An Illinois auto accident lawyer at our firm, working with co-counsel, recently filed a lawsuit on behalf of two Chicago residents who were injured in December, 2010.
The plaintiffs, a driver and a passenger, were rear-ended by a vehicle driven by a negligent driver. The clients were traveling in a 2005 Range Rover southbound on I-90. The at fault driver was operating his 2002 Chevy Impala southbound on I-90, behind the plaintiff’s vehicle.
The plaintiff’s automobile stopped for traffic ahead of it. The defendant failed to stop and/or reduce the speed of his vehicle he was driving, and struck the Range Rover from the rear. The force of the initial impact propelled the plaintiff’s vehicle to the right off of the roadway, striking a concrete wall, which was adjacent to the right lane of traffic.
The Illinois State Police responded to the scene of the accident. Their investigation placed the defendant at fault for the accident.
Our lawsuit alleges the defendant failed to keep a proper lookout, failed to stop and/or reduce the speed of his vehicle to avoid a collision, was driving at an excessive rate of speed, and failed to exercise due care for the safety of those in the area, including our clients.
Following the collision, the plaintiff who was a passenger had an immediate onset of neck pain, back pain and left shoulder pain. Shortly after the collision, she sought medical treatment at Our Lady of the Resurrection Hospital’s Emergency Department. There, she initially complained of neck pain, back pain, and left shoulder pain. A history was taken and a physical examination was performed. She was diagnosed with musculoskeletal pain and a muscle strain. She was prescribed pain medication and instructed to follow up with a physician.
Over the next couple weeks, the plaintiff’s pain increased significantly. She sought follow up medical treatment from a medical doctor. She complained of neck pain, and back pain. A history was taken and an examination was performed. The physical examination revealed tenderness in the paracervical muscles and left trapezius muscle, as well as pain and muscle spasm on palpation of the lumbar area. The physician diagnosed her with a cervical spine sprain/strain and lumbar spine sprain/strain. The doctor ordered x-rays of her cervical spine and lumbar spine, prescribed pain medication and recommended that she begin additional physical therapy.
Per the doctor’s recommendation, she began an additional course of physical therapy on December 21, 2010. She attended twenty (20) sessions of physical therapy which ended on March 11, 2011.
She obtained x-rays of her cervical spine and lumbar spine. The cervical spine x-ray revealed straightening of the normal lordotic curvature.
On January 4, 2011, the plaintiff returned to her docotr for follow up treatment. A physical examination revealed pain on palpation of the paracervical muscles, right trapezius muscles, and back muscles. At that time, her physician instructed her to continue physical therapy and pain medication.
She next saw the doctor on January 18, 2011. He maintained his diagnosis that she sustained a lumbar spine sprain/strain and cervical spine sprain/strain. At that time, he instructed her to continue physical therapy and prescribed new pain medication.
On February 8, 2011, she returned for more follow up treatment. There, she complained of low back pain and neck pain causing radiating pain to both shoulders. The doctor instructed her to continue physical therapy and pain medication.
She next saw the physician on March 8, 2011. There, she complained of low back pain and neck pain causing radiating pain to her left shoulder. At that time, she was told to continue physical therapy and prescribed additional pain medication.
The client next saw a doctor on March 29, 2011. There, she complained of low back pain and neck pain causing radiating pain to her right shoulder. A physical exam noted tenderness at the apracervical and right supraspinatus muscles, as well as pain on palpation of the lumbar area. At that time, she was instructed to continue physical therapy.
On May 3, 2011, the plaintiff returned to the physician’s office. She was again told to continue physical therapy.
Finally on June 7, 2011 her doctor instructed her to continue her home exercise program and discharged her.
The client had an additional twenty-four (24) sessions of physical therapy which ended on May 27, 2011 when she was discharged.
As sometimes can be the case, the defendant’s insurance carrier did not offer enough money to settle the claim. The plaintiffs took our advice and allowed a lawsuit to be filed on their behalf. Once the case makes its way through court we expect the defendant insurance carrier to become more realistic with their settlement offers.
If you have been injured in a Chicago area car crash and you feel that you are not being treated fairly by an insurance carrier, contact our office for a free consultation. Call 866-99-ABELS speak directly to an Illinois personal injury lawyer today.