing that he agreed plaintiff had sufficient time and distance to stop from when he first observed the turning tractor trailer. Direct-examination of the defendants’ accident reconstruction contradicted plaintiff’s claim that he was proceeding at or under the speed limit, and showed that he was not only speeding but accelerated instead of braking. Peter was able to introduce three highly effective animations prepared by defendants’ accident reconstructionist as chalks after a voir dire hearing outside of the jury’s presence. Consequently, Gareth was allowed to use the animations during the closing argument. The jury returned a defense verdict of “no negligence” after deliberating for 90 minutes!
