Please explain how Insurance companies get away from paying victims using the "Eggshell Plaintiff" rule?
September 17, 2014
Struck by a car earlier, I was taken to ER. Police report shows driver admits fault. I was sent for testing by Pers. Inj Dr. and he had MRIs taken of my back & shoulders. Here are some results:
BACK-Showed degenerative disc disease and showed old chronic bulges at al L discs & S1.
RT SHOULDER-Tear of posterior glenoid labrum/moderate rotator cuff tendonitis/ intrasubstance tear of the infraspinatus tendon.
LEFT SHOULDER-Degenerative disc disease & tear of superior labrum partially extending into biceps anchor. Hill-Sachs fracture measuring 2.5 cm w/ marrow edema consistent with subacute injury.
I'm taking injections in both shoulders & back for pain plus therapy. I'm 64 & feel as if my atty has an uphill battle to collect for my pain & suffering due to my age even though I was a pedestrian
Rather than cite the 'eggshell plaintiff' rule (which works in your favor), the ins co. is more likely to argue that your "degenerative" disc problems were pre-existing, and therefore not caused by the accident. It's a frequent tactic that they employ to try to reduce their liability. I must say, the radiologist did you no favors including that term in the report (they even called the shoulder fracture a "subacute" injury, suggesting that it is not recent).
Contact us today if you need help with a similar matter.
Online answers to questions do not create an attorney-client relationship. There is no attorney-client relationship without a signed retainer agreement.See All Questions & Answers