Plaintiffs, husband, and wife filed suit claiming permanent injuries stemming from a rear-end motor vehicle accident. Both claimed injury to their spine, resulting in various procedures and surgeries. Combined, the Plaintiffs incurred just under $500,000 in Letter of Protection medical bills. Plaintiffs produced photographs of their vehicle showing a dented bumper, trunk, and broken taillight. Plaintiffs used the severity of the impact to bolster their medical causation arguments and the need for the procedures and surgeries. Defendant denied causing any damage to the Plaintiffs’ bumper as the impact was low velocity (but had no photos from the scene of the accident to prove his position). However, Defendant was able to obtain deposition testimony from the police officer, and bodycam footage (although somewhat blurry from humidity) from the accident scene to prove there was no visible damage to the rear of the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

Defendant also retained an accident reconstruction expert and biomechanical expert to support the Defendant’s position that the height differential in the vehicles could not have resulted in the type of damage claimed, and that the minor impact could not have caused sufficient velocity/forces to cause the injuries claimed. Additionally, Plaintiffs denied and/or downplayed their multiple prior injury claims, and the Defendant uncovered a combined fourteen (14) personal injury claims between the husband and wife, arguing that the two were serial Plaintiffs. Surveillance footage captured the two Plaintiffs engaging in multiple activities that they claimed in deposition they could not perform because of their alleged permanent injuries. The Defendant also uncovered that one of the Plaintiff’s was not taking the narcotic mediation prescribed by his pain management specialist (though pharmacy records revealed multiple purchases). In fact, the Plaintiff husband’s urinalysis revealed that he was instead abusing Fentanyl (a non-prescribed drug) which he was likely purchasing from the sale of the prescribed narcotic mediation. As a result, the extensive discovery, the Defendant filed a Motion to Dismiss for Fraud. The case was ultimately dismissed, and the Court entered an award in favor of the Defendants to recover all their costs.

View Motion