$4.3 Million Verdict in Florida Traffic Light Crash
A Miami-Dade County jury awarded a driver over $4.3 million for injuries sustained from another driver who ran a red light into his vehicle. The case, Omar Marrero v. Javier Alfaro et al., 2020-020077-CA-01, in the Eleventh Judicial Circuit Court of the State of Florida, is a prime example of how large jury verdicts can be against defendants who run red lights and cause vehicle collisions.
What Happened?
On October 8, 2019, Omar Marrero was driving his Hyundai at the intersection of U.S. Highway 1 and Southwest 280th South in Homestead, Florida when Javier Alfaro ran a red light and crashed his Chevy Silverado into Mr. Marrero’s vehicle. Mr. Marrero filed a lawsuit in 2020 against Alfaro and Alfaro’s company, Xtreme Creative Builders Inc., which was the listed owner of the vehicle. The lawsuit alleged that Alfaro acted negligently in failing to observe the red light and “violently colliding” into Mr. Marrero’s vehicle. The lawsuit sued Xtreme Creative Builders Inc. on the basis of vicarious liability, as the owner of the vehicle.
The lawsuit alleged that Mr. Marrero sustained “significant, permanent bodily injuries” to his neck and spine as well as disc herniations, that resulted in costly medical expenses and multiple invasive surgeries that failed to fix the problem. As the plaintiff’s counsel, Grant Gillenwater of Morgan & Morgan P.A., describes: "Not only has this crash had profound personal impacts on Mr. Marrero, but it has also robbed him and his family of priceless experiences together.” He further explains that "Mr. Marrero's daughter loves going to Disney World. Mr. Marrero can't take her there anymore. He's also staring down a lifetime of forever waking up and going to bed in pain, which will only get worse as he ages."
The parties proceeded to trial after the plaintiff rejected a $300,000 settlement offer. At trial, Mr. Marrero presented several medical experts who testified the collision caused the “extraordinary diffuse pathologies” of the injuries that resulted in “monumentally invasive” treatment modalities, injections, and surgeries. A day before the jury verdict was rendered, defense counsel, Wayne T. Hrivnak of Davis Giardino Hrivnak & Okon PLLC moved for a mistrial on the basis that the expert testimony should have been limited, which was denied by the trial court.
In an earlier blow to the defense’s case, the trial court granted the plaintiff’s emergency motion to strike video surveillance evidence of the incident back in late July, after the defendants included the video in its March exhibit list. The court found that the defendants failed to timely disclose the videos.
In reference to the court’s rulings, the defendants commented that, "What's even more extraordinary is that this case presents a case study of the glaring representation of what can only be described as the manifest corruption present in the personal injury industry.”
The Verdict
The jury found in favor of the plaintiff, finding that the defendants caused his injuries. The jury awarded the plaintiff $3 million for future pain and suffering, $100,000 for past pain and suffering, $732,000 for past medical expenses, and over $523,000 for future medical expenses.
“I'm pleased justice was served," said Marcel Flemming, one of the plaintiff’s attorneys, in a statement about the verdict. "The defense made the mistake of questioning our client's character and credibility and even tried to disparage his status as a stay-at-home dad. Fortunately, the jury saw through this smokescreen, and understood that the totality of the evidence in the four-plus years since the crash supported awarding a just verdict to Mr. Marrero for everything he's been through."
The Marrero verdict marks a relatively large award amount in comparison to other traffic accidents. Earlier this summer, another Miami-Dade County jury rendered a $280,000 verdict in favor of the plaintiff after the defendant driver failed to stop at a stop sign and crashed into the plaintiff’s vehicle. With the average Florida car accident settlement anywhere between $110,000 to $1,000,000, Mr. Marrero’s decision to reject the $300,000 settlement offer and proceed to trial yielded him a much more substantial award amount.
About the author
Anjelica Cappellino, J.D.
Anjelica Cappellino, Esq., a New York Law School alumna and psychology graduate from St. John’s University, is an accomplished attorney at Meringolo & Associates, P.C. She specializes in federal criminal defense and civil litigation, with significant experience in high-profile cases across New York’s Southern and Eastern Districts. Her notable work includes involvement in complex cases such as United States v. Joseph Merlino, related to racketeering, and U.S. v. Jimmy Cournoyer, concerning drug trafficking and criminal enterprise.
Ms. Cappellino has effectively represented clients in sentencing preparations, often achieving reduced sentences. She has also actively participated in federal civil litigation, showcasing her diverse legal skill set. Her co-authored article in the Albany Law Review on the Federal Sentencing Guidelines underscores her deep understanding of federal sentencing and its legal nuances. Cappellino's expertise in both trial and litigation marks her as a proficient attorney in federal criminal and civil law.
Subscribe to our newsletter
Join our newsletter to stay up to date on legal news, insights and product updates from Expert Institute.
Sign up nowA Sample Voir Dire: How To Qualify An Expert Witness
Download free white paperChallenging Opposing Experts: Advanced Research Techniques
Download free white paperCross Examining Expert Witnesses: The Ultimate Guide
Download free white paper
Subscribe to our newsletter
Join our newsletter to stay up to date on legal news, insights and product updates from Expert Institute.