New York Verdicts

Plaintiff(s):

Yelissa L. Medina (Female, 21 Years)

Plaintiff Attorney(s):

Craig W. Phemister;
Novo Law Firm P.C.;
New York,
NY,
for
Yelissa L. Medina

Plaintiff Expert(s):

Evan Schwartz; M.D.; Orthopedic Surgery; Astoria,
NY called by:
Craig W. Phemister

Defendant(s):

New York City Transit Authority

Defense Attorney(s):

Lynne Troy Henderson;
assistant general counsel, New York City Transit Authority;
Brooklyn,
NY,
for
New York City Transit Authority

Defendant Expert(s):

Lewis Rothman;
Radiology;
Valhalla,
NY called by:
Lynne Troy Henderson

On June 24, 2009, plaintiff Yelissa Medina, 21, a receptionist, fell while she was traversing the platform of an elevated subway station that was located at the intersection of Broadway and Myrtle Avenue, in the Bedford-Stuyvesant section of Brooklyn. Medina claimed that she sustained injuries of her back and a knee. Medina sued the subway station’s operator, the New York City Transit Authority. She alleged that the New York City Transit Authority negligently created a dangerous condition that caused the accident. Medina claimed that she tripped on one edge of a 0.75-inch-thick board that had been affixed to the concrete platform, to cover a defect of the platform’s surface. Her claim was corroborated by her sister, who was present when the accident occurred. Plaintiff’s counsel claimed that the board’s edges had been beveled to create a 45-degree angle. He argued that such an angle was unsafe, and he suggested that a 30-degree angle would have been appropriate. He also contended that the use of the board itself was unreasonably dangerous, given that hundreds of people traversed the platform daily. Defense counsel suggested that the board was not involved in the accident; that Medina tripped on a slip-resistant strip that covered an area adjacent to the board. Alternatively, defense counsel contended that, if Medina tripped on the board, it was a result of her own negligence. She produced a witness who claimed that Medina was running when the accident occurred. The witness also claimed that Medina was wearing high-heeled shoes. The court heard testimony from a maintenance worker employed by the New York City Transit Authority. The witness claimed that the board’s 45-degree edge angles satisfied a standard established by the Americans with Disabilities Act. Defense counsel argued that a 30-degree edge angle would have been merely trivially safer than a 45-degree edge angle.

The trial was bifurcated. Damages were not before the court. Medina was placed in an ambulance, and she was transported to Kings County Hospital Center, in Brooklyn. She claimed that her back and her left knee were painful. A doctor diagnosed a comminuted fracture of Medina’s left knee’s patella and a tear of the same knee’s patellar tendon. A brace was applied to the knee. Medina claimed that she also sustained trauma that produced a bulge of her L5-S1 intervertebral disc. Medina quickly commenced a course of physical therapy, but she claimed that she experienced ongoing pain. In February 2010, she underwent arthroscopic surgery that involved repair of her left knee’s patellar tendon. In February 2013, she underwent surgical debridement of the same tendon. Each surgery was followed by a brief course of physical therapy. Medina claimed that her left knee remains painful, that the knee has not regained full range of motion, and that the knee has developed chondromalacia, which is a softening of cartilage. She also claimed that she retains a limp, that she retains a compensatory alteration of her gait, and that she requires use of a cane. She further claimed that her residual effects are permanent and that they prevent her resumption of work. She has not worked since the accident. Medina sought recovery of damages for past and future pain and suffering. Defense counsel contended that Medina did not sustain a fracture of her left knee, that the knee’s patellar tendon healed well, and that Medina’s bulging disc is a degenerative condition that is not related to the accident.

The jury rendered a defense verdict. It believed that Medina tripped on the board, but it found that the board was not unreasonably unsafe.

Judge:

Peter Paul Sweeney

Demand:

$375,000

Offer:

$90,000

Trial Length:

2
 days

Trial Deliberations:

1
 hours

Jury Vote:

5-1

Jury Composition:

3 male/ 3 female

Post Trial:

Judge Peter Paul Sweeney denied plaintiff’s counsel’s oral motion to set aside the verdict.

This report is based on information that was provided by plaintiff’s and defense counsel.