Bucci & Dix

Practice Areas

B&D Blog

Frequent Questions

Automobile, Truck & Motorcycle Accidents

Labor & Employment, Civil Rights and Discrimination

Latest News

Hunter Jamerson Joins Bucci & Dix As An Associate
Posted on 4/15/2009
Amanda Burke Promoted To Paralegal
Posted on 4/15/2009

view all

Automobile, Truck & Motorcycle Accidents

4/20/2009
M. Scott Bucci
Comments (0)

Drunk Driving - Punitive Damages Verdict Upheld

The Rockingham Circuit Court has upheld a jury's verdict in a drunk driving, punitive damages case. The plaintiff claimed approximately $10,000 in past and future medical bills and the jury returned a verdict of compensatory damages in the amount of $80,000. Further, the jury returned verdict of $200,000 in punitive damages. The defendant moved to reduce the jury verdict on the grounds it was excessive.

The court noted that the compensatory damage award was only 8 times the plaintiff's claimed special damages, and as such, did not "shock the conscience" of the court. Regarding the punitive damage claim, the court noted that the defendant had previously been convicted of multiple DUI incidents, had a .32 BAC level, and showed little remorse for the accident. As such, the court held that the verdict was not excessive considering the circumstances surrounding the DUI.

Labels: personal injury lawsuit

4/17/2009
Clint W. Verity
Comments (0)

Twelve-Year-Old Girl Injured in a Boating Accident on Smith Mountain Lake Settles for $303,500

The minor victim of a boating accident on Smith Mountain Lake on July 2, 2005 settled the case for $303,500. Specifically, a twelve-year old girl traveled to the lake with friends. The girl’s parents entrusted her supervision to certain adults who then delegated her supervision to other adults. In the process, the girl was being towed behind a personal watercraft (jet ski) operated by the adult defendant with a minor passenger who was responsible for watching the girl. The defendant adult operator of the personal watercraft operated the watercraft in such a manner as to throw the girl from the tube. Subsequently, a second defendant ran the girl over causing severe personal injures to her legs, groin and femoral artery. The case settlement was comprised of the limits of the only applicable insurance policy and money paid out of pocket from one of the defendants.

Labels: insurance personal injury lawsuit settlement

4/9/2009
Hunter W. Jamerson
Comments (0)

$490,000 verdict upheld: one less defense in auto accident personal injury trials

The Virginia Supreme Court handed down a decision in Richmond during its January session which removes the "unavoidable accident" doctrine from the available defenses in personal injury claims arising from automobile, motorcycle, and truck accidents. A car accident in Central Virginia gave rise to the case of Hancock-Underwood v. Knight, 227 Va. 127 (2009). An Amherst County jury awarded the victim's family $490,000 in compensation for the death and injuries suffered as a result of the car accident. That verdict was upheld in the Virginia Supreme Court's decision.

In reference to the "unavoidable accident" doctrine, Justice Donald W. Lemons wrote for the Court: "In consideration of the prevailing concerns of the states that have rejected the instruction -- that it merely restates the law of negligence, overemphasizes the defendant's case , and is apt to confuse and mislead - we join those states and hold that it is error to grant an unavoidable accident instruction." Id. at 136.

Labels: personal injury lawsuit verdict

4/7/2009
M. Scott Bucci
Comments (0)

Auto Accident Lawsuit Found To Be Timely Filed

A Hanover Circuit Court judge has found that a lawsuit arising from an automobile accident in Hanover was timely filed after it appeared that the statute of limitaitons may have expired, because there was an earlier lawsuit that was filed in Ohio before the statute of limitations expired. In a typical car accident case, there is a 2 year statute of limitations to file a lawsuit. Also, there are usually several different venues that a personal injury lawyer can file a lawsuit. Most personal injury lawsuits arising from auto accidents do not have to be filed in a mandatory venue. Rather, there are usually several different permissible venues from which a plaintiff's lawyer can chose to file a lawsuit.

In the Hanover County case, the plaintiff filed a lawsuit in an Ohio court even though the accident occurred in Virginia, one day before the 2 year statute of limitations expired. Then, after the statute of limitations expired, the plaintiff filed another lawsuit in Norfolk. The Ohio court then transferred the case to Norfolk, and the Norfolk judge dismissed the first lawsuit, and transferred the second lawsuit to Hanover.

The defendant moved to dismiss the case because the second lawsuit was filed after the expiration of the statute of limitations. However, the judge found that under Virginia law the statute of limitations was "tolled," or delayed, while the first suit was pending. Accordingly, it was not too late to file the second suit in Norfolk.

Labels: personal injury lawsuit statute of limitations tolling venue

Personal Injury

10/29/2009
Mark D. Dix
Comments (0)

Medical Malpractice Suit Dismissed On Statute Of Limitations Grounds

In Chalifoux v. Radiology Associates of Richmond, Inc., a local trial court dismissed a woman's medical malpractice suit against her radiologist. The woman alleged that the radiologist negligently misread several tests and studies, which, if properly read, would have indicated that she had a brain tumor.

The allegedly negligent radiological tests were performed between December 2002 and October 2005. An immediate and threshold problem is apparent from these facts: in Virginia, the statute of limitations for personal injury lawsuits is only two years. In short, the law requires injured persons to file suit within two years of their injury. In this case, Ms. Chalifoux did not file her lawsuit until 2009, four years after the last negligent reading.

Despite Ms. Chalifoux's procedural default, Virginia law allows her an exception to the statute of limitations, called the “continuous treatment rule.” Under the continuous treatment rule, the injury (which starts the two-year statute of limitations clock) does not accrue until an entire course of treatment has concluded. In essence, the rule allows an injured plaintiff to use the latest date she was treated if the discrete medical visits are part of a single or continuous treatment regimen.

In applying the continuous treatment rule, the Richmond City Circuit Court found that Ms. Chalifoux's visits were not part of a continuous treatment. The court held that, even if each test was compared to all the past tests, each radiological test reading was a separate and distinct wrong. As such, the normal two-year statute of limitations should apply to each erroneous test reading.

Labels: personal injury lawsuit

4/8/2009
M. Scott Bucci
Comments (0)

Lawsuit Against Deceased Defendant Cannot Be Amended

The Salem Circuit Court has found that a personal injury lawsuit was untimely filed because the statute of limitations had run, and the previously nonsuited case was a legal nullity. The plaintiff filed his lawsuit prior to the expiration of the statute of limitations against the defendant, who was deceased. The plaintiff then nonsuited the case, and refiled it after the expiration of the statute of limitations. Thereafter, the plaintiff moved to amend the lawsuit to substitute the decedent’s personal representative in place of the decedent defendant.

Citing to the Virginia Supreme Court case of Johnston Memorial v. Bazemore, the Circuit Court judge held that the amendment could not be allowed. The initial personal injury lawsuit against the decedent defendant constituted a “legal nullity.” Although the Virginia Code permits a lawsuit to be amended to name the personal representative, this provision does not apply if the initial case was nonsuited and the statute of limitations has expired.