Atkins V. Brown

Atkins V. Brown

Copyright (c) 2004 JAS Publications, Inc.
Reprinted with permission

Georgia Superior Court

CASEY T. ATKINS v. DARTHY R. BROWN
03CV00754

DATE OF VERDICT: February 3, 2004

TOPIC: MOTOR VEHICLE AUTO ACCIDENT - INTERSECTION - TURNING

SUMMARY: Result: Verdict: $23,000

EXPERT WITNESSES: Plaintiff's: Howard J. Collier, M.D. - Orthopedist, Douglasville, GA

ATTORNEYS: Plaintiff's: Scott Dewitt Delius, Atlanta Defendant's: Thomas D. Harper, Atlanta

JUDGE: David T. Emerson

RANGE AMOUNT: $1-49,999 STATE: Georgia

COUNTY: Douglas County, GA

ALLEGED INJURY: A fractured carpal bone in the wrist requiring two surgeries for the removal of glass fragments. Plaintiff claimed the need for a future surgery to remove a ganglion cyst on the wrist caused by the trauma and an increased risk of arthritis. Plaintiff claimed $9,000 in past medical specials and $3,500 in future medical specials.

SUMMARY: Plaintiff Information: Age: 21 Sex: M Occupation: Land surveyor Marital Status: Single

Defendant's Insurance Carrier: State Farm

Jury Deliberations: 1.5 hours

FACTS: Despite a highly contested liability dispute, a plaintiff who suffered a fractured wrist received a $23,000 verdict in his favor following an intersection collision. According to plaintiff's counsel, plaintiff's credibility was a factor in the jury's determination of liability and damages.

Plaintiff Casey Atkins, a 21 year old male, was operating his motor vehicle when he was involved in a collision at an intersection with Defendant Darthy Brown's vehicle. The intersection where the collision occurred was controlled by a traffic signal. The impact happened when plaintiff attempted to make a left turn across the path of defendant's oncoming vehicle, which was traveling in the opposite direction on the same roadway. The parties disputed the facts surrounding the collision and which driver had the right-of-way at the time of the collision.

Plaintiff alleged that he had a green light when he entered the intersection to wait for oncoming traffic to clear to make his left turn. Plaintiff further asserted that the light then cycled from green to yellow to red. He maintained that he then observed oncoming traffic stopping for a red light and he executed his turn to clear the intersection. It was plaintiff's position that defendant had run a red light at the intersection and the collision resulted due to defendant's negligence.

Defendant contended that she had entered the intersection at the same time that the signal was turning yellow. Defendant maintained that the intersection collision occurred because plaintiff failed to yield to her vehicle. Defendant did not strongly contest plaintiff's injuries.

EDITOR'S NOTE: Per plaintiff's counsel, the trial focused on the credibility of the parties since there were no witnesses to the accident. The jurors reported to plaintiff's counsel after the trial that the plaintiff appeared to be more credible than the defendant.