$10 Million Verdict in Ventura County Car Crash Case

In March 2019, the plaintiff was driving a new Chevy truck while working for a painting company when a crash occurred in Ventura County. Ahead of him was a GMC Savanna van owned by Oakwood Worldwide. The van’s driver appeared to be turning right onto a side street but suddenly executed an illegal U-turn, causing the plaintiff’s truck to collide with the rear driver-side panel of the van.

Following the crash, the plaintiff initially went home but sought urgent care the next day due to neck and back pain. Over several years, he underwent extensive treatment, including chiropractic care, physical therapy, pain management, and orthopedic treatment. In July 2023, four years after the crash, he underwent a cervical spine fusion at C5-C6 after a new orthopedic evaluation deemed him a surgical candidate.

The Defense’s Arguments

The defense contested liability, asserting that the plaintiff was following too closely and driving at an unsafe distance and speed. They introduced an accident reconstruction expert who supported this claim. Additionally, the defense attempted to minimize the plaintiff’s injuries by arguing he had preexisting spinal conditions. They pointed out that:

• The plaintiff had a history of football-related injuries from playing tailback.
• He had chronic lower back issues for over a decade.
• Three days before the crash, he had visited an orthopedic specialist for severe spinal pain and had been placed off work for weeks.
• A prior MRI of his cervical spine showed a disc bulge and annular tear at the same level where he later underwent fusion surgery.

The defense also presented a life care planner who attempted to reduce the projected cost of the plaintiff’s future medical care. On cross-examination, however, the expert admitted to using ChatGPT and a chat bot from a hospital website to estimate costs. Furthermore, she disclosed that the defense attorneys advised her not to write a report to prevent the plaintiff from reviewing her analysis.

The Trial and Jury Verdict

The plaintiff’s attorneys, Elliott Jung and Emma Van Ginneken of HHJ Trial Attorneys, and Taylor Gaines of Batta Fulkerson, rejected multiple settlement offers before trial. The defense initially offered $350,000, calling it a "gift." As the trial progressed, they increased their offer to $3 million, but the plaintiff's team declined.

During trial, the plaintiff’s attorneys highlighted how the crash had impacted their client’s life, particularly his ability to be a father and husband. The jury deliberated for just one day before awarding $10,024,171 in damages, closely aligning with the plaintiff’s demands:

• $1.9 million for future economic damages
• $1.3 million for past non-economic damages
• $7 million for future non-economic damages

What’s Next?

The verdict is a significant victory for the plaintiff, underscoring the challenges defendants face when attempting to downplay preexisting conditions in personal injury cases. The case also serves as a cautionary tale for defense experts who rely on artificial intelligence tools like ChatGPT for medical cost evaluations.

This outcome highlights the critical role of effective cross-examination and the power of personal narratives in securing substantial verdicts. As plaintiffs’ attorney Taylor Gaines stated in a social media post, “We made sure that the jury could see that Merrill wanted none of this. All Merrill wanted was to be a good father and a great husband, and his spine injury was preventing him from doing that no matter how hard he tried.”